HP Umpire Chad Fairchild ejected Tigers 3B Miguel Cabrera and Manager Jim Leyland for arguing a strike two call in the bottom of the 3rd inning of the Phillies-Tigers game. With three on and one out, Cabrera took a 0-1 fastball from Phillies pitcher Jonathan Pettibone for a called second strike. Replays indicate the pitch was located navel high and over the outer half of home plate (sz_top 3.590, pz 3.143; px 0.378) [strike one was also located navel high and over the outer half of home plate (sz_top 3.590, pz 3.041; px 0.241)], the call was correct.* At the time of the ejection, the Phillies were leading, 1-0.
These are Chad Fairchild (75)'s seventh and eighth ejections of 2013.
Chad Fairchild now has 23 points in the UEFL (15 Previous + 2*[2 MLB + 2 Correct Call] = 23).
Crew Chief Jeff Kellogg now has 9 points in the UEFL's Crew Division (7 Previous + 2 Correct Call = 9).
*Substitute batter Matt Tuiasosopo experienced a third strike to credit Cabrera with a strikeout.
These are the 106th and 107th ejections of the 2013 MLB season.
This is the 46th player ejection of 2013. Prior to his ejection, Cabrera was 0-1 in the contest.*
This is the 51st Manager ejection of 2013.
This is the Tigers' 4th/5th ejection of 2013, T-1st in the AL Central (CLE, DET 5; KC, 3; CWS, MIN 2).
This is Miguel Cabrera's 1st ejection of 2013 and first since September 8, 2012 (Tim Timmons; QOC = -).
This is Jim Leyland's 2nd ejection of 2013 and first since July 11, 2013 (Chad Fairchild; QOC = Irrecusable).
This is Chad Fairchild's first ejection since July 25, 2013 (Fredi Gonzalez; QOC = Incorrect).
Wrap: Philadelphia Phillies vs. Detroit Tigers, 7/28/13
Video: After a called second strike, Cabrera says magic words for heave ho, followed by skipper (DET)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments
(
Atom
)
62 comments :
Chad is racking up those ejections 8 wow. Twice leyland ?
I'm no lip reader, but it looks like he said "That's horrible".
If that is indeed all he said - all the fans in attendance are owed an apology.
"I'm sorry he was thrown out for arguing balls and strikes, which is an automatic ejection by rule."
This must be National Take The Bat Out Of Your Best Power Hitter Weekend.
The ejection was brutal, IMO.....didn't look like Miggy was showing up Fairchild.
First, by delaying the continuation of the at-bat by standing outside the batter's box to argue balls and strikes, it could be argued he was showing him up. Second, arguing balls and strike is an automatic ejection by rule. Following the rules is not "brutal".
If he said "That's horrible"....then that ejection is so Little League. Fairchild has apparently let his arrogance get to him.....ie Thursday vs. Freddie Gonzalez.
If somebody can get thrown out just for saying 'That's horrible" instead of "you're horrible", there would be 20 ejections a week. Don't you plumbers get it? Obviously he said something worse. Chad has been umpiring in professional baseball for 17 years and you are honestly ignorant enough to believe that today was the day he decided to start running people for saying "That's horrible."
Get a clue.
If he said "That's horrile"....then he was arguing balls and strikes which is an automatic ejection....ie 9.02(a).
i was watching the game when it happened. both of the pitches IMO, were strikes, but this just seemed like a quick ejection.
i don't know what was said, but it just seemed like they were both discussing it and then he's ejected.
cabrera looked surprised.
So in your fantasy world every player that says a single word about balls and strikes would be ejected? There wouldn't be anyone but the umpires left....but I am guessing you would be okay with that.
Most umpires would have handled this in a much more professional manner - Miggy wasn't showing him up at all
"F'n horrible" has been and will always be (to a competent professional umpire) an automatic ejection. This is a great job and easy. Obviously Leyland is going to get run in that spot..... It's very impressive how calm Chad remains under the whole situation. Extremely well handled by all. You could argue that Cooper shouldn't have come in to peel Leyland as the conversation remained calm. However with Kellogg occupied with Cabrera that make the situation a bit more tricky.
