Skip to content

Brewers win on horrendous call by umpire Mike Estabrook

Jun 1, 2013, 7:17 PM EDT

Brewers @ Phillies June 1 2013

The Brewers defeated the Phillies today 4-3, thanks in large part to a horrendous call by second base umpire Mike Estabrook in the bottom of the ninth inning. Down 4-2 initially, Freddy Galvis homered to lead off the ninth against Brewers reliever Francisco Rodriguez. Pinch-hitter Jimmy Rollins, who was not in the lineup due to a sore right foot, followed up with a single. Pitcher Kyle Kendrick pinch-ran for Rollins and was moved up to second base on a sacrifice bunt by Ben Revere. With Cesar Hernandez batting, Rodriguez wheeled and fired back to second base, covered by shortstop Jean Segura.

Watch the play unfold in this .gif:

Good thing there isn’t any technology available which would have allowed the correct call to be made.

On the very next pitch, Hernandez doubled to right field, which would have scored Kendrick. Rodriguez then intentionally walked Domonic Brown to face the much-less threatening Michael Martinez, who feebly grounded out to Segura at shortstop to end the comeback attempt.

101 Comments (Feed for Comments)
  1. cur68 - Jun 1, 2013 at 7:21 PM

    Human Element, FUCK YEAH!


    • bendover09 - Jun 1, 2013 at 8:50 PM

      Wait until you see the strikeout call on Berkman. Then he was thrown out of the game. Another good day for the umpires.

  2. normcash - Jun 1, 2013 at 7:22 PM

    Wrong call for sure, but it’s easy to see how he missed it from the angle he had—his view
    was blocked by the second baseman and the ball fortuitously rolled right into his glove and
    he sold it….

    • djeter220 - Jun 1, 2013 at 7:42 PM

      The ball rolled rolled right into his bare hand, which would have no way of being there if he had made the clean catch and tag like the ump assumed…the fact that he presented the ball in his bare hand should have been a dead giveaway he didn’t make the play cleanly.

      • egb234 - Jun 1, 2013 at 7:51 PM

        You have no idea what the ump assumed in the split second he made the call. What if he assumed the right hand was close enough to pull the ball out of the glove? It would have been a reasonable assumption because, again, HIS VIEW WAS BLOCKED.

      • Utley's Hair - Jun 1, 2013 at 8:13 PM

        Segura had the ball in his bare hand. His view being blocked was irrelevant.

  3. Stiller43 - Jun 1, 2013 at 7:32 PM

    “On the very next pitch, Hernandez doubled to right field, which would have scored Kendrick.”

    That is, of course, assuming his pitch selection and everything that goes into pitching remains exactly the same with or without a RISP.

    • DJ MC - Jun 1, 2013 at 7:43 PM

      Of course, we’ll never know how that human element, which is interesting and important to the game, would have been effected because we waste time allowing another, pointless form of human element to negate it.

    • DelawarePhilliesFan - Jun 2, 2013 at 7:55 AM

      I have always argued that same point – you don’t know what the pitch would be in a hypothetical situation. But in the intial spot, it was 1 out and a runner on second. In that situation, you just need an out. Flyball won’t hurt you nor will a groundout, so you just need an out anyway you can get it (i.e. you don’t have to go for the strikeout). 2 outs and no one on base, the situation really has not changed – just get an out anyway you can. It’s hard for me to see how the pitchers approach changes, and if you look at the pitch selection to Hernandez for his at bat, it was the same rotation of pitches that everyone else saw – except for Revere, who was trying to make an out with a sacrifice.

      We don’t know what would have happened, that is true. But I have a hard time seeing what would have been different pitch wise. The ony thing that changed was less pressure on the Brewers, and more pressure on Hernandez

  4. jrs45 - Jun 1, 2013 at 7:33 PM


  5. Stiller43 - Jun 1, 2013 at 7:34 PM

    Im not defending the call or happy OR sad about the outcome btw, just saying things dont necessarily remain equal.

