These are Greg Gibson (53)'s first and second ejections of 2012.
Greg Gibson now has 8 points in the UEFL (0 Previous + 2*[2 MLB + 2 Correct Call] = 8).
Crew Chief Gerry Davis now has 2 points in the Crew Division (0 Previous + 2*[1 Correct Call] = 2).
*The call is correct pursuant to UEFL Rule 6-2-b-1, also known as the Kulpa Rule.
^After review, the Appeals Board has confirmed Quality of Correctness, 5-1-0 ("Correct" ==> "Correct")
^ The Appeals Board's historical decisions may be consulted via the UEFL Portal.
UEFL Standings Update
1) 8 points: cyclone14
2) 6 points: TheGunsofHochuli & millerump18
4) 5 points: JRD
5) 4 points: Spence1222
6) 3 points: BillMueller, Jeremy, JohnShulockFan, nkcaump, Turducken, UmpAtty
These are the 8th and 9th ejections of 2012.
This is the 5th Manager ejection of 2012.
This is the 3rd player ejection of 2012.
This is Ron Gardenhire's first ejection of 2012.
Prior to his ejection, Span was 0-1 in the contest.
Wrap: Twins at Yankees 4/17/12
Video: Span and Gardenhire ejected for arguing called strike, alluding to earlier balk call
Pitch f/x courtesy Brooks Baseball
*After Span's ejection, Clete Thomas completed the at-bat, hitting a double. Span argued strike one, whose px value of 0.887 is within the "borderline" range of 0.768 to 0.935 feet, per UEFL Rule 6-2-b-1.
Please explain how the Twins' graphic has the pitch as a ball and the pitch f/x has it as a strike. Somebody's wrong.
ReplyDelete"Very short fuse for home plate umpire Greg Gibson." Yeah, except for the fact that it appears that Span got away with quite a bit of verbiage before being run. Unfortunately, Gibson had to yell back at Span, making Gibson look bad.
ReplyDeleteBy the way, this is the fourth consecutive day with an ejection, the total during that span (pun may or may not be intended) being seven. Happily, the MLB did not waste much time in posting the video (which showed the actual tosses), unlike some other cases this year.
Also, FoxTrax showed the pitch as a ball. Of course, those TV strike zone representations have been wrong before.
@anon 6:46 p f/x have also been wrong before
ReplyDeleteYes it has. Just to see which Close Call Sports gives higher credence to, I challenge the ruling of correct.
ReplyDeleteWe've been through this with the playoffs, the TV graphic's box runs from -.9 to +.9 whereas the actual width of home plate, INCLUDING the radius of a baseball on either side (because an part of a ball crossing through that strike zone is a strike) is .953...... That's over .1 feet of strike zone that you don't see on TV's Kzone or Foxtrax.
ReplyDeleteNonetheless, it will be interesting to see what the Appeals Board says. Personally, I'd prefer to give Gibson the benefit of the doubt.
ReplyDeleteSpan couldn't shut up. Gibson(who usually does have a pretty quick fuse) gave him a lot of room.
ReplyDeleteBoarderline bitch,but it appears it got the corner. I say it was a strike.
Gardy ejections are entertaining,especially when Hunter is involved.
Gibson always seems like the biggest asshole, especially during arguments. But he is one hell of an umpire and one of the most accurate balls-strikes guys in the MLB. He actually gave Span more rope he usually would give someone, but his Gardy ejection was far too quick IMO. Then again I don't know what he said. Gibson is the exact opposite of his Cc Gerry Davis who I don't think I have ever seen get into a heated argument in my life.
ReplyDeleteThis video is how they should show all ejections everytime. It would be nice if they would of even shown the balk call they were talking about. by far the best video of the year as far as ejections are concerned.
ReplyDeletea bit hard to tell, but it looks like FoxTrax has the ball touching the edge of the zone...and it looked like a strike to me live. too bad no overhead view.
ReplyDeleteThis is Span's third career ejection. Here is the second: http://mlb.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_id=7695409&c_id=mlb
ReplyDeleteThis ruling has been challenged and is under review.