If he had done this at the end of the at-bat he might have gotten away with it; not sure what he said but body language can be deceiving. Instead he decided to do it, not during a lull in play between batters, but in the middle of his own at-bat, refusing to enter the batter's box to instead argue balls and strikes which is, by rule, not permitted.
How did Fairchild take the bat out of Cabrera's hands? The pitches were strikes! Do you even know what that phrase means??
Hello, Mr. Strawman!
it really doesn't matter the number of ejections.. that is a myth.... I will guarantee you there ARE MLB umpires who would let that go..... and it makes it harder for the majority of the qualified umpires to work. 0 ejections doesn't make you a great umpire. That is a myth.
I'm not questioning the pitches. I'm question how the ejection was handled. Poor job by Fairchild, IMO.
Poor decision by Cabrera to have that argument during the at-bat.
So why isn't everyone ejected every time they argue balls and strikes? SHouldn't the rules be applied consistently?
Yes, the rules should be applied consistently. Unlike other types of judgment calls, there is no situation (with the exception of a check swing appeal, which is a strange thing in and of itself in terms of correctness) where a called ball or strike will be changed, and therefore there is no good reason to delay the progress of a game to argue it.
Here's how it happened:
Fairchild CORRECTLY calls two pitches in the at bat strikes. Cabrera said something that anyone with a functioning brain would assume was an automatic ejection, given how quick it happened. Leyland stuck up for his best hitter, just like any manager in baseball would, REGARDLESS of whether or not the calls or reason for ejection were correct. (That's what a lot of you plumbers who have clearly never been on a field don't understand: Sometimes, the manager knows the call was correct and knows his player deserved the ejection and gets ejected anyhow!!!!!!!! You simpletons are so gullible, so easily entertained.)
Here's how the homers/umpire haters/plumbers/trolls see it:
Fairchild took the bat out of his hands and ejected him for no reason because he's so arrogant!!!
Some of you really need to hold yourselves accountable for the ignorant things you spout on this site. Embarrassing.
What's embarrassing is your usage of context calling people simpletons.........speaking of trolling.
The shoe must fit, because you're clearly wearing it!
Have you ever been on an MLB field?? Neither have I...so had then been YOU tossing Miggy, I would have put you in the same book as Chad was. Except you'd be instigating this one rather than hear a couple of words Miggy said that get him the boot.
Sam Holbrook just tossed Jose Bautista
These Detroit announcers are "F'n Horrible."
I'm sorry - I thought this was an adult conversation....if you don't like being asked a question, have a private conversation with Steve.
An "adult conversation"? You managed to fit a strawman, a loaded question, and an ad hominem attack all in the space of two sentences.
But I'll humor you: The answer to your question is "no".
On a side note......half of Chad's ejection have occurred in a little more than a week, since the All-Star Game.....and he was the RF umpire at the ASG.
Cabrera takes two cock shots and steps out TWICE on Fairchild and now Fairchild is the ass for running him? Really? I'm with Steve Holt and TMAC. Fairchild is just standing there letting Cabrera act like a prima donna and than when Cabrera says the magic words he hooks him...and without taking his mask off I might add. Textbook. Hey Miggy...let the water warm up a little before you get in the shower. I'm glad all the plumbers on here that think they know so much about handling situations never get the chance to ruin it for the guys who actually have a clue how to handle a game.
Tyler...any chance you umpire games at all?
and as far as I know...no telephones were harmed in the filming of this ejection
I see you've never umpired a baseball game period, as you seem to think that umpires are taking the bats out of people's hands, So it's understandable that you wouldn't understand these ejections. But telling an umpire that the call or he is "fucking horrible", after theres already been a previous conversation, and no doubt a warning, is an easy ejection. But you keep listening to those commentators. They know their stuff.
Because neither team would have enough players to finish a game...