  6. xjokerz - Jun 1, 2013 at 7:44 PM


  7. egb234 - Jun 1, 2013 at 7:50 PM

    Idiotic commentary. Acting like it’s so obvious that we should implement replay to technology to remedy plays like this is insulting to anyone who can think about more than one issue at a time. Are you saying they should have replay for every play in baseball? It’s already a very, very slow game. What about important plats? Ok, pickoffs at second will never make it into a class of plays that are frequent enough or crucial enough to be reviewable. That’s to say nothing of the question of who triggers the replay, who views the video, etc.
    Also, this was not an obviously missed call. It was a bang-bang play where the ball clearly beat the runner to the bag and the defender used sleight of hand to get the call.
    Stupid snark by the author.

    • cur68 - Jun 1, 2013 at 7:54 PM

      Stupid snark by the commenter. In every other major sport, replay is used to ensure calls are made correctly. The very best technology is brought to bear to ensure the outcome is fair and within the rules. Except in MLB, that is. The author (Bill Baer) is bang-on correct.

      • 18thstreet - Jun 2, 2013 at 12:44 PM

        I’m in the tiny minority on this one. It’s not that I like wrong calls, or see them as part of the game or whatever these “human element” comments are taking shots at. It’s that I watch baseball games to be entertained, and waiting for the so-called ‘instant’ replay verdict to come back is intolerable.

        This is a June game between two crappy teams. The world will go on with a few wrong calls now and then. And we’ve all seen how in the NFL, even using the replay technology, doesn’t guarantee that the calls are right. It just guarantees that there are more pauses in the games in which nothing happen.

        If it were possible to have a system in which the replay reviews were brief and rare, and I’d be fully in support of expanded use of replay. But neither of those things is going to happen. They’re going to review a half dozen close plays in every last game, and I’m going to change the channel to reruns of Frazier while they do it.

        Do I prefer wrong calls? No. Do I prefer the occasional wrong call if the alternative is adding 20 minutes to every game? Yes.

    • paperlions - Jun 1, 2013 at 7:56 PM

      No, it was a horrible call, and one that anyone with two synapses in sequence can see would be easily and quickly remedied if replay were available.

      …and talking of idiotic commentary. You may as well have said, “Hey, look over there a strawman. I’m actually too lazy to bother building him, just take my word for it, he’s there.” You presented 0 reasons for replay not to be available to correct such calls.

      Heck, you didn’t even offer a reason for an umpire think a player was tagged out when it was obvious the tag was made with an empty glove.

    • indaburg - Jun 1, 2013 at 8:27 PM

      You know what would speed up the game? Not having 10 minute arguments over blown calls in the middle of a game. Hockey, for example, has an effective centralized system in place for the quick review of calls. It seems to work well, and it doesn’t slow down play.

      Baseball stubbornly remaining in the dark ages is making a mockery of the game and is making fools of the officials. It’s time.

      • thebadguyswon - Jun 1, 2013 at 8:38 PM

        Its Bud Selig and Bud Selig alone. He doesn’t want to do ANYTHING to upset the umps union.

    • djpostl - Jun 1, 2013 at 9:37 PM

      Only idiotic commentary here is from you. This is just another perfectly example of the need for expanded replay where anyone BUT the umps on the field makes the call.

      Anyone who tries to argue otherwise is just delusional as hell.

      And yeah, as for this specific case it was an easy call, angle and all. The second he he saw the glove on the runner but the ball in his bare hand would have been a dead giveaway.

      But even if it was a tough call on the field it is one that could have been reviewed and remedied in under 20 seconds.

      There’s no excuse for something like this.

    • bigmeechy74 - Jun 1, 2013 at 11:05 PM


    • DelawarePhilliesFan - Jun 2, 2013 at 8:01 AM

      They should not review every play. They shold have an umprie in the booth who can call to the field and say “Hold on guys, we got that wrong”.

