As Marlins manager Guillen watched Hanley Ramirez rounded first base after singling in the bottom of the ninth inning, something didn't look quite right to the veteran skipper, who immediately exited the third base dugout and waltzed straight toward Davidson and eventually crew chief Jerry Layne, who was making his first appearance since being hit with a broken bat in Cincinnati.
Turns out, Matheny had asked Davidson to double-switch his pitcher into the fifth spot, though the Cardinals internally penciled in the substitution as having occurred in lineup spot No. 7.
In what might as well be a case play straight out of the MLB Rules Book or umpiring manual, a glance at the Marlins Park scoreboard indicated the Cardinals had intended to bat first baseman Craig at No. 5, catcher Yadier Molina at No. 6 and pitcher Victor Marte at the No. 7 spot for third baseman David Freese. With No. 8 hitter Daniel Descalso slated to lead off the eventual 10th inning, colloquial baseball strategy pegged the logical pitcher's slot as seventh, meaning Marte (or his spot) would not have to bat for another nine hitters.
Instead, Matheny incorrectly had placed Marte in Craig's fifth spot, meaning that on appeal from Guillen, Craig had to come out of the ball game (he was replaced defensively by Tony Cruz, who took over Freese's seventh spot in the batting order).
Huh? For the visually inclined, refer to the above table to see what happened in Florida Monday night.
Rules 3.06 and 3.07 govern substitutions, stating that the manager must notify the umpire-in-chief of any substitutions (3.06), who in turn shall notify all personnel of the switch (3.07).
Wily Ozzie Guillen has finally done it, taking the effort he used to expel in getting ejected and turning into real manager know-how. Well done. Nonetheless, Matheny and the Cardinals got the final laugh, winning the ball game in the 10th—with a pitcher producing the game-winning RBI. Too bad Ozzie didn't wait until the 10th before executing a batting-out-of-order appeal (Rule 6.07(a)).
Wrap: Cardinals at Marlins, 6/25/12
Video: Cards forced to remove Allen Craig after Matheny miscommunication with umpire Davidson
Is this technically an ejection or no?
ReplyDeleteno
ReplyDeleteNo, Guillen was not ejected last night and has not been thrown out through the first 2.5 months of 2012, a fact that has eliminated all but one UEFL'er in the Prop Predictions: Date of 1st Ozzie Guillen Ejection race: If Ozzie is ejected in 2012, ThePeoplesChamp stands to gain two points in the UEFL standings for projecting an eject date (5/25/12) closest to the actual first ejection. If Guillen is not ejected in 2012, those points will remain unclaimed. Most UEFL'ers predicted Guillen would have been ejected by late April.
ReplyDelete@Anon 9:24AM - I do not believe Craig was "ejected", he was simply removed from the game.
ReplyDeleteBut I think it is unfair to put this "miscommunication" all on Matheny. It takes two people to have a miscommunication. Matheny wrote down on his lineup card in front of Davidson that Marte was going in the 7th spot and claims he told Davidson such. But he took the high road in the post game by saying "The only thing I can say is that he's [Davidson] been doing this a lot longer than I have."
It's certainly possible Matheny screwed up, but it is equally possible Davidson screwed up and thought he heard something he didn't. One thing for sure, Matheny will likely want to see what the umpire writes on the official card from now on.
Good learning point for umpires here as well. Confirm you have the correct change.
This is part of the reason why I always repeat a change or write it in front of the coach (unless it is obvious like the guy at the plate is now batting for YYY). Make sure you got it right so you don't have a problem later.
ReplyDeleteIt says too bad Ozzie didn't wait until the 10th and tried a batting out of order call???
ReplyDeleteNot saying, just saying, Ozzie would have to appeal before the next piitch or play to get batting out of order. Waiting wouldn't be smart.
I don't think that is true. IIRC, in a batting out of order situation, the defense will allow the completion of the at bat, and perhaps only protest if it resulted in a hit. However, this was a "fielding out of order" or illegal substitution. It was not recognized until a play had been completed.
DeleteRemotely related was a successfully upheld appeal by the Astros versus the Mets. Ed Kranepool had walked off the field after the 2nd out in the top of the ninth, thinking third out - game over. The Houston batter flied out but nobody had noticed Ed's absence. Houston protested that 8 men in the field constituted an illegal play. Anyway, I think the out was completed when the teams returned to Houston. This might be the only upheld protest for Houston in its 50 year history.
