Wednesday, May 11, 2011
Polls: Bowa on Umpire Ejections
An ejection can happen for many reasons. In this League, we track, analyze, and discuss ejections from the utmost standpoint of objectivity. In the real world, however, we know that ejections - and plays in general - are rarely discussed from an objective perspective. Introducing the newest UEFL feature: Polls. Sure the UEFL is all about objectivity, but we also understand the subjectivity that permeates sports culture, and it is high time we prudently view and discuss certain issues in a subjective light. We begin with TV analyst Larry Bowa's recent commentary on umpires and ejections. You may view Bowa's remarks at the video link below, and apply your own subjective analysis to answer the poll question below.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments
(
Atom
)
20 comments :
I think Bowa has a point on DiMuro's situation. Even though 2B can't see anything, at least conference. From a game management standpoint. But you have to remember, Uribe got ejected 5 minutes AFTER Mattingly already had a calm conversation with DiMuro. Mattingly got tossed only AFTER Uribe got tossed... I don't think DiMuro doing anything short of calling SAFE would have kept that chowderhead Uribe in the game.
What to do if the call gets reversed??? Now there's the real issue behind instant replay.
West left Tuesday's game in Baltimore after the 4th inning and is not there tonight(Wednesday-replaced by Reyburn). Anything to this or just a severe tummyache.
From the beginning:
Bowa gives Gardenhire far too much credit. He has shown himself on camera to be just as much a raving spitting fool as any other angry coach. He should have stayed off the field.
Bowa also talks about giving veteran managers 'the benefit of the doubt'. But it's actually the opposite. It's the veterans that the umpires know, and they know which ones will make a show. Furthermore, he's outright telling umpires to treat managers differently from each other. And notice that he's not willing to give a 33-year veteran umpire 'the benefit of the doubt'. Sounds like a huge double standard.
The Francona tape they show only shows West and Francona, and fails to show that Francona had already been ejected. Bowa uses this failure to imply that West prevented any conversation at all, instead of just trying to get Francona off the field. He also never mentions that that Hernandez ejected Francona. Post-ejection, Francona has no more rights.
Finally, Bowa's saying that an umpire conference would have solved the Mattingly incident is disengenuous at best. DiMuro could have had the conference, but there is no reason to believe that doing so would have gotten Mattingly off his back, and certainly would have had no effect on Uribe's actions, which are what actually precipitated Mattingly's ejection. But Bowa implies that it was the lack of a conference that got Mattingly tossed.
Basically, this entire piece is pure propoganda, with Bowa (or his writer/producer) spinning the film and facts to make the umpires look bad. And the whole thing is shameful.
Bowa should have stayed in the darn coach's box... What do you expect from this guy? Though his point re: DiMuro asking for help IS a valid point (if I'm DiMuro, I get together with the crew, and we will be upholding my call no matter what... it's all for show...), the way Bowa conveys it is just terrible.
Gardenhire: You may not leave the dugout to argue balls/strikes. Period.
Francona: You may not leave the dugout to argue balks. Period.
DiMuro: The ejection happened in the inning after the play happened... I'm not sure what he could have really done differently, especially because the initial conversation he had with Mattingly ended with no ejection. Only when Uribe came out to 3rd during the next inning was there suddenly a problem.
For folks who were asking for the Damon/ Miller clip:
http://newyork.yankees.mlb.com/media/player/mp_tpl_3_1.jsp?w_id=518127&w=2006/open/tp/archive09/091806_nyator_damon_ejected_tp_350.wmv&pid=mlb_tp&gid=2006/09/18/nyamlb-tormlb-1&mid=200609181669678&cid=mlb&fid=mlb_tp350&v=2
Bowa is only right about the DiMuro play and I agree with Jimmy. Just get the guys together and make the manager happy, the incident is avoided.
With the other two plays, he's wrong. The rule book says you can not leave your position to argue balls and strikes. Joe said that to Gardy and the manager chose to ignore his warning, and according to the rule book, he was ejected.