      To quote crew chief Tom Hallion after the game “”It’s unfortunate, but it’s one of those plays that if any one of us — any umpire — had seen the loose ball, we certainly would have come in and helped Mike out with that,”

      Any umpire. Imagine if they had a 5th umpire in the booth. Can’t see why the umps wouldn’t like having the extra one – thats 15 extra jobs. It would cost MLB about $3 mill a year.

    • mattor3 - Jun 2, 2013 at 9:25 AM

      egb234, you make a good assertion but don’t back it up. Anyone who wants replay in baseball is a casual fan who turns on three games a week in their living room in the 7th inning, then goes onto NBC HardBalltalk and rants and raves about instant replay.

      With baseball, it’s not as easy as the other sports. It’s a can of worms if they expand it to put outs because every ball in play becomes reviewable. Whether its a flyball, bang-bang play at first, a pickoff at 2nd (yes this call was horrible and I am a Phillies fan and was livid last night), a popout, a tag, an outfield assist, etc. EVERYTHING becomes an object of replay. And I agree with Selig: baseball is a game of pace. It moves along slowly but constantly. There are at least 2-3 close calls per game. Making the umps leave the field would add more time to this sport which already has problems containing the ADD fans of the 21st century. An extra 15-20 minutes of nothing going on in a game would be torturous for fans at the stadiums and at home.

      What you really have to ask yourself in this endless debate is: Does it really matter? There are 162 games in a year. Teams win and have been winning on close calls and bad calls since the game was invented. But you guys are right, it doesn’t HAVE to be this way, but it is. Baseball isn’t as serious as the NHL. They don’t have a diabolical central office like the NHL, NFL and NBA who are down their franchises throats. There’s no clock and no deadline. It’s a relaxed game, it’s a kids game played by grown men. And when you play 162 games, calls like this will even themselves out over a season. 1 game is meaningless over the course of a baseball season and anyone who disagrees with that is not a baseball fan who is knowledgeable about the game. All of you flipping out about this don’t see that. These guys will lace up today and this game will be a distant memory come tomorrow..

      • kalinedrive - Jun 3, 2013 at 10:54 AM

        I disagree with everything you said except “There’s no clock and no deadline. It’s a relaxed game.”

        Yes, and the built-in delays between plays is usually plenty of time for a replay/review. How many replays do you see in an average broadcast? Is there any reason a dedicated professional umpire couldn’t review every close play and hit a buzzer if he thinks it merits closer scrutiny?

        Most close plays will be seen to be correct and there will be no additional delay while the next batter steps in after taking 12 practice swings and holding his hand up while he scratches at the dirt with his cleats and the pitcher wanders around and adjusts his cap and looks in for a sign.

        I’ve watched plenty of baseball, often from the first pitch to the last, and I’m not concerned about the pace of the game being slowed down when they already have time to show me five replays of every close play before the next pitch is thrown anyway.

  8. randygnyc - Jun 1, 2013 at 7:53 PM

    Norm- except the ball never made it to the glove if you look closely. Which would be hard to explain that if the glove tagged the runner, how did the ball end up, instantaneously in his right hand?

  9. egb234 - Jun 1, 2013 at 7:54 PM

    I hate umpires. I hate bad calls. But acting like this was a horrendous call, especially one that obviously justifies replay, is stupid. Bang-bang play, ump was in the best position possible to make the call, and the ball beat the guy to the bag.

    • paperlions - Jun 1, 2013 at 7:57 PM

      You also apparently hate logic. Balls beating players to bags simply don’t matter when a tag is required.

      • egb234 - Jun 1, 2013 at 8:06 PM

        You apparently cannot connect an argument to the point being argued. This was a close play and the umpire made a reasonable mistake under the circumstances. It was not a horrendous call.

