MLB: ***Official World Series Thread***

[CyCrazy]

1. Not everyone on here is a Cyclone fan.
2. Buy a baseball rulebook so you know that it wasn't a terrible call.

You might as well hit yourself with a hammer than reason with him.

 

[CyCrazy]

What does my "bias" have to do with anything?

Well lets see "Everything".

 

[GWad]

1st bad decision: Not walking Jay to set up a potential double play.


2nd bad decision: Saltalamacchia never should have made that throw. After playing catcher throughout HS I was taught to never give up a potential run on a risky throw to third. He had 0 shot at getting the runner. Didn't that kind of play cost them the go ahead run in game 2?!?

BINGO, the bad throw is why Boston lost

 

[GWad]

Well lets see "Everything".

HEHEHEHE,........Exactly 1908 was a very long time ago!!!

 

[shagcarpetjesus]

I hate the Cards and I think the umps got it right. And I would once again like to point out that everybody is going to freak out about the obstruction call and ignore the great play that Pedroia made.

 

[cmjh10]

I hate the Cards and I think the umps got it right. And I would once again like to point out that everybody is going to freak out about the obstruction call and ignore the great play that Pedroia made.

Pedroia made several great plays tonight. Absolute stud.

 

[awd4cy]

Looks like they made the right call.

 

[SenorCy]

Why was Saltalamacchia making that throw anyway? Kozma is pretty much a guaranteed out.

 

[cmjh10]

 

[cmjh10]

 

[shagcarpetjesus]

After seeing this replay multiple times now, I can't stop giggling at Allen Craig's belly flop into home plate.

 

[Cy$]

very good call at the end. Obvious obstruction. Not a cards fan.

 

[CyCrazy]

very good call at the end. Obvious obstruction. Not a cards fan.

Tell that to your boy antiDooshbag. He is still trying to wrap his mind around that.

 

[Jordanj6502]

That is a tough call, and I am not sure it is the correct call. But the call is definitely justifiable. It looks like Middlebrooks may have been attempting to get up right before Craig tripped and pushed him back down. Craig tripped prior to getting to Middlebrooks, but he probably tripped because Middlebrooks was there. In the end the call is a judgement call, and the 3rd base umpire judged it to be obstruction.
View attachment 22742 View attachment 22743

The Definition of Obstruction

OBSTRUCTION is the act of a fielder who, while not in possession of the ball and not in the act of fielding the ball, impedes the progress of any runner.
Rule 2.00 (Obstruction) Comment: If a fielder is about to receive a thrown ball and if the ball is in flight directly toward and near enough to the fielder so he must occupy his position to receive the ball he may be considered “in the act of fielding a ball.” It is entirely up to the judgment of the umpire as to whether a fielder is in the act of fielding a ball. After a fielder has made an attempt to field a ball and missed, he can no longer be in the “act of fielding” the ball. For example: an infielder dives at a ground ball and the ball passes him and he continues to lie on the ground and delays the progress of the runner, he very likely has obstructed the runner

And the Rule Applied

7.06
When obstruction occurs, the umpire shall call or signal "Obstruction."
If a play is being made on the obstructed runner, or if the batterrunner is obstructed before he touches first base, the ball is dead and all runners shall advance, without liability to be put out, to the bases they would have reached, in the umpire’s judgment, if there had been no obstruction. The obstructed runner shall be awarded at least one base beyond the base he had last legally touched before the obstruction. Any preceding runners, forced to advance by the award of bases as the penalty for obstruction, shall advance without liability to be put out.
Rule 7.06(a) Comment: When a play is being made on an obstructed runner, the umpire shall signal obstruction in the same manner that he calls “Time,” with both hands overhead. The ball is immediately dead when this signal is given; however, should a thrown ball be in flight before the obstruction is called by the umpire, the runners are to be awarded such bases on wild throws as they would have been awarded had not obstruction occurred. On a play where a runner was trapped between second and third and obstructed by the third baseman going into third base while the throw is in flight from the shortstop, if such throw goes into the dugout the obstructed runner is to be awarded home base. Any other runners on base in this situation would also be awarded two bases from the base they last legally touched before obstruction was called.
(b) If no play is being made on the obstructed runner, the play shall proceed until no further action is possible. The umpire shall then call “Time” and impose such penalties, if any, as in his judgment will nullify the act of obstruction.
Rule 7.06(b) Comment: Under 7.06(b) when the ball is not dead on obstruction and an obstructed runner advances beyond the base which, in the umpire’s judgment, he would have been awarded because of being obstructed, he does so at his own peril and may be tagged out. This is a judgment call.
NOTE: The catcher, without the ball in his possession, has no right to block the pathway of the runner attempting to score. The base line belongs to the runner and the catcher should be there only when he is fielding a ball or when he already has the ball in his hand.

Source for Rules (Warning PDF): http://mlb.mlb.com/mlb/downloads/y2013/official_baseball_rules.pdf

The key part is in the example in the definition. "For example: an infielder dives at a ground ball and the ball passes him and he continues to lie on the ground and delays the progress of the runner, he very likely has obstructed the runner"

Isn't required to even make contact, just to delay the runner.

 

[CloneinWDSM]

Tell that to your boy antiDooshbag. He is still trying to wrap his mind around that.

Antidooshbag lol

 

[egunzy]

No dog in the fight here but I really think Boston got hosed. First off, why was the runner coming back to the inside part of the bag/baseline in order to run home. In my opinion, the 3B was raising his legs to clear THE BASEPATH for the runner. Why should he be penalized because the runner chose to go over the top of him?? And according to the poorly written rule, if the ump determined the infielder was not playing the ball, etc it's interference. I would argue that him lying there was a direct result of playing the ball, no matter how stupid it was for the catcher to throw the ball there to begin with. What if he would have tried to stand up? Still interference likely. The basepath was open.

Also, the baserunner put both hands on the back of the 3B and impeded him from getting up.

 

[urb1]

No dog in the fight here but I really think Boston got hosed. First off, why was the runner coming back to the inside part of the bag/baseline in order to run home. In my opinion, the 3B was raising his legs to clear THE BASEPATH for the runner. Why should he be penalized because the runner chose to go over the top of him?? And according to the poorly written rule, if the ump determined the infielder was not playing the ball, etc it's interference. I would argue that him lying there was a direct result of playing the ball, no matter how stupid it was for the catcher to throw the ball there to begin with. What if he would have tried to stand up? Still interference likely. The basepath was open.

Also, the baserunner put both hands on the back of the 3B and impeded him from getting up.

Admittedly, I'm a Cards fan. But reading the rule posted above, it was applied correctly. And Craig was trying to get over him, not hold him down.

 

[wxman1]

I like baseball but am not a huge fan of the sport in general (short attention span). This might be the worst rule of any sport. The infielder can't "obstruct" the baserunner but but the runner can try and take out an infielder by sliding several feet off the bag (when they are usually already clearly out) with the sole purpose of attempting to obstruct or takeout the infielder. Not to mention the whole bulldozing the catcher at home thing.

Right call according to the rule book. Just plain stupid rule.

 

[ExCyment]

Not a Cards fan Redsox hater or even a baseball fan, that was a correct and obvious call in my opinion.

 

[clonedude]

Not a Cards fan Redsox hater or even a baseball fan, that was a correct and obvious call in my opinion.

If you're a Red Sox fan you don't like it of course. But the fact is, if the Red Sox player isn't in the way, the run scores pretty easily.