With Francona he's part wrong and part right. It is the crew chief's job to get rid of the ejected personnel (if he himself didn't do the ejecting) to avoid further incident between the ejecting umpire and ejected person. But Bowa is correct in saying that Joe tends to get a bit grabby and pushy when he does this.
The publicizing of umpire fines and suspensions, that's just stupid. Umpires are there to be background figures, observe and you should really only notice them when a decision needs to be made. They say all the time "the game is about the players not the umpires" and publicizing the things Bowa said seems to contradict that statement.
Jon Terry...I couldnt of said it better myself...People just like saying umpires are wrong even if they know they are right. just like in the vic carapazza ejection...even the K zone said it was a strike but the annoucers said it was still a ball.
Who knows why DiMuro didn't ask for help, maybe he did, I don't know. Wouldn't have hurt to check, IMO. West was doing a fine job in the other two. Bowa had a point re: DiMuro, otherwise, Bowa's just being Bowa.
Okay, I'm going to make some points about the ejections and comments by Bowa.
To start, I am a High School/College umpire trained at Pro School so I was trained to work Pro Ball. Everything I say about handling situations is exactly what I was taught at school.
Gardenhire ejection:
Should have been handled better. Joe should tell Gardy "I had a foul tip". Once Gardy tries to argue Joe should say "Ron, it's done lets play" if Gardy continues to argue then he goes.
Giving coaches an ultimatum like, "You step on the dirt and you're done," is not a good idea. The coach will always do exactly what you told him not to and now you better run him or you look stupid.
I also don't like the finger wagging by Joe. An open hand and a "We're not going to talk about this Ron," would be perfect.
Francona ejection:
West actually handled this very well. Once an umpire has thrown out a player or coach they are to walk away and let the Crew Chief or the next Sr umpire escort the person from the field.
Francona was very irate after being ejected and constantly trying to get past West to Angel. Contact was inevitable. Joe should not have grabbed Francona but putting an arm in front of him to block him is fine.
DiMiro, Mattingly, and Uribe:
I have no problem with DiMuro refusing to go for help. In a 4-Man crew someone always goes out and takes responsibility for the ball. If the umpires can't and shouldn't go for help every time they are asked. Some things you don't ask for help on and this is one of them. Bad angles and out of position and crazy stuff where no one is quite sure exactly what happened are the only times you should get help.
The nearest umpire to help Dimuro was well over 200 feet away and would have no credibility to change the call. Sometimes it may be appropriate to get together to "put on a show" for the coaches, but should very rarely happen. If the umpires went for help every time they were asked then you would have coaches coming out on every close play to argue and the umpires would look like they didn't know how to do their jobs and would never have any credibility.
It's often times is why strikes/balls are called incorrectly because of how the catcher caught the ball. the pitcher can paint the inside corner, but if the catcher had set-up outside and had to reach back to catch the pitch than the umpire will have no credibility if he calls it a strike even though it may technically be a strike.
An umpire with no credibility will gain no respect from coaches or players and will constantly have his/her calls questioned.
Overall, Bowa does not understand what it means to be an umpire and seems to think the umpires should do whatever the coaches tell them.
You guys that are saying that DiMuro should have gotten help simply to placate the manager are exactly the people I DON'T ever want to work with. Getting together is done if you are not 100 percent sure of your call, NOT to make a coach/manager happy. DiMuro went out on this ball and took responsibility for the catch. This is his call to live or die with. There was a runner on first base as well, so I would be interested to know where you guys suggest placing that runner if you change it to a no-catch?
Bowa's insinuation that DiMuro was not sure about the call is bullsh*t as well. Bowa has no way of knowing what DiMuro told Mattingly.
All of these were handled exactly as they should have been, and Larry Bowa is still a giant rat.