    • cur68 - Jun 1, 2013 at 7:59 PM

      What? He tagged the runner out with an empty glove? Do you even understand the rules of baseball?

      • egb234 - Jun 1, 2013 at 8:11 PM

        I don’t know why I bother responding when you aren’t trying.
        I didn’t say that he tagged the runner out with an empty glove. The call was factually wrong; incorrect; inaccurate. However, given the circumstances, it was not a horrendous call.

      • cur68 - Jun 1, 2013 at 8:13 PM

        WTF is your definition of “horrendous” then???? MINE is “The call was factually wrong; incorrect; inaccurate” AND not frigging POSSIBLE for the runner to be out. That IS the VERY DEFINITION of HORRENDOUS.

      • egb234 - Jun 1, 2013 at 8:22 PM

        A horrendous call is one that 1) is wrong, and 2) any idiot with eyes would have seen if he/she were in the umpires position. Angel Hernandez makes them regularly, as do many other MLB umpires. This umpire’s call was reasonable given the circumstances.

      • Utley's Hair - Jun 1, 2013 at 8:33 PM

        The fact that Segura had the ball in his bare, ungloved hand makes it a horrendous call. This was not a “reasonable call given the circumstances.” The circumstances surrounding it make it a horrendous, unreasonable call.

      • cur68 - Jun 1, 2013 at 8:38 PM

        egb: the circumstance is that it is 2013. Fans, players, managers & the media have been calling for expanded replay with the best technology of the day employed as appropriate to assist the umpires. What do we have? CRT TV’s and no official even looking at the TV broadcast.

        Back around the turn of the century, baseball changed the rules and equipment to ensure fairness and safety (The LiveBallEra). In fact, MANY changes have been made as technology advanced over the years. Accommodating expanded replay is little more than a continuation of that. That this call can stand reduces baseball to a farce in light of all that has been done to this point.

        Once upon a time baseball lead the way. Now, its still firmly in 1990.

      • Utley's Hair - Jun 1, 2013 at 8:48 PM

        Which, luckily for you, means the Jays and Josephine Carter are about to win the Series, you Canuck.

      • cur68 - Jun 1, 2013 at 8:57 PM

        Ah…the early ’90’s…great days…great days, indeed.

    • heyblueyoustink - Jun 1, 2013 at 8:15 PM

      Egb, you should applaud yourself, you’re coming off as more insane than me at the moment

      • cur68 - Jun 1, 2013 at 8:19 PM

        It looks like we’re ganging up on this guy and I feel bad about that, but holy dog, how can someone say this was anything BUT a craptasm of a call?

      • historiophiliac - Jun 1, 2013 at 8:28 PM

        That means you should have some more scotch!

      • heyblueyoustink - Jun 1, 2013 at 8:29 PM

        I won’t use the words I’d like to. My television nearly lost it’s life over this.

      • egb234 - Jun 1, 2013 at 8:31 PM

        Ha! Thank you, heyblueyoustink. The best part for me is that I hate umpires and I am generally in favor of replay. And here I am on a comment section I never read arguing the opposite. I just don’t think this call was that horrendous.
        Cur68: Don’t feel bad, I’m not bothered. I don’t always enter the comment section, but when I do I prefer ruffling feathers.

      • heyblueyoustink - Jun 1, 2013 at 8:31 PM

        Oh, that’s on tap. A fine 16 year to celebrate Dom Brown and my emancipation from an unhealthy relationship!:-)

      • Utley's Hair - Jun 1, 2013 at 8:35 PM

        And how does Dom Brown factor in to your escape from an unhealthy relationship?

      • cur68 - Jun 1, 2013 at 8:40 PM

        UH: lets not ask that, eh? We might get Ole HeyBlue arrested for revealing more than he should.

      • heyblueyoustink - Jun 1, 2013 at 8:41 PM

        Call it a celebration of positive things, hair. I’m an optimist to a fault most days. The alternative is just lousy.

