Pages

▼

Monday, July 4, 2011

Ejections: Kerwin Danley (1)

HP Umpire Kerwin Danley ejected Marlins catcher John Buck for arguing ball calls in the top of the 9th inning of the Phillies-Marlins game. With none out and none on, Phillies batter Domonic Brown took a 3-2 fastball from Marlins pitcher Michael Dunn for a called ball four. Replays indicate that pitch 1 was located over the heart of the plate, but below the hollow of the knees of Brown. Pitch #6 (ball 4) is considered correct under the "Kulpa Rule".* The call was correct. At the time of the ejection, the Phillies were leading, 1-0. The Phillies ultimately won the contest, 1-0.

This is Kerwin Danley (44)'s first ejection of 2011.
Kerwin Danley now has -2 points in the Umpire Ejection Fantasy League (0 Previous + 2 MLB + -4 Correct Call = -2)
Kerwin Danley is owned as a Secondary Umpire by jdbr78, who is now in 33rd place in the UEFL with 1 point.
*Pitch #6 is correct under the "Kulpa Rule" of pitch f/x. Pitch #6 carried a px value of 0.946, which is within the 'borderline range'--0.901 to 1.000--thus considered correctly ruled; pitch #1, however is not as the result of a Challenge.
**Quality of Correctness was challenged and overturned ("Correct" ==> "Incorrect").

This is the 106th ejection of 2011.
This is the 47th player ejection of 2011.
Prior to his ejection, Buck was 0-2 in the contest.

Wrap: Phillies at Marlins Independence Day 2011
Video: Danley Runs Buck

Pitch f/x courtesy Brooks Baseball
at

12 comments:

  1. AnonymousJuly 4, 2011 at 9:42 PM

    It looked like Kermie said "You caused that." at 0:54. Looked inside to me.

    ReplyDelete
  2. AnonymousJuly 5, 2011 at 12:06 AM

    Gil,

    unless this call is changed I don't see where I have 7 if this was 4. I had 4 from Barksdale previous.

    ReplyDelete
  3. tmacJuly 5, 2011 at 12:09 AM

    Danley was excellent today... http://www.brooksbaseball.net/pfxVB/zoneTrack.php?month=7&day=4&year=2011&game=gid_2011_07_04_phimlb_flomlb_1%2F&prevDate=74

    Did not give the low pitch to either side and seperated the edges well. Very consistant.

    ReplyDelete
  4. LindsayJuly 5, 2011 at 12:25 AM

    jb, it is 7 points if this call is found to be correct. You receive three additional points for a Secondary Umpire's correct call (1 Secondary MLB + 2 Correct Call = 3 Points), UEFL Rule 4.a:

    3 points for each ejection by a Primary AAA
    2 points for each ejection by a Primary MLB
    1 point for each ejection by a Secondary MLB

    +

    2 points for each ejection as the result of an ejectee's correct call
    1 point for each ejection as the result of a crewmate's correct call
    -2 points for each ejection as the result of a crewmate's incorrect call
    -4 points for each ejection as the result of an ejectee's incorrect call

    - 1 point Penalty for each AAA Umpire's ejection as the result of an incorrect call

    =

    Total Points Rendered (1 + 2 = 3); that's why they're Secondary Umpires: their points contributions are secondary to the Primary Umpire's actions.

    ReplyDelete
  5. AnonymousJuly 5, 2011 at 7:16 AM

    When major league catchers set up and want a pitch on the outside corner and then have to reach back to handle the pitch on the inside, very few umpires reward the defense with a called strike. In their reviews, umpires are not critiqued for calling this pitch a ball even if it catches some of the plate.

    ReplyDelete
  6. CricketJuly 5, 2011 at 12:24 PM

    I cannot seem to get the video to load...

    ReplyDelete
  7. CricketJuly 5, 2011 at 3:58 PM

    Alright, video is now loading...

    I don't understand, unless an actual replay of pitch 1 is provided, why this ejection is not ruled "incorrect."

    I do understand Howard is 6'6" or so, and his knee may be a couple inches higher than "normal," but usually pitch f/x is given the advantage.

    As for Danley, Kerwin is one of my favorite umpires. I don't really know why, but he just seems to be so cool...and I know that sounds childish, but he just seems to be enjoying what he does.

    ReplyDelete
  8. DanJuly 5, 2011 at 9:48 PM

    Challenge. Pitch #1 was called a ball, and was a strike according to the Brooks Pitch F/X. Since there is no replay of the pitch, Pitch F/X is the only way that we have to truly gauge the pitch.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Jeremy DircksJuly 5, 2011 at 9:51 PM

    Cricket, we provide video that we can link you to. I saw the pitch once on TV, it looked to be below the hollow of the knees. The pitch graph on the television replay plotted the pitch below the bottom of the strike zone. You are definitely free to challenge, but I thought I would let you know that we do our best to provide any replay we can can see, unfortunately we don't always have it available.


    Thanks for the contributions to the website.

    ReplyDelete
  10. CricketJuly 6, 2011 at 12:20 AM

    I absolutely appreciate the efforts. I was just making a general statement since I don't have access to a video/there's not one available on MLB, not being critical.

    ReplyDelete
  11. LindsayJuly 6, 2011 at 1:46 AM

    This ruling has been challenged.

    After review, the Quality of Correctness has been overturned. The call is now incorrect.

    After review, including examination of the real-time play, replays, and alternate angles, the decision of overturning the original Quality of Correctness was made. Replays and pitch f/x analysis indicates the first called ball carried a normalized pz value of 1.569. Traditionally, as in the Horizontal Kulpa Rule of pitch f/x, the borderline margin is approximately 0.500 to either side of the zone's bound. This is manifested horizontally by a borderline zone of 0.900 - 1.000, with the exact boundary point defined as 0.953. Accordingly, this is manifested vertically by a borderline range of 1.450 - 1.550, with the exact boundary point defined as 1.500 (lower bound; the upper bound of 3.500 corresponds to a [3.450, 3.550] range).

    Overturned.

    ReplyDelete
  12. AnonymousAugust 16, 2011 at 6:45 AM

    Kewin Danley is a good ump and he's also sexy as hell. FYI.... I'm a woman.

    ReplyDelete