@Zac, did you hear the comment post game by Mattingly RE: DiMuro, DiMuro telling Mattingly that he wasn't 100% sure? I think that's the only reason we're saying DiMuro should have gotten help - because according to Mattingly, DiMuro admitted he was only 80 something percent sure. If DiMuro says he's got it 100%, yes, it's his call all the way and why would you get help, but because he allegedly said he wasn't sure, that's the perfect instance of when you DO go to your crew. Most likely, none of them have anything to overturn the call with, and you uphold it.
Placating the manager happens when you admit to the Manager that you aren't sure - that's exactly when you get together with your partners... and if Mattingly lied about what DiMuro said, then Mattingly isn't as classy as I thought, but Mattingly is a guy that I generally believe.
Yes, if Bowa says it, it's probably not credible, but if Mattingly said it, I tend to believe it.
Haha, Zac. DiMuro literally said he wasn't 100% sure. You can even read his lips on the highlight.
Listen, I understand not wanting to ask for help if you're confident, the job of an umpire is to be a decider not a debater, but if DiMuro was even a bit unsure (which would make sense, seeing as he made the wrong call) then he should have at least talked to the others. If he does that, one of two things will happen.
1. No one will have had a better angle or someone will confirm the ruling and he will tell this to Mattingly, who will go back to the dugout. It seemed pretty clear that he wasn't all that upset, he just wanted him to ask.
2. Someone saw it and overrules him. Perhaps, Hurdle comes out, perhaps not. Either way they got it right, which is all that matters.
Dimuro: you made your call and you didnt put other umpires in a bad sitution.
Coach Placaters are a** kissers. I also try to avoid those
@Jared,
Placating is NOT admitting to the manager you aren't sure. Placating is when you are 100 percent sure, but you go to your partners to help bail you out to save face so he won't be upset with you anymore. Placating is going for help just for the hell of it so you can get him off your back. Props to DiMuro for not doing so here, as this was his call. U2 has other responsibilities, and the PU is 200+ feet away.
@Anonymous,
At no point in that video could you read DiMuro's lips about not being sure of his call. The replay is inconclusive at best, as it still looks to me like the ball hit the webbing first. Also, no one is going to overrule DiMuro. They can give him information and he decides if he wants to change the call or not. I have a hunch that DiMuro told Mattingly that they couldn't change it anyway because there was a runner on first at the time. None of you jumping on DiMuro have answered that question yet: Where do you place that runner if you get your little conference and change the call?
Zac, the issue is that DiMuro told Mattingly he wasn't sure of his call, and then refused to get help to try & get the call right. Again, from a post-game interview, "Mike said he wasn't 100 percent sure," Mattingly said. "I asked him to get help, because somebody else may have seen it [differently]. But he wouldn't do that." DiMuro himself admitted he wasn't 100% sure: "At the very end, [Mattingly] asked if I was 100 percent sure," DiMuro said. "I told Don, 'Who is 100 percent sure of anything in life?'"
If you are going to admit to a manager that you aren't sure, and you have the resources of a 4-man crew, even if Reynolds is watching his runner, even if Welke is watching something else, etc., wouldn't you at least want to get it right to the best of your ability? Baseball is a sport where you have time to get it right. If this was a basketball play, a hockey play, then fine, but this is baseball. We have time to get this play right - or at least try to - let's do it.
Placate (verb): To make less angry or hostile. Placating is not admitting to the manager you are not sure - placating is the process of getting together with your crew to make sure you get the call right if you are not sure. Placating is what should happen as the result of admitting to the manager you are not sure. Admitting you aren't sure, but refusing to get together with your crew seems to me to be the exact opposite of placating. You're going to p*off a lot of coaches by pulling the "I'm not sure, but I'm not going to get together with my partners to see if they had anything I didn't" card.
Placating is the whole sequence - if you're going to admit to a coach you're not sure, you have to go to your crew for help and come to a (perceived) joint conclusion. THAT IS placating - doing everything in your power to get the call right, and communicating to the coach that you have done everything in your power to get the call right. Refusing to go for help WHEN YOU ARE UNSURE OF YOUR CALL is the exact opposite of placating.