ReplyDeleteIm curious if Gibson called it a strike due to the attempted bunt or cause of the location of the pitch?
ReplyDeleteI would wager it was a called strike based on Gibson's vocalization.
ReplyDeleteI think Gardenhire's ejection came more off the balk call than the strike three call, wonder if that could be ruled non-correct such as the ejection issued by Darling earlier this year [same concept of Unsportsmanlike NEC]... already challenged, so curious.
ReplyDeleteGardenhire is an idiot. What purpose did his ejection serve? He couldn't get out there fast enough to save Span, but yet still had to get run? He's basically saying that he does nothing during the games, so it's no big deal if he's not there. I can see if he was saving Span, and kept him in the game, but here he's an idiot. If I was the GM I'd fine him, for walking off the job.
ReplyDeleteLot's of great, fair, civil, commnets from Anonymous posters, insightfull even.
I'd like to suggest and challenge you guys to pick a user name. I think it would add greatly to the thread. Of course I understand that if you posting from work, you mite not be able to post under a personal account, I'm talking about the people who only post under Anonymous.
Certainly others may agree, it's far easier, and entertaining to read and follow a thread that identifies comments in a more personal way.
Gibson's main reason for getting so mad was the fact that Span was argueing, what's called a wide open play. Any time you do that, your going to make an umpire mad. 3 factors in an ejecton arguement. What is the play being argued, and what and how are you saying your words. Span was most likely wrong on all 3 counts.
There is no way that ball was a strike. The catcher caught it on the far inside of the plate black, and the ball curved in towards the catcher. That ball never crossed the plate.
ReplyDeleteThe balk call was not Gibson's call to make, as the call was that Liriano was moving towards home, and the only one with a good view of that would be the 1B umpire.
So, Gibson made a call on the balk that wan't his to make and then called that ball a strike on Span. I don't care about Gibson's reputation, that was no strike.
Who says that's not Gibson's call? A step to the plate rather than to first is routinely picked up by the plate umpire. Oh, it's because the *announcers* said that it's not the plate umpire's call. That's right, the announcers know *everything* about umpiring.
ReplyDeleteIf an umpire sees a balk, shouldn't he call it regardless of what base he's at?
ReplyDelete@ Rich/anon
ReplyDeleteWhile opening toward home and coming to 1st SHOULD be called by the 1st base umpire.. WHile it can be called by anyone it is the 1st base umpire's primary responsibilty before the pitch is thrown.
and yes if a balk is an obvious one anyone can and should call it!!
This ruling has been challenged. After review, the original Quality of Correctness of "Correct" has been confirmed in a 5-1-0 decision by the UEFL Appeals Board. Five Appeals Board members elected to Confirm the original QOC, one elected to Uphold the original QOC and zero voted to Overturn the original QOC.
ReplyDeleteDuring review, the appeals board applied the Kulpa rule to determine whether or not the strike one pitch was within the horizontal bounds of the strike zone. With a px value of 0.887, the pitch was within the borderline range of the horizontal strike zone. Borderline pitches are generally considered correct, unless there is clear and convincing evidence otherwise.
For the working zone using pitch f/x, the horizontal bound of the strike zone is: 17" Home Plate + 1.716" max radius of the baseball (pitch f/x measures from the center of the baseball) + 1.716" (on other side of the plate) = 20.432" across. Since pitch f/x zeros the center of the plate, it is 10.216" from the center of the plate on each side. 10.216"= 0.8513 feet. A margin of error exists in the system of 0.0833 feet. .08513 +/- 0.0833 = (0.768, 0.935). Anything less than a px value of 0.768 must at one point been within the bounds of the horizontal strike zone at some point. Anything in between 0.768 and 0.935 px value is considered borderline and within the margin of error. A pitch with a px value greater than 0.935 is a ball, if the zone has no depth (as pitch f/x measures from the front of the plate) or may or may not be a ball, if the zone has depth.
