This is CB Bucknor (54)'s first ejection of 2012.
CB Bucknor now has 4 points in the UEFL (0 Previous + 2 MLB + 2 Correct Call = 4).
Crew Chief Dale Scott now has 6 points in the UEFL's Crew Division (5 Previous + 1 Correct Call = 6).
*This ejection is eligible for a balls-strikes exemption for pre-ejection pitches in the bottom of the 5th.
*After review, the UEFL Appeals Board has affirmed Quality of Correctness & Reason for Ejection (6-0).
UEFL Standings Update
This is the 88th ejection of 2012.
This is the 10th non-player/non-manager ejection of 2012.
This is Dan Warthen's first ejection of 2012, and first ejection since June 30, 2009 (Jim Wolf; QOC = Incorrect). This was also a mound visit argument ejection as Mets pitching coach for Warthen.
This is CB Bucknor's first ejection of 2012 and first since July 4, 2010 (Gerald Laird and Jeremy Bonderman; QOC = Incorrect).
This is the Mets' sixth ejection of 2012, first in the NL East.
Wrap: Mets at Braves 7/15/12
Video: Warthen argues with Bucknor during mound meeting, gets ejected
UEFL Video
Pitch f/x courtesy Brooks Baseball
52 comments :
The travesty that is CB Bucknor continues. When they say he is the worst umpires, as in the players, they are ten times as accurate as CB will ever be.
But what about the delayed time out pitch? That blew the fuse as much as anything?
CB Bucknor displayed incompetence coupled with arrogance on his pitch calls today and ejecting Dan Warthen- DISGRACEFUL
Here's another example of why he's so bad -- pitches one and two are out of zone and get called strikes. Naturally Santana tries to pitch that part of the plate again and they are called balls. So techically Bucknor calls the pitches correctly, but what he's basically done is set up to the pitcher to fail.
But again, the other thing not reflected in the chart is the delayed time out he granted the batter in the middle of the sequence which angered the Mets as much as anything else.
this guy is an absolute embarrassment to the umpiring profession
Without a doubt, this is the worst umpiring crew in baseball. Remember the Padres/Dodgers triple play debacle? Who brought that to you... Dale Scott.
it's a joke to call this "correct". Warthen was arguing the time out, and just the overall inconsistency of CB. Love to see how the plot plays out.
Send the whole crew on vacation. For 180 days!
you can't blame Dale Scott for CB Bucknor.... Consistantly Bad has followed CB for as long as he's been umpiring high school games in NYC.... it is what it is.... As for his chart well it seems for CB really good.. it's a shame we have to lower our standards...
http://www.brooksbaseball.net/pfxVB/cache/zoneplot.php-pitchSel=all&game=gid_2012_07_15_nynmlb_atlmlb_1&sp_type=1&s_type=7.gif
When you are the guy in charge, you have to take responsibility. Scott has had his own problems this year as well, as evidenced by the Padres/Dodgers debacle.
Its the inconsistency from pitch to pitch that bothers me with him, the pitchers/hitters have no idea whether or not the pitch will be called a strike/ball if its close
In addition, third base umpire Dan Iaasogna called a fly ball that landed foul in left field fair.
I challenge -- Warthen was steaming over the inaccurate time call given to Bourn. Balls/Strikes not the reason for the ejection.
Second that -- Iassogna blew a call at 3B. This is, without a doubt, the worst umpiring crew in the Major Leagues going today. Just brutal two days.
Perahps gil can splice some of the incorrect calls together if he has time.... It indeed was a horror show this weekend.... Warthen has been ejected in just under 20 big league seasons a grand total of ONCE.... by Jim Wolf.... Warthen doesn't say much
You know....as horrible as we pundits say about CB, I find it very amusing that this is his first toss of the season and we're already in the middle of July.
I should say as horrible as CB is as we pundits say......
Maybe that's telling you something.. he's so bad he won't eject anybody because he knows he's that bad! LOL
@2:15: The Iassogna call benefited the Mets.
Wow, give up 6 earned runs in one inning and only get 6 hits for the game. What terrible playing by a professional team. Fans got hosed by the players which happens more often than not, not the umpire.
Seems like when Angel did not give time out last year, everyone said he was a douche. Make up your minds.
Check out what the score was Bourn was at the plate.