      • Utley's Hair - Jun 1, 2013 at 8:44 PM

        I, on the other hand, am a pessimist. That way, I’m never disappointed.

      • heyblueyoustink - Jun 1, 2013 at 9:04 PM

        I don’t mind sharing this, because generally people are unaware of this condition, but one reason why I always try to look at the sunny side, is directly related to this:

        It’s under researched by both the Fed and pharmaceuticals. With my new free time I’m going to be more active on the awareness/ support group thing. I can cope largely becaused my father raised me never to be a victim. Many people don’t have that.

        So he’ll yeah, I think the Phil’s are sneaking into the playoffs, that on shoring is going to happen regardless of which idiots run this country, and that I’m going to live forever, without having to behead people to assume their power.

      • historiophiliac - Jun 1, 2013 at 10:35 PM

        Easy on the self-medicating then, old man. 😉

      • heyblueyoustink - Jun 1, 2013 at 10:57 PM

        When you sell self medicating to lead your Nuero to agree with you and comply, you realize DO or MD doesn’t always equal Einstein.

        Only took me three Nueros to get one that got it. Low blood pressure and a happy kind of abortive. 😉

        The condition treatment is a total roulette wheel.

        Donna Summer was number one on the charts when I entered this world, just for fun!

      • historiophiliac - Jun 1, 2013 at 11:03 PM

        Good grief. I’m older than you. Sheesh.


    • djpostl - Jun 1, 2013 at 9:39 PM

      It was not just horrendous it was pathetic.

      Try to keep up Skippy.

      If the play was so “bang-bang” then how did the ball have time to go from his glove to his barehand?

      The only thing touching the runner was the glove. Yet, d’oh, the ball was in his throwing hand.

      If it all happened so fast it’s pretty clear to anyone up to and including functional retards that a proper tag had not been applied.

    • DelawarePhilliesFan - Jun 2, 2013 at 8:08 AM

      The ump was not “in the best position possible to make the call”. There was a runner on 2nd, and a lefty at the plate, and positioned himself between 1st and 2nd. The manual says you should be between 2nd and 3rd in that spot.

      The ump, of course, has full descretion on where to be, but he was not in the advised spot for that situation,and had he been, he would have seen the drop. Or perhaps not, since he obviously was looking at Kendrick the whole time

    • ump570 - Jun 4, 2013 at 5:22 PM

      Why do you hate umpires? I’m an umpire and I bust my ass. I pay to attend several clinics a year, study the game and do everything possible to get every call correct, and guess what, sometimes we kick calls. That’s just the way it is. I worked 10 travel games last weekend, just like every weekend from March to November, and I had one argument on a close call on a steal at 3rd base. I saw hundreds of pitches behind the dish, made at least a dozen bangers on the bases, and this coach had the balls to imply that I made the call to screw his team. I didn’t even know any of these teams or where they were from. I traveled 2 hours to get to this tournament. Why would I give a shit about the outcome of this one call. What drives me crazy as an umpire is just how many people criticize us but have never even attempted to umpire a 9 year old’s little league game. It’s easy to judge. But until you’ve set up in the slot with the game on the line, and had to make a game deciding call, you don’t know what you’re talking about.

  10. randygnyc - Jun 1, 2013 at 7:56 PM

    Egb- which is why the umpires need an extra man in the booth, watching each play unfold. He can immediately see and speak into the crew chiefs ear piece. Problem solved. Correct call made. Doesn’t even need a challenge

    • egb234 - Jun 1, 2013 at 8:03 PM

      I can easily acknowledge that this solution makes the most sense. Similar to CFB, doesn’t lead to purposely missing calls that can be reviewed. Still a question of how the ump gets all of the camera angles quickly, but that should be resolvable.