Kulpa Rule parameters for px value:
Strike (if within vertical bounds): < 0.768
Borderline 0.768-0.935
Ball > 0.935
Both yawetag and Jeremy gave explicit deference to the Kulpa rule in their opinions confirming Ejections 008 and 009 as correct.
Furthermore, Ejections 008 and 009 were not eligible for a Balls/Strikes exemption. Additionally, the balk call made in the top of the second inning was not eligible for review.
Confirmed: Jeremy, Albertaumpire, BillMueller, RichMSN, yawetag
Upheld: tmac
Overturned: None
Deferred: None
Abstained: Gil (Posted original QOC of "Correct")
Quality of Correctness has been confirmed, 5-1-0.
Saw that the UEFL was featured in an article about the Ejection!
ReplyDeleteThought I would pass it along: http://www.startribune.com/sports/twins/blogs/147908685.html
Not only was it featured, it was practically the subject of the article!
ReplyDeleteI don't think Gibby had a short fuse at all. Span got to talk a long time for a batter, especially one in the box. And Gardenhire got to talk for a long time too, especially with all that hand motion, and the fact that he was probably referring to previous calls. However, it is unfortunate that Gibby can't walk away after the manager has the player in hand.
ReplyDeleteI think Jon Terry summed it up quite well.
ReplyDelete@Anonymous 11:37 PM, During his argument, Gardenhire gestures toward home plate with where he believes the strike one pitch to Span was located. Per UEFL Rule 6-5-a, there is a strong preference for plays under appeal to be conclusively categorized or adjudged as Correct or Incorrect (as opposed to Irrecusable), 6-5-c discusses the "call made directly prior to ejection," and 6-5-c-3 specifies that "USC-NEC is only assigned when no other reason for ejection may be assessed... NEC represents 'Not Elsewhere Classified' and is generally subservient to any other probable classification."
ReplyDelete@Anonymous 12:11 PM, Thanks for the link. That's awesome.
Gil that artical kind of refered to you as a geek!
ReplyDeleteWell, frankly, he sounds like a geek when you read his explanation.
ReplyDeleteAnd the width of that box on here started at -1 to -1 then to -.9 to +.9 and now to -.85 to +.85. That box is narrowing width wise each year.
ReplyDeleteAt Anon 6:33pm,
ReplyDeleteDo numbers scare you? Are you confused by the math? If you cannot understand an expert opinion, your post has no merit. The next time you don't undrstand what your reading, or the text sounds like it's written by a geek, grab your purse and use your i-phone and bring up the calculator and dictionary functions and you should be able to sound out the words, and crunch the numbers yourself.
Not a big deal, I embrace that classification as the validation of pfx location numbers knowledge. We each choose to spend time and effort in the furtherance of different ends. Mine just happens to include the UEFL and understanding the data we use here to come up with objective analysis. Just because we don't all share that same level of intensity shouldn't adversely divide us.
ReplyDelete@jonterry,
ReplyDeleteThis is knock on umpires as old as time.
"it is unfortunate that Gibby can't walk away after the manager has the player in hand".
Pro Ball arguements can be nasty and personal, no doubt more so after the player has been ejected. Even to the point of comments like, "I'll kick your ass".
I have no idea what was said, nobody does. However we are talking about a big league umpire who knows he's on camera.
What you see from Gibby is human nature, not the human element. Only a fool doesn't react when he is being shit on. The players want that reaction, they need it, so they can say, "See the guys a jerk". Gibby knows the deal. So how do you account for human nature, not element? Gibby told Span, and told him. Warned him and warned him. Gibby only yelled when the scale was tipped, he couldn't stay quiet. Each scale is different for each umpire.
We all want Gibby to just stand there like Bear Bryant, it's not going to happen. At some point he's going to act human, that's what he is.
@Big Marc: Chill out. I never said there is anything wrong with being a geek.
ReplyDelete@Gil,
ReplyDeleteThe guy is a jerkstore, to use a Seinfeld reference. I wish you had not even acknowledge the comment or the piece of (beep) that said it.