Still, no one is complaining because the Mets lost the game -- they are commenting at his terrible first base call yesterday and his body of work today (and beyond). The fact that the Mets lost this game today has nothing to do with the widespread notion that CB isn't a very good umpire.
And comparing one time out call today by one ump to another made in a game last year by another umpire is a bit of stretch. Why not compare one called strike in a game today with one made by another guy in another at-bat a year ago. It's no different, and it's rather pointless.
For an umpire as controversial as Bucknor is, it's kind of hard to believe he went over 2 years without an ejection.
saw it on espn. Its typical
Whoever the worst MLB umpire is, he is still way better than any of us. Everybody needs to take it easy on the big league guys.
Anon6:30, get that umpire apologist stuff out of here!
http://mlb.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_id=23066579&c_id=mlb
I'm a Braves fan and even I can say the Mets got hosed in that inning. There was one pitch to Yanish that was called a ball that Santana and the Mets objected to. Yanish wound up walking, which setup the big inning. I thought watching it that the first two pitches to Bourn were off the plate and I was right. But most hitters and pitchers don't mind that as long as there's consistency, which is something C.B. Bucknor never displays (unless you want to call him consistently inconsistent). Santata went back to that same area and didn't get the call. It's like Bucknor shrunk his zone for a punchout.
I'll disagree with those who think the late timeout was the reason for the argument. I think it was a combination of that, and the inconsistent zone (specifically in Yanish and Bourn's AB's).
You umpire apologists can take up for him all you want, but the truth is C.B. Bucknor is awful and has no business being in the Majors.
1. the pitch in the video is a ball. Period. It's way outside, and the catcher moves it to the plate.
2. It's utterly ridiculous for anyone to claim with any certainty what was being discussed on the mound. You just don't know.
3. Only the manager has the right to question an umpire. Any other coach should go just for opening their mouth. Do your job, and let your manager do his.
I had a brother at that game. But he has no idea what happend. Not only is he a soccer referee, but he proposed to his girlfriend during the game. He may not even know which team won!
Are we having this discussion because there was something terrible in this clip? Or are we having this discussion simply because it's CB Bucknor? Looking at the clips and the Brook's graph I see a few observations:
1) The verbal "time-out" granted by Bucknor is almost simultaneous to the pitchers first motion. Yes, he does grant it rather late, and I have seen umpires not grant time there and the batter steps out. Many times this leads to the offense's manager getting ejected.
2) The Brooks pitch track looked rather good. The exception being wide on the corners, then when it counted, Santana didn't get the call. It is much easier to deal with a consistent zone (either consistently large or small) than an inconsistent zone.
The real issue is this: Can Bucknor change his reputation? Even with officials at the apex of baseball, someone has to be the worst. Unfortunately Bucknor finds himself in this situation over the past several years. Is he worthy to be a big league umpire? Absolutely. Does he need to improve? Without a doubt. I think his reputation makes it much harder to improve. If this was a Davis, Cousins, Gorman, or Joyce clip would it get the same reaction?
I think people who say this call should be incorrect because of the late time-out have just no idea what they are talking about. The time-out was late but it was beofre the pitcher threw the pitch. This happens at least once in every single game. People are just getting mad at that because it is Bucknor. Like Jon Terry said, this pitch is a ball period. Strike one should have also been a ball so Santana actually got lucky on a pitch. I think Warthen must have been most upset at a 2-2 pitch called a ball on Paul Janish. That pitch was def. not called correctly. But looking at the pitch fx, Bucknor had an OK day. Not great but I have seen much worse this year.
I do not believe that either call is incorrect. The pitch, like John Terry noted is a ball. No questions about that. Here is how granting time works if you have never worked the plate: Player requests time, Umpire Brain Processes request, and then either wards or does not award. It is not an instantaneous thing. It make take a second. I do not believe the time request was too late. Happens at every level like that. Big thing for me if I am watching that as coach or player is that Bourn needs to keep his hands on the bat and feet in the box in order to swing if not granted and not commit another infraction. Worst umpire in whose opinion? Here is a guy that went 2 years between ejections. You have a bad game every now and then. For those of you that umpire, I would like to look at video of your games like we see of these umpires so that we can see how brutal you are. The problem is that commentators, players, and managers get to say what they want about the umpires and nobody questions it, and some believe it.
@Russ:
The pitch to Janish had a px of .849, which is in the borderline range. Had Werthen been tossed arguing that pitch, the call would have been correct.