  11. therealbigben - Jun 1, 2013 at 7:56 PM

    The same ump blew a call at second earlier in the game that led to the Phillies second run, so overall he had an even +/- rating on the day

    • dennisund - Jun 1, 2013 at 8:01 PM

      The second run scored on a single up the middle, the play you are referencing happened after the run scored and the catcher threw to 2nd base and the umpire called the runner safe. The run counted either way.

      • therealbigben - Jun 1, 2013 at 8:05 PM

        well then before that play the first base ump blew the call on a check swing that would have ended the inning. Human element! Could also blame Manuel for pinch running for Howard earlier in the game or Kendrick not taking third on a wild pitch. He never gets picked off if he’s on third.

      • dennisund - Jun 1, 2013 at 8:07 PM

        It would have been easier to admit you remembered wrong than all of this.

  12. captainwisdom8888 - Jun 1, 2013 at 7:58 PM

    Lets look at this very simply: Segura extends his glove out to catch the ball and make the tag, but ends up with the ball in his opposite bare hand instead. THIS CAN ONLY MEAN THE BALL FELL OUT OF THE GLOVE, considering infielders DO NOT switch the ball from glove-hand to throwing hand simply to make a tag on a base runner. It just doesn’t happen, and I’m struggling to figure out an explanation as to what this umpire thought he saw…

    • dennisund - Jun 1, 2013 at 8:04 PM

      He simply wasn’t thinking of where the ball should have been. He got confused because he couldn’t tell what was happening, saw the ball was secured and filled in the blanks. There was certainly nothing malicious about it, but this is what happens when split second decisions need to be made without a direct view of the play. The system is screwed.

    • indaburg - Jun 1, 2013 at 8:29 PM


  13. randygnyc - Jun 1, 2013 at 8:02 PM

    15 games a night. 1 extra umpire in the booth. Each @ 200k per year = 3 million per hear to solve this problem. 6 million per year if you think they are over worked and need to split their duties.

    • cur68 - Jun 1, 2013 at 8:07 PM

      With baseball making billions/year that’s chump change.

      • Utley's Hair - Jun 1, 2013 at 8:10 PM

        Hell, it might even bump up MLB revenue.

      • stex52 - Jun 3, 2013 at 12:03 PM

        3 million dollars a year won’t even buy one team a decent back up infielder.

        The only disadvantage I see is if they get much better calls, we won’t get so much traffic on the baseball blogs.

    • indaburg - Jun 1, 2013 at 8:30 PM

      More jobs for umpires. Why isn’t their union supporting this?

    • nothanksimdriving123 - Jun 1, 2013 at 8:52 PM

      Even less expensive: a team of 3 umps in a room in Replay Central, watching feeds of every game, zeroing in on any close play, ready for any time a game ump signals for a ruling when they aren’t sure, and for any of the managers’ 3 challenges per game. Decisions, which are final, probably within 3 minutes every time. Even with a few different ump replay teams (to deal with the days when there are day and night games from coast to coast), that is still less than an extra 15 umps almost every day. People seem terrified of manager challenges. You get 3. Use them wisely. No problem.

      • nothanksimdriving123 - Jun 1, 2013 at 10:17 PM

        And I should add: what can be challenged? Fair/foul, trap/catch, safe/out at any base, did he tag him? It isn’t perfect, nothing is, so it won’t settle every possible problem, but it will obviously eliminate the most flagrant, embarrassing calls. Well, Bud, you done evolving yet? Wanna pick up the pace there pal? Cro-Magnon evolved quicker.

  14. schmedley69 - Jun 1, 2013 at 8:09 PM

    Bad call aside, this is the second time in the past few weeks that the Phillies have used a pitcher to pinch run in a crucial situation and he’s been picked off. Cliff Lee did it a few weeks ago against the Reds but was bailed out when Kratz and Galvis went back-to-back to win it.