Again, if you ARE sure of your call, there is no reason to go to your crew... DiMuro himself admitted he was not 100% sure, and that is that.
Make sense? As for where to put the runner, Rule 9.01(c). Reynolds is watching the runner, PU has a great view of the entire scene in front of him, Welke at 1B can even chime in from his angle on that. You probably have a runner on 3rd... the guy was running with the pitch and was already past second when the out was signaled, he had to retouch 2nd and that's why he was out by a mile on the tag up.
Bowa's a moron. West's only mistake was not ejecting Gardenhire right away for stepping out. But you know Joe, and he makes sure everyone knows Gardenhire was warned, so that's okay with me. As for Francona, Angel ejected him and Joe was a crew chief doing his crew chief job. Who cares, no big deal. As for DiMuro and Mattingly, if Uribe didn't get tossed, Mattingly wouldn't have been tossed. Mattingly and DiMuro discussed it and Mattingly walked away okay with it. Uribe came back and was an idiot, and that's that. Sure, Mike could have asked for help. If as you say he admitted he wasn't sure (what a stupid thing to do especially if you're not then going to ask for help!), Mike screwed up by not at least entertaining the notion of getting together with his other umps. Either way, that call is standing as a catch. But still, I prefer to see Mike go to another umpire for help - even though it's almost a lock the play stands as a catch. At least make up for the fact that you're not certain by trying to get it right.
Any way. Bottom line. Joe did a great job in both cases, Mike could have done a bit better, and Larry Bowa proves that he is an idiot.
In case if anyone was wondering, Rule 4.07 addresses that an ejected individual must leave the playing field.
4.07
When a manager, player, coach or trainer is ejected from a game, he shall leave the field immediately and take no further part in that game. He shall remain in the club house or change to street clothes and either leave the park or take a seat in the grandstand well removed from the vicinity of his team’s bench or bullpen.
Rule 4.07 Comment: If a manager, coach or player is under suspension he may not be in the dugout or press box during the course of a game.
There were some good points and some that in the business of pro baseball umpiring that are just mute. The Gardenhire ejection was justified. The clear foul tip was signaled, and could be heard on video. Gardenhire was warned not to come out. He did and got run.
The Francona ejection was on Hernandez. Joe did what crew chiefs are supose to do and get between an ejected player/coach and allow the other umpire to walk away. Was it physical, sure because Francona wanted the conversation with Hernandez. Its absolutely no different than Joe Brinkman damn near choking out George Bret in the "Pine Tar" game or seprating players in a possible fight situation.
Now the Matingly ejection was just stupid. IF DiMuro did in fact admit that he saw the play but wasn't 100% sure, then a conversation between the umpires should have happened. Get the call right. The Uribe ejection was a result of his own stupidity. Uribe should've let it go, but he had more to say and got run for it. Lets face it, players and managers alike, know EXACTLY what they can say to draw an ejection. Matingly got run for standing up for his player... no other reason.
Steve
I hope Blogger is able to restore all comments for this thread, because we had a really good discussion going till blogger crashed. Basically, DiMuro himself told a reporter that he told Mattingly he wasn't 100%. Mattingly told a reporter DiMuro said as much. DiMuro said his actual quote was something like "who is ever 100% sure in life?" DiMuro I guess wanted to admit he wasn't sure in a "cosmic truth" sort of way. Either way, that was foolish and left himself open to criticism when he didn't go for help after admitting he wasn't 100%. Mattingly did not get run after the initial conversation, but after Uribe decided to get tossed half an inning after the fact, Mattingly had no choice but to get the heave ho, going to bat for his third baseman.
Moral of the story: If you're going to admit you aren't 100% on a call in a sport like baseball, you better be prepared to go to your crew.
Post a Comment