It just seems a bunch of Mets fans showed up the last couple days on the site.
The question again though is the sequence of the at-bat. Pitches one and two to Bourn are outside of the zone but get called strikes. So Santana goes back there for pitches three and four and they are (correctly) called balls... Yet Santana was throwing there because he just got two strikes called in the area of that spot. If pitches one and two were called balls, would he have gone back there for pitches three and four? Doubtful.
Thanks Cricket,
I did not realize that pitch to Janish would have been correct. I was just going based on the TV replay which made the pitch look like a strike. I should no better than to trust the TV replay. I am not a Mets fan at all and think Bucknor's bad rap is undeserved, I was just trying to point out another pitch Warthen was probably mad at. I am not trying to bash this crew at all.
To add on to what Brett said if he is really the worst Umpire in the MLB how come he has worked 3 playoff series. That's more playoffs than Mike Dimuro, Mark Carlson, Marvin Hudson,Ed Hickox,Marty Foster and Andy Fletcher and the same amount as Brian Runge,Doug Eddings, Paul Nauert,Hunter Wendlstedt,Jim Wolf,Larry Vanover,Tim Timmons,Bill Welke and Paul Schreiber.
Anon 10:03, go look at the chart again. Pitches 3 and 4 were NOT in the same spots as 1 and 2. Pitch 3 was much further outside and pitch 4 was much further up than pitches 1 and 2. I can't speak for the rest of the game, but there is nothing wrong with this at-bat.
So let me see if I have this correct, the Mets are complaining that Bucknor didn't give them another pitch out of the strike zone? The day before they were complaining about this crew getting together and getting a call correct? These are both examples of what Sandy Alderson, while EVP of baseball operations in the commissioner's office, implemented into the umpire department. He started Questec and implored the umpires to get together and get plays right. Funny how now they aren't to happy with the process now that he is the GM of the Mets. Karma my friends.
They need to show these UEFL videos on TV. I mean, freezing the frame and showing a highlight of the ball's trajectory to prove that it never had any part of the plate?
These are some great comments but i think the problem a lot of amateur umpires have is they believe ejections = the quality of the umpire.. this IS NOT THE CASE. Just b/c someone say Phil Cuzzi has about one ejection a year does not mean he's one of the best. I think (i KNOW) a lot of managers have just accepted CB for what he is. It comes with experience... you know what you're going to get. An inconsistant umpire who in general works hard but isn't good. He's in MLB he's not going anywhere and you can't fight it. People on here have been known to bash a guy like say Joe West b/c he has a lot of Ejs but that doesn't make him any worse an umpire. Umpires tend to have varying personalities just like players do so the tolerence of other humans and response will vary as well!!
Black kid from NYC. Oh, he had all the breaks. Yep that's a hot bed for minority umpires. Gimme a break. Funny how all negative comments are from Anon. No guts everbody?
I suggest CB had a tougher road to the bigs than anybody else. I suggest he's really a top 10 umpire. We are, again and again shown his clips. This one, he is correct about, yet the bashing does not end. Just saying CB is the worst doesn't make it so.
Before 1999, playoff were assigned on a rotation basis (or there abouts). Do you want to know why? Huh?
Well, this may suprise you, they did keep "some" type of umpire stats, and when they would get done at the end of the year, and taking all factors into account, from top to bottom they were all so close percentage wise, there was no way to tell anybody apart...... Thus a rotation system was the fairest.
CB misses them at the same percentage as everyone else. But the black kid from NYC gets hammered here right(in this case) or wrong....
Gee I wonder why?
[Braves fan] The real problem with CB's zone was that he was striking that very same pitch in the 8th with a 6-1 score that Santana didn't get in the 5th in a 0-0 game.
As others have pointed out, players can adjust to any reasonable zone as long as it's consistent. Bucknor's wasn't on Sunday.
I agree with most of what Big Marc said, except the part about CB being the "black kid."
Bucknor is a native of Jamaica. I point this out only to ensure that no one thinks MLB should get a cookie in the minority hiring column based on cb bucknor. While MLB has gone out of its way to hire umpires from south of the border, such as Bucknor, you still need a search warrant to find an African American umpire
Didn't take the apologists long to show up.