    Ruben Amaro has done a horrible job and hasn’t given Charlie a full deck to play with, but Charlie is not playing the hand that he’s been dealt to it’s fullest. Pinch running for Howard (bad knee and all) with Michael Martinez in a 4-2 game was bound to come back and bite him in the ass, and sure enough it did. Martinez ended up batting with the game on the line and made the final out. The wheels came off for the Phillies last year in June, and it looks like it might happen again this year. This team is hard to watch.

    • dennisund - Jun 1, 2013 at 8:16 PM

      Is it wrong that I’m already looking at which prospects I’d look forward to in return for all of these veterans going to teams trying to seal the deal?

      • schmedley69 - Jun 1, 2013 at 8:37 PM

        Yes, because those prospects for proven player deals almost never work out for the team getting the prospects. Teams never want to give up their top prospects, and even with the top prospects there are more misses than hits. Cliff Lee was traded 3 times when he was younger and cheaper, and not one of those prospects has panned out. Cliff Lee is a great pitcher and is under contract for 3 more years. Keep him. He will be more valuable than the crap that they get in return in a trase. If they don’t plan to re-sign Utley, then maybe you trade him and hope to get something decent, but more than likely they won’t get anything good. They would have to eat a lot of salary to move Papelbon. Other than that, there is no one to trade who will bring anything of value. Keep the good players, and re-tool in the off-season. Getting rid of your good players for other team’s trash makes no sense.

  15. egb234 - Jun 1, 2013 at 8:16 PM

    Were the defender’s actions the equivalent of flopping in the NBA or diving in soccer? I like the deceptive element of baseball, but I’m curious why people don’t ever condemn a baseball player using deceit when it’s usually despised in other sport.

    • dennisund - Jun 1, 2013 at 8:25 PM

      Perhaps, but baseball has such a weird relationship with cheating. There’s the cheating that is considered ‘just trying to win’ like catchers framing pitches, batters ducking out of the way on an inside corner pitch, trying to fake out a runner at first by pretending to throw the ball back to the pitcher, batters letting the ball hit them without moving, these are the go-getter cheats. Relaying signs, corked bats, performance enhancing drugs that haven’t proven to enhance anything, get out the pitchforks. A blatant spit ball didn’t even elicit a review. It seems rather arbitrary to me, so I really don’t know.

      • egb234 - Jun 1, 2013 at 8:36 PM

        Yeah, it’s funny. Cheating is ok, unless it’s cheating. Still the best sport in the world though.

    • cur68 - Jun 1, 2013 at 8:30 PM

      No one gives a crap about Segura, ok? Frankly, I kind of admire his quick thinking and fast hands, there. The problem is that we, the fans, have been calling for expanded replay FOR YEARS. Why? So that this kind of thing does not happen. Getting the call right is FAR more important than players being sneaky.

      If a player puts one over on the ump, then it SHOULD be a case where the Ump the best means of the day for getting the call right. If the player STILL gets away with the deception, in spite of the replay or what have you, fine. All that could have been done WAS done to get it right.

      But, THIS. This is a farce. Anyone at home can see easily what the correct call is. How is it a part of the game to get the effin call so blatantly wrong when the fix is so simple? This isn’t 1813. We have high definition replay and cellphones. Phones so small you can wear them in your ear, in fact. There is NO earthly reason to allow the wrong call to stand when the correct call could easily have been made and rather quickly at that.

      • egb234 - Jun 1, 2013 at 8:40 PM

        I’m not sure we can salvage this new relationship of ours. This comment was separate from replay. For what it’s worth, you are an entertaining writer. I could almost feel you yelling at me. That is meant as a true compliment.

      • stex52 - Jun 3, 2013 at 12:07 PM

        1813?? Just can’t get over that little dust-up in Canada, can we? Just let them burn your capitol once and you never hear the end of it.

      • cur68 - Jun 3, 2013 at 12:23 PM

        “Let”? That’s an interesting typo, Stex. Never seen “beaten so badly they could only stand helplessly by, clapped in irons, while the victorious Canadians sacked the Capital” misspelled so tragically. Tsk.