I'm just trying to figure out if this "Steve Holt" guy is being ironic on purpose, because the ejection seemed pretty clear to me.
Steve. Really dude? 17 years? It's fantastic that you are defending one of the worst crews in baseball. Your boy Fairchild is known for injecting himself into games - along with his current / former crew - their reputation is well known in baseball. This situation continues his rep, in which he ejects a player for mumbling a few words (not showing him up) in the middle of an at bat.
While we are analyzing this - let's look at the facts. 17 years of experience? 13 of those in the minor leagues. Fact. Also, Fairchild was the ump who completely BLEW the calls on the plate in a very recent Chicago White Sox v Detroit Tigers game, not issuing warnings to benches then concurrently ejecting Leyland a his pitcher without said warnings being issued.
YOU need to get a clue, bro. Look at the bigger picture and stop being an ignorant ass referring to people as plumbers - b/c quite honestly, with your opinions here in this thread - you look incredibly ignorant.
Aww does Stevie have thin skin too? lol
People are focusing on just that second strike and how quickly he was ejected from that strike but what no one seems to want to comment on is the fact Cabrera also did question the first strike of the at bat.
Also Cabrera has a huge ego and tends to talk a lot of trash and complain about just about everything. He is always chirping about something so you can bet this is not the first thing he has chirped about in this game/series so the quick hook could be from a culmination of multiple complaints over the last 3 games and it got to the point that Fairchild was done listening to him complain and sent him to the showers early.
Also the fact he complained on 2 consecutive called strikes that were unquestionably strikes and then said the call was horrible would justify a quick hook anyway. These were not borderline pitches, they were pitches that were well within the strike zone and Cabrera was complaining the first pitch was outside, and that the second pitch was up and outside.
Had the pitches been borderline as opposed to unquestionably strikes I am sure Fairchild would have given a little more leeway before giving the hook.
Eric obviously doesn't get a chance to watch Cabrera play often. Cabrera is one of the most mild mannered players out there. Also, Eric watch the "1st strike".
This is uncalled for. Take it back to kindergarten. The guys argument makes no sense, but neither does your comment about his haircut.. Joe West is fat, but so what
That describes almost all announcers. Horrible and ignorant. I think the only exception in MLB is Vin Scully.
To me, it looks like he said "You're f'n horrible, man." That's automatic, no matter how quiet you're being about it. I'm a big Tigers fan, and I think Cabrera is one of the better players in the game today - but sometimes you just gotta think before you speak!
I don't see any, by definition, strawmen. Also, "arguing' balls and strikes isn't simply making a comment or asking a question about a call. For an 'argument' to take place, by definition, there needs to exist an attempt to persuade someone of something, by giving reasons for accepting a particular conclusion as evident.
Actually, that's not an 'argument'. Under 9.02(a), it's an 'objection'. An argument is an attempt to persuade someone of something, by giving reasons for accepting a particular conclusion as evident.
What are you implying with "1st strike"?
The pitch was a no doubt strike.
Here is the Pitch FX... Couldn't be any more of a strike.
Here is the Pitch FX... Couldn't be any more of a strike.
Yet also Chris, there is no "rule" that states you cannot argue balls and strikes. The standards for removal from a game published in the PBUC manual, are clear that any player, manager, or coach who "leaves their position to argue balls and strikes" is subject to an ejection. Players comment on calls form their position in the batter's box and coaches do the same from their spot in the dugout all the time, but they do so in a manner that they do not leave their current position or use profanity to insult the umpire while doing it (another standard for removal). All of that is within the accepted practices of the game.
Cabrera was removed because he used profanity and insults directly intended for Chad Fairchild (F'n Horrible), not because he was arguing balls and strikes.
Then you're not looking hard enough. The two strawmen are: "So in your fantasy world every player that says a single word about balls and strikes would be ejected?" and "I am guessing you would be okay with that" because they are both phrased in such a way as to present themselves as if they were my position, which they were not.
