• Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
  • Consider registering! Fewer and higher quality ads, no emails you don't want, access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Even if you just want to lurk, there are a lot of good reasons to register!

dropped 3rd strike call in Angels vs. Sox

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
JXC

JXC

17-4 since 2001
Just so all of you know. If you watch closely. The catcher never had control of that ball, and used the ground to make the catch, AFTER the ball hit his mit. The announcers are wrong. That was a great call.
 
It was classy of him to react like he did. They may never show the replay that I saw ONCE on FOX that showed it wasn't caught. It was a closeup. What happened was, the catcher orignally had the ball go into his glove, without skipping, but the ball was still moving around in the glove, and he turned his glove, and used the ground to help with the catch. So that should be ruled not a catch, and it was rule not a catch. It's the right call.
 
Upvote 0
Very classy response by Scioscia. I thought he was gonna go off on live TV, but he handled himself very well.

What a bizarre finish. I think the guy caught it. Catchers know full-well if they catch the ball or if it short-hops. It's not like they're gonna get away with something if they don't tag the batter. If he knew it short-hopped, he would've tagged the batter out.
 
Upvote 0
Just because he thought he caught it, doesn't mean he did. He didn't catch it...he used the ground. It was obvious in a replay that probably won't ever be shown again.

I love how the announcers, Tim Mccarver...and now harold reynolds and john kruk don't know what they are talking about, with the mechanics.
 
Upvote 0
He thought he caught it...that's obvious. I'm VERY surprised he didn't tag the batter-runner anyway. He obviously had to turn his glove when the ball hit it to keep control of it, therefore letting the ball touch the ground. You can tell he caught it funny. He has to know he caught it funny. He was stupid for not tagging the batter.
 
Upvote 0
Oh8ch said:
It may be that the ball touched the ground, but it was still a chicken-shit call. Rarely made and should not have decided a playoff game.
Click to expand...
How is this call rarely made? I know NO umpire that is going to say the catcher "caught" the ball, when he didn't catch the ball. The 'call' didn't decide the game, the play did. The catcher should have tagged him. Why should the rules be bent just because the catcher was stupid?
 
Upvote 0
Oh8ch said:
It may be that the ball touched the ground, but it was still a chicken-shit call. Rarely made and should not have decided a playoff game.
Click to expand...
do I need to buy you one of these?:

Adrenaline_MiamiJersey-2T.jpg
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top