  16. thebadguyswon - Jun 1, 2013 at 8:36 PM

    MUST HAVE HUMAN ELEMENT!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  17. guppies66 - Jun 1, 2013 at 8:47 PM

    The umpires win again. It’s too bad that their feelings are more important than the integrity of the game.

    MLB must feel very proud that it’s fans can so readily see their teams lose games they deserved to win.

    MLB Survival hint: continually frustrated fans will eventually go away.

  18. randygnyc - Jun 1, 2013 at 9:02 PM

    Nothanks- no thanks. So after 3 challenges you revert back to human error. What if there are 4 close calls in a game. You’re resigned to accept that the 4th, and most important call late in a game, could be wrong with no remedy. When by simply adding a 5th man in the booth who is constantly watching the feeds with all subsequent replays, can instantly override a call.

    • nothanksimdriving123 - Jun 2, 2013 at 4:14 AM

      I see your point, but there are rarely 4 awful calls against one team in a single game. I’ve never seen it (not counting demented shifting strike zones). And I’d be happy to toss in more for extra innings. And managers would only need their challenges when the umps refuse to call for a replay themselves.

  19. neveraboutveracity - Jun 1, 2013 at 10:24 PM

    Yes, a bad call by the umpire. An even worse call by Charlie Manuel. Not because pitchers are not savvy base runners, but because of the potential for injury. The Phils’ rotation is depleted, so let’s bring in one of the few hurlers who is doing well, cold off the bench, and tell him to run as fast as he can to the next base. Don’t worry about your hamstrings. And don’t worry about your hands. Slide in head first if you have to. Stretch out your arms and fingers and jam them into the bad. I don’t care how depleted your bench offerings are at that point in the game. It is a bad coaching call, but one we have seen time and again from this manager.

  20. jbeagles23 - Jun 1, 2013 at 11:08 PM

    That’s the definition of a terrible call. Had he caught the ball with his glove. He would’ve shown the ump the ball in the glove. Officials and umps are embarrassing sports these days. It all started with that Green Bay Seattle football game

  21. edgarallan926 - Jun 2, 2013 at 12:38 AM

    Where’s proudlycanadian?? Segura deserves to get a full beer thrown at him for “cheating”, right??

  22. eagles512 - Jun 2, 2013 at 1:19 AM

    Can’t believe some are defending the ump. They are a joke and need to be publicly called out when they continue to make such awful mistakes.

  23. FinFan68 - Jun 2, 2013 at 7:43 AM

    Replay can be used to quickly correct calls like this especially if there is an ump on monitor duty during the game. The problem would be fixing plays that continue after an incorrect call is made. Decisions are made by runners and fielders based on the call as it is made. If the ump makes the opposite decision at the time then those decisions would likely be different. That is hard to fix. A solution would be to freeze everything at the time the mistake was made but there would still be the same level of complaints. The argument would shift from replay getting the call right back to what it used to be… The umps should get the calls right immediately

  24. mauijim3 - Jun 2, 2013 at 8:02 AM

    While this was a missed (bad) call, nobody on the Phillies really argued about the result, even the runner. Since no arguments happened, even if replay was allowed would it have even been used in that case? Seems to me that if everyone on the field accepts the call, there would have been no reason to look any further anyway.

  25. greymares - Jun 2, 2013 at 8:05 AM

    When the umpires are fined and suspended for calls that are incorrect, they themselves will be calling for replays to get it right.

Leave Comment

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!

Top 10 MLB Player Searches
  1. G. Stanton (2738)
  2. C. Correa (2602)
  3. Y. Puig (2596)
  4. G. Springer (2527)
  5. B. Crawford (2479)
  1. H. Ramirez (2424)
  2. H. Pence (2375)
  3. M. Teixeira (2287)
  4. J. Hamilton (2259)
  5. J. Baez (2244)