Argument
Noun
1. An oral disagreement; verbal opposition; contention; altercation
2. A discussion involving differing points of view; debate
3. A process of reasoning; series of reasons
4. A statement, reason, or fact for or against a point
5. An address or composition intended to convince or persuade
This situation is an "argument" as per definition #1.
Steve holt. Just because you type in caps doesn't make the call correct. The second strike on Cabrera did have good swing back action and was indeed an acceptable strike call. The first however was a travesty, not close. Fairchild blew it, knew he did, and like a bad ump, got defensive instead of lengthening the leash. He was touchy because he knew it was a bad call. Cabrera was rightfully angry, and to make matters worse a very good second pitch put him down 0-2 when it should have been 1-1 in an important at bat. No big hand gestures, no shouting, just a low tone expletive which Fairchild absolutely deserved. There is no debate, umps will blow calls, how they handle it is an important part of being a good ump. A defensive umpire is a bad ump.
Correctly? You are saying the first pitch was a strike? I'm afraid you are the simpleton. Being ahead in the count is everything with the bases loaded. Fairchild blew that call. If Cabrera had made hand gestures or shouted to show chad up, I would agree with the ejection. But Cabrera voiced his displeasure in a very quiet manner. When you blow one, you know you're going to hear it and a good ump lengthens the leash a little. The second pitch was a great pitch that was an acceptable strike call, but make no mistake, this whole thing was about the first and cabrera's disgust at being down 0-2 instead of licking his chops at 1-0 or 1-1. The best umps are ones you never even notice. I noticed Fairchild not because of the ejection, but because of that horrid first pitch call which apparently in today's MLB, a player has no right to voice even low tone displeasure with. If you think that first pitch was a strike Steve, then I'm afraid you are incredibly biased, or legally blind.
Any chance we can have the PitchFX numbers on strike one please? Some people are claiming it was a good pitch and others are claiming it was not.
Are you serious??? The first pitch was a strike no matter how you look at it. It was not even borderline just look at the px and pz values. To even be considered borderline it would need a px between 0.768 and 0.935 and/or a pz<0.0833 above or below Cabrera's sz_top. With sz_top 3.590 vs pz 3.143 the pitch would have needed to be over 3.5 inches higher to even be considered a borderline call on the vertical strike zone, and with a px 0.378 it would have had to have been nearly 4 inches further outside to have been considered a borderline call on the horizontal strike zone.
Actually I just gave the values on the strike 2 pitch, The strike 1 pitch was even better that one was an inch closer to the middle of the strike zone on the vertical and over an inch closer to the middle on the horizontal. So the first pitch was actually an even better pitch than the second that you argued was an acceptable strike.
I think what people seem to be having a problem with is that in the video the camera angle makes it look like the pitches are not over the plate. People need to realize that the camera is not pointed directly in line with the plate, it is at an angle giving the illusion that the pitches are further outside than they really are.
I just haven't seen the first pitch, so I was curious. It's been quite a long time since I accepted that the majority of people have no clue how three-dimensional space works. What's really terrifying is that these people are driving cars.
The first pitch is actually shown 33 seconds into the video posted. They show the 0-0 pitch followed by the 0-1 pitch.
The 0-0 pitch looks worse than it really is because Ruiz was set up on the inner half of the plate and Pettibone missed his spot and threw it on the outer half of the plate causing Ruiz to have to reach over. On the 0-1 pitch Ruiz was actually set up on the outer half of the plate and had to move very little to make the catch.
Both pitches were close to the same location (the 0-0 pitch being slightly better). The main difference between the 0-0 and 0-1 pitches is the amount of movement Ruiz had to make in order to catch them.
Didn't realize that was there. I watched the pitch and the ejection and then turned it off because the announcers were annoying me. Now I feel silly...
The hilarious part is, that's not my haircut, or my picture.
Bro are you mad?
Wait, you're using analogies about feet and other people are "simpletons"?
Don't hurt your neck falling down from your high horse.
I think he does. He was just wondering how to say it in "Pig Latin" combined with Cantonese.
Post a Comment