The ball call is obviously correct, but I think that the call of time was incorrect. Under 6.02b comment:
"Umpires will not call “Time” at the request of the batter or any member of his team once the
pitcher has started his windup or has come to a set position even though the batter claims “dust in his
eyes,” “steamed glasses,” “didn’t get the sign” or for any other cause."
While Bourn may have made his request for time before Santana started the wind-up, it appears to me that time was granted after the wind-up commenced.
@Anon 7:33: I've always felt that comment was referring to the time of the request rather than the actual call of time. Much like how in football a coach might request a time-out, but by the time the official can react and blow the whistle the ball has been snapped. It's when time is requested, not when it's called, that matters.
Also, someone should keep track of how many times TV announcers use the "that coach/player never gets mad" line. And I understand what was meant, but the one announcer says "there are pitches in this game that have been thrown by Ben Sheets that have been called strikes" and when you navigate away from the window for a bit and when you restart the video later that's the first thing you hear, it's quite funny out-of-context.
On another note, can we possibly have a moderator start removing the apologist/basher comments? Too many pages end up being filled with what is essentially name-calling instead of actual intelligent discussion.
@BAPACop
FYI- I am anon 7:33, and I choose not to use a real name.
You make an interesting point. Its tough to interpret as written. Since the umpire is not required to grant a request for time, it could be interpreted that no umpire may grant a time-out request once the wind-up has begun, even if the request was made before.
I am unfamiliar with football, so I wouldn't even be able to speak to that. Since I know time-outs are limited in football, I would ask if a referee is required to grant a time-out request as long as the timing is appropriate?
I am curious to see how the appeals board interprets this (if it is even being considered). Such a call does have a realistic effect on the pitcher's concentration for the remainder of the at bat.
Curt, I was a little uneasy even posting those words. I was trying to make a point about his race, and I didn't realize he was Jamaican, had I known I wouldn't have tried to make that far reaching point..... however, I'm not totally convinced the CB bashing is race related, but I cannot figure out when he misses plays, why he get's the worst umpire tag....even if he is the worst in the bigs, he's still 70th best in the world, and besides somebody has to be at the bottom.
Bapacop had to break it down potato level for some of you. If you didn't realize that a request for time and calling time cannot happen at the same time, your an idiot. It was laughable he had to break that down to those who were crying about when CB called time.
Also, to clarify:
Anon post says," that was a bad call"....ok
Anon post says, " He is the worst umpire" not ok.
Hate to pull the race card..but.......
After review, the Original Ruling has been affirmed in a 6-0 decision by the UEFL Appeals Board. Six Appeals Board members elected to Confirm the Original Ruling.
Per Curiam Opinion:
First and foremost, the Board considers Reason for Ejection, the granting of "time" vs. Balls/Strikes, or NEC vs. Balls/Strikes.
UEFL Rule 6-5-c-3, regarding irrecusability and NEC, states, in part, "A reason for ejection of Unsportsmanlike Conduct-NEC is only assigned when no other reason for ejection may be assessed. For instance, if an ejected person reignites an argument over a previously ruled play, yet indicates a disagreement regarding the current play, reason for ejection and QOC will reflect the argument over the current play: NEC represents 'Not Elsewhere Classified' and is generally subservient to any other probable classification."
Therefore, Balls/Strikes is generally a more convincing Reason than NEC, unless "overwhelmingly clear and convincing evidence [indicates] that the argument was indeed in response to only one call" (6-5-e). Because this threshold has not been satisfied in regards to NEC, the Board unanimously finds that Balls/Strikes is the reason for ejection.
The Board has applied a Balls/Strikes Exemption (6-5-d-2), in which the Board finds Bucknor's pre-ejection half-inning performance to be 6/6 = 100% accuracy. Because the two strike calls in question were not against the affected team, they are ineligible for accuracy determination (Ejection 075: Tony Randazzo (1)). In Randazzo, the Board rejected the argument of inter-inning consistency. In this decision, the Board likewise finds intra-inning consistency inadmissable.
Because Balls/Strikes accuracy is 100%, the Board is unanimous in its determination that QOC had been properly determined.
Therefore, the Board affirms the Original Ruling.
Confirmed: Gil, tmac, Albertaumpire, BillMueller, RichMSN, yawetag
Upheld: None
Overturned: None
Deferred: None
Abstained: Jeremy (Posted Original Ruling)
The Original Ruling has been affirmed, 6-0.
Post a Comment