 |
| Melvin argues for a home run after replay review. |
This is Angel Hernandez (55)'s first ejection of 2013.
Angel Hernandez now has -2 points in the UEFL (0 Previous + 2 MLB + -4 Incorrect Call = -2).
Crew Chief Angel Hernandez now has 0 points in the UEFL's Crew Division (0 + 0 Incorrect Call = 0).
This is the 30th ejection of 2013.
This is the 13th Manager ejection of 2013.
This is the A's' 3rd ejection of 2013, 1st in the AL West (OAK 3; HOU, LAA, SEA, TEX 0) .
This is Bob Melvin's first ejection since April 13 (Andy Fletcher; QOC = Y).
This is the 13th Manager ejection of 2013.
This is the A's' 3rd ejection of 2013, 1st in the AL West (OAK 3; HOU, LAA, SEA, TEX 0) .
This is Bob Melvin's first ejection since April 13 (Andy Fletcher; QOC = Y).
This is Angel Hernandez's first ejection since July 3, 2011 (Ron Washington/Gary Pettis; QOC = Y).
70 comments :
I believe Tumpane (HP), Hernandez (2B), and Eddings (3B) went for a further look. I didn't see Nauert. Matt Vasgersian on MLB Network said that Hernandez tossed Melvin earlier in this series for arguing an out of the baseline play. I think he is mistaken. Right?
This call is an embarrassment to professional baseball. THERE WAS NOT ONE INCONCLUSIVE ANGLE.
And then for Angel Hernandez to come out to a pool reporter after the game, and demand that the journalist not use quotes, and then give the BS excuse that evidence wasn't conclusive. No accountability. Not to be Hawk on umpires here, but this is BRUTAL.
Thanks, Angel.
He is completely mistaken. I know the exact play he was talking about and Melvin did argue an out of the baseline call with Paul Nauert not Anggel Hernandez and he did not get ejected although he really should have as he put his finger right in Nauerts face.
Joe Maddon ejected for the second straight day, this time by Scott Barry.
Worst Call Of The Night For Angel.......Wearing The Snap Back Hat.
I was going to comment on this. What the hell is Angel Hernandez doing?
Nauert never throw's out people when he should. From what I got at umpire school though is he really hates filling out EJ reports.
Cool Story Bro.
That's just sad. I'm trying to make a case to call that a 2B.... No excuse for that with a replay review. Brutal.
Oops missed that one AH.
What's the point of replay if you still can't get it right? I've read on here in the past from the umpire groupies and apologists that Melvin gets run when it doesn't really matter or it's not that important. Down a run with two outs in the 9th and your game tying HR isn't properly called even with replay, who wouldn't get run? To say the call is inconclusive is such a b.s. excuse unless Angel didn't get the same replay as everyone else. And if that's the case, why not? To paraphrase Melvin, everyone in the park saw it (as did anyone especially watching the replay). BTW, the Little League World Series doesn't start until August, Angel, so even though that's where you might deserve to work after nights like this, you should change your hat.
AH is going to get destroyed by the media on this one. Has any reviewable call been missed? This one wasn't even close.
Silly me...I didn't think we needed any more proof that Angel Hernandez is wholly unqualified to be a Major League Baseball umpire.
Cooking my crow as we speak.
I would like an answer from any of the pro guys hanging around here. What kind of feed are the umpires looking at when they are in the tunnel reviewing a call? Isn't it possible that the MLB feed operators and not the umpires are at fault on this one?
...how do you miss that? I don't understand.
So... no one's going to challenge this one? :P
(Note that THIS is NOT a challenge)
It is quite possible there is a flaw in the replay system..... I'm taking an educated guess that the blown up view that was shown on CSN Bay Area was not one that the umpires saw. It is quite possible they did not have an angle to change the call. It wouldn't make sense to get a call like this wrong on purpose. And considering the blowback that will be involved obviously you want to get it right. I'm hoping that this doesn't derail Tumpane in any way. No matter what you think of Eddings and Angel they would have changed the call if evidence was provided to.
it unfortunatly is very possible the umpires are not at fault. It is also possible they are... hope that clears things up!
Yes, exactly. I think that we need to see what the umpires saw before we excoriate them.
Challenge. I don't think we should dock Hernandez points for a view that he wasn't provided.
I'm just kidding.
I think if this were Jim Joyce or Gerry Davis people here wouldn't be this hostile and may be open to the idea that there could have been something up with the feeds.
His post-game actions have something to do with it. They were as Busch League as this call, if not more.
Angel: "It wasn't evident on the TV we had it was a home run"
Seriously? Forgetting the replay for a moment, they still missed the original call. Or do you think we should label missed safe/out calls as irrecusable because the umpire doesn't get to see the same replays we do as well?
The ejection was for the arguing of a call already reviewed, not for the original call on the field... Had there been no review, and Hernandez tossed Melvin for arguing the play itself, I would agree with you... In my opinion, the QOC in this, and all review/ejection cases relies heavily on what happened "downstairs" when they viewed the available replays... Not necessarily whether the call itself was correct or incorrect, but whether they followed all rules correctly in the review and whether there was indisputable evidence to overturn their original call... Again, Melvin was tossed because he continued to argue after a review, NOT because he was consistently arguing a call on the field. There is a big difference in my eyes.
In re 030 Hernandez 1
This appeal has been summarily denied by the UEFL Appellate Interpreter.
As opined in 020/021/022 Timmons 1/2/3, "Quality of Correctness does not pertain to the character of an ejection, it pertains to the accuracy of the call leading to ejection. This aforementioned principle is key to QOC determination."
UEFL Rule 6-2-c-b states that calls overturned after instant replay review shall revert to reflect the crew chief as the calling umpire, whereas calls upheld after review may reflect either the crew chief or the original calling umpire as the calling umpire post-review. As Hernandez was both the original calling umpire and the crew chief, Hernandez is clearly the calling umpire. Replays overwhelmingly indicate the no-HR call was made in error prior to review.
As manifested in Video link #2 (Footage compiled of the different broadcasts, including Oakland & Cleveland Feeds), the home feed indeed displayed the same or a similar camera angle shown by the Oakland broadcast, though digital manipulation did not appear as indistinguishable.
The Interpreter recognizes argument concerning the call itself vs. the instant replay process are two different reasons for ejection, yet no convincing evidence suggests the instant replay process was exclusively argued, as opposed to, for instance, the original call and the post-review call.
As opined in the aforementioned Timmons case, character of ejection is not of concern—for instance ejection for throwing a hat vs. arguing a replayed call—reason for ejection simply pertains to the accuracy of the call leading to ejection.
Appeal summarily denied as replays overