1B Umpire Adrian Johnson ejected Brewers left fielder Ryan Braun for arguing an out call in the bottom of the 3rd inning of the Nationals-Brewers game. With one out and one on, Braun hit a 1-1 slider from Cardinals pitcher Livan Hernandez to second baseman Danny Espinosa, who threw to first baseman Michael Morse. Replays indicate the ball arrived in Morse's glove just in advance of Braun's foot arriving at first base, the call was correct. At the time of the ejection, the Nationals were leading, 5-2. The Brewers ultimately won the contest, 7-6.
This is Adrian Johnson (80)'s second ejection of 2011.
Adrian Johnson now has 8 points in the Umpire Ejection Fantasy League (4 Previous + 2 MLB + 2 Correct Call = 8).
Adrian Johnson is owned as a Secondary Umpire by cyclone14, who is now in 6th place in the UEFL with 9 points.
This is the 49th ejection of 2011.
This is the 21st player ejection of 2011.
Prior to his ejection, Braun was 0-2 in the contest.
Wrap: Nationals at Brewers 5/24/11 Wrap
Video (1): Braun is ejected arguing a close call
Video (2): The bang bang play at first base (alternate angle)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments
(
Atom
)
16 comments :
I don't understand why inconclusive plays are viewed as correct... I watched the Masn feed on MLB.tv premium and used the slow mo option and still can't tell and they have the best angle with the open glove and the foot touching the bag at what appears to be the same time... Now that would be an out.. but on that feed from the brewers cast nobody in their right mind could say difinitively beyond a shoadow of a doubt the ball BEAT the runner.
Can't get much closer than this, good call Adrian.
http://mlb.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_id=15144943
Show Nats feed
If it's that close that we still can't decide even with slow-mo, mutiple angles, and stop-footage, the call *should* be considered correct.
@tmac...You can't call every inconclusive play incorrect either, so since the umpire made a call, you can't overturn that simply because it's inconclusive...
Bang, Bang, I like the call.
tmac - is that what the rule says, that the ball must beat the runner?
It looks like a great call to me.
Most umpires use "the runner must beat the ball" theory...if the runner arrives at the same time as the ball, he didn't beat it, and is out. This call is close to that, but the runner is out...not inconclusive...out. Great call by Johnson.
Adam,
In the past if there was no precise way to determine if the call was correct or incorrect it was called inconclusive. The fact then when I watched this play ON mlb.tv premium I used the slow mo frame by frame to determine it was nearly impossible to determine. I LOVE that call... BUT could you see it with your naked eye? SO far in these comments you are all truth tellers b/c NOBODY says they saw it clearly. And by the way NOWHERE did i say to call this incorrect.
I think the idea behind determining calls like this as correct might possibly stem from the idea that a player shouldn't argue a call that was that close. Johnson may well have been wrong (although I happen to believe ties really do happen) but the call was so close that ejecting Braun for arguing it should still give Johnson owners points.
True, the UEFL used to operate on an initial Quality of Correctness (QOC) of correct/inconclusive/incorrect. When we overhauled our spreadsheet this season, we did away with the initial finalized inconclusive QOC. Instead, we use a placeholder QOC (PQOC), which is attributed to all ejection write-ups which have yet to be reviewed because the video is not yet available, etc. PQOCs are denoted by tags #DEFAULT PLACEHOLDER QUALITY OF CORRECTNESS IS "CORRECT"#. PQOCs are subject to change upon review of the play, and because default PQOC always must be "correct," PQOCs may not be challenged. PQOCs may not remain attached to a post for more than 12 hours at the most; they are replaced by a Finalized Quality of Correctness (FQOC) after review. FQOCs may be challenged once by any user.
The following is a list of standardized instruction to UEFL QOC judges:
For all intermediate QOC determinations, please use the 1-9 scale, where 1 represents "absolutely incorrect," 5 represents "inconclusive," and 9 represents "absolutely correct."
1) Watch a real-time broadcast replay only once. Log your QOC determination for this step in section [1].
2) Watch a slow motion replay, if available, from only one angle, no more than ten times. If multiple angles are available, the angle chosen should correspond to that which most closely resembles the calling umpire's probably angle when making the call. Log your QOC determination for this step in section [2].
3) Watch a slow motion replay, if available, from all other angles, no more than ten times per angle. Log the average QOC determination for this step in section [3].
4) Compare [2] and [3]; if the numbers are significantly close to either extreme of the scale, report that end's label as the FQOC. If not, advance to step 5.
5) Compare [2] and [3]; if the numbers conflict, attribute an absolute weight of 2x (relative to 5 as the zero point) to [2] and compare to [3] again. If the numbers still significantly conflict, advance to step 6.
6) Compare [1], [3], and the weighted [2] calculated in step 5. Average. If <4 or >6, report a probable FQOC. If the average is between 4 and 6, refer to UEFL Rule 7.a.ii.
@ gil: Thanks for the write up and clarification: I guess there are lies damn lies and the rest.... so when i read umpires have been ruled correct on such a high percentage of calls i will take it with a salt shaker.. I could have used you back in the day to rule all my calls correct.
We operate under the framework of "if the evidence isn't there to disprove the call, it's not wrong." I think that is most fair.
@tmac, no troubles, when you mentioned calls shouldn't be correct, I made the @ss-umption that they therefore should be incorrect, not left as simply inconclusive.
I do like the way it is now. Umpire made call, can't prove it, but you can't disprove it either. So we'll have to leave it to the umpire who made it. More of a preponderance of the evidence, rather than the beyond reasonable doubt argument.
Well, tmac, I think it's quite fair that when it's so close you can't determine safe or out based on multiple looks (including slow motion and stop action) it's a correct call no matter what the umpire calls.
I would like to make the suggestion that perhaps "inconclusive" should be viewed as such,and 0 points be awarded since it is deemed neither right or wrong?
Just a thought
@Anonymous 4:19 PM PT, at the present time, the only way to get a ruling of inconclusive is by means of a challenge. Challenged Quality of Correctness (CQOC) may be correct/inconclusive/correct, just as before; it's just that the initial FQOCs cannot be inconclusive. A status of inconclusive just means we may continue to review the play throughout the current phase of the season (for instance, our current phase, phase #3, ends at the All-Star break) and change the inconclusive CQOC to correct/incorrect. Only inconclusive CQOCs may be modified, and if after the current phase of the season, CQOC is still inconclusive, under UEFL Rule 7.a.ii., "Quality of Correctness shall revert to reflect the call made on the field as Correct."
Rationale: On the field, an umpire must call out or safe (or Fair/Foul, Strike/Ball, etc.); there is no intermediate judgement. Therefore, after the review period is complete on this website, only correct/incorrect QOCs shall remain. If the umpire does not have the luxury of inconclusiveness, neither shall we.
Post a Comment