Anybody that has spent anytime researching the data you provide, would have to come to the conclusion you have a staff of 30 people working on this stuff. Of course we all know it's you and a handfull of others ONLY. The time you spend, and information you provide has not only giving me food for thought on some nights, but I would easily say the site has made an old vet like me, redeadicate myself to the rules and the game of baseball.
Technical/Hard core date, and hair spliting situations are enjoyable.
To end with Seinfeld, and Don't dumb it down for the masses!
Big Marc, honestly chill out. You seem to be starting fights with every anonymous poster on here for no reason. I understand you like to defend umpire, I do too. But you have to be objective sometimes. These umpires make mistakes too you know. Saying something like Gardenhire does nothing during the game is very disrespectful and frankly uncalled for.
ReplyDeleteIf every other umpire should not take crap from players how come we rarely ever see arguments like that anymore. I don't discredit Gibson for the ejections, I believe both were warranted I just wish Gibson wouldn't yell back at players/coaches after an ejection. He always seems to do this and it just looks bad and unprofessional.
Good grief. Are you still yelling at me for calling Gil a 'geek'? First of all, I was not the first person to use the term. Second, I consider calling Gil a 'geek' a compliment to his intelligence. So basically, in your zeal to protect Gil, you have twice jumped all over a commenter who was trying to compliment him. Way to go! You have officially lost all credibility, so stop trying to be the policeman on this board.
ReplyDeleteNice to see this website getting some publicity.
ReplyDeleteHey Marc. Trust me, I understand the impulse. I've lost my cool more than a couple of times. And each time, I've wished I hadn't, therefor making the incident 'unfortunate'. I don't blame him, I just can also see the the reality of the situation, which is that everyone from the commentator to us has higher praise for someone like Alphonso Marquez, who shows less temper. The umpires like Gibby or Davidson who show more emotion are the ones who get shat upon more. Trust me, I know.
ReplyDelete"Big Marc, honestly chill out. You seem to be starting fights with every anonymous poster on here for no reason"............. I seem to be? I am !! Put your name on the comments, own your words, and let's see if under your name would you use the term geek as a compliment.
ReplyDeleteSo now I must apologize for not understanding the meaning of the word Geek.
How about next time you like something on this site.......... Nice job Gil. Try that.
Ok, Big Marc. I was the one who said that about Gil being a geek and I will put my name on it. Apparently, considering Gil to be intelligent was a big crime worthy of being attacked. If you didn't understand what geek means, why did you attack me for using it?
ReplyDeleteBig Marc, Umpsrule was not making fun of Gil by calling him a geek. Me and many other anonymous posters understand how much work Gil and Jeremy put into this site and I applaud them both for putting the work in with the mat and what not. And also Gil did not seem to be offended in any way by thse comments. Everything was peaceful on this particular comment section until you started ripping on people for no reason. Stop fighting fights that aren't yours.
ReplyDeleteI second what anon from 1:27 said. Gil and Jeremy both should be commended for the hard work they have put into this site. They have provided historical records for the umpires and a UEFL rules book, which must have been a time-consuming project. Also, determining the QOC of an ejection is not always easy either. Even after they have made the ruling, they unselfishly allow us, the commenters who benefit from their labor, to question their decision-making (and I was the one who challenged this one, by the way). They even created an appeals board that has the capability of overruling them, the people in charge of the site. Obviously, they care very much about the work they do and I know we are all very grateful for it. Gil and Jeremy, keep up the good work!
ReplyDeleteYou guys used to post the pitch fx on the site. Why aren't you guys doing it this year.
ReplyDeleteWe are. To save space, the PFX graphic doesn't appear on the home page, but once you click into the individual post, you should see it at its normal location (bottom of the post).
ReplyDeleteBig Marc, you are correct that it is human nature that gives one the impulse to jump back in the player's face and scream back at him. However, it is the lack of discipline, maturity and good judgment that causes one to act upon the impulse.
ReplyDelete