I suppose an illegal substitute (ostensibly Crain at 1B) is treated like a bat with pine tar too high on the handle which is to be removed from the game when it is pointed out. It does not appear that a play, or a pitch, or a completed at bat "legalizes" an illegal substitute. If Craig had made a put out at first, I doubt it would have been negated with the batter allowed a do-over.
Edited to add: I cannot copy and paste the description of the Kranepool protest, but it was indeed a strange play. It can be found under Astros Oddities at www.astrosdaily.com. There are also a couple of BOOO situations described including one that was completely botched by the crew by calling the wrong man out.
DeleteWith the Kranepool play, the last Astro batter (Jeff Leonard) ended up batting three times before they got it right. The game was in AUGUST 1979.
Poor Craig. It's one of those situations that ultimately worked out just fine for St. Louis, but by the same token, who knows that Davidson gave to Guillen when the switch was made. The scoreboard showed Matheny's version of events (that's the HOME team siding with the AWAY team's record), so I'm wondering what actually happened down there.
ReplyDeleteGo get 'em Ozzie! Props to him on calling that one out, it took the umpires 10 minutes to straighten out that mess!
ReplyDeleteWhoever was the pitcher should have also been taken out of the game.
ReplyDeleteIs Fairchild back?
ReplyDeleteDidn't see Chad anywhere yesterday. I'm assuming he's out for at least 7 days as his concussion looked CL (Concussion List) worthy.
ReplyDeleteIf the pitcher came in and was put in the 5 spot, then whoever was in the 5 spot (Craig) was then an illegal substitute and had to be removed. The pitcher was then batting 5th and the new substitute would bat 7th. I don't think it took ten minutes for the umpires to figure this out, since it only took me 2, but they had to explain this to everyone involved.
ReplyDeleteHallion's crew is off this week, so it just gives gives Fairchild extra time to recuperate. Not sure if he would have been back or not.
ReplyDeleteWhat about Davidson being picked up by the field microphone telling Ozzie, "Sorry, Ozzie, I eff'ed up."
ReplyDeleteIf Matheny had stood his ground, would it have been grounds for protest? Perhaps, like a golf card, the PU should get each manager to literally sign off on all "double changes"
Davidson admitted he f'd up. This wasn't Matheny's fault. It was the umpire's. There's the audio telling us so! The umpires continued to screw it up by allowing Ozzie to get what he wanted. If he wanted to appeal the situation, it should have to happen before that base hit; not after. That gave him a distinct advantage.
ReplyDeleteNow is that a protestable incident?
I think an "illegal" fielder can be pointed out at any time by the offense to cause his removal. I do not think the rules allow for him to be "legalized" by the completion of a pitch or a play or an at bat. This is not an appeal play which does have limitations like that/
Delete"Guillen doesn't even want to talk to Bob Davidson, he's going right down to Jerry Layne."
ReplyDeleteWise move, Ozzie.
I love this. Watching the umpiring conference, Dan Bellino was doing all the talking. "Yeah, whatever. Just go to the lawyer, he'll figure it out."
ReplyDeleteInteresting play just happened in Boston. Line drive was hit to Gonzalez at first and he caught it just below knee level. On bringing his glove up the ball fell out and he kicked it directly to 2B Pedroia inadvertently. Gonzalez thought he had a catch but Pedroia alertly scooped it up and ran over to tag first. This relates to the Colorado game with a catch/no catch by the pitcher and the need to have control and intentional removal of the ball from the glove to validate a legal catch of a batted ball.
ReplyDeletein that boston play...country joe apparently signalled "no catch" to alert pedroia to this...didn't really matter because rasmus wasn't running anyways!
ReplyDeleteOzzie just got tossed by bellino
ReplyDeleteLooks like ThePeoplesChamp just laid the "Smackdown" on everyone in terms of figuring out when Ozzie would first get tossed this year.
ReplyDeleteYes indeed, ThePeoplesChamp receives two points for that prop prediction.
ReplyDeleteAnd it appears the "UEFL Curse" rolls on, with Ejection 079: Dan Bellino (3)
@ Anonymous 11:43,
ReplyDelete"Whoever was the pitcher should have also been taken out of the game.
If Marte was still in he should have been taken out also. The substituted for player, Craig, had rentered the game. Rule 3.03. If due to umpire error I don't know what the ruling would be and since nobody protested we won't know.
So, what is the UEFL Curse, exactly?
ReplyDeleteWhenever the UEFL does a story about a specific coach or umpire, that person often gets involved in an ejection during the next game (hunter wendelstedt interview last year).
ReplyDeleteOkay. By the way, Angel Hernandez has been pretty quiet this year. Just sayin...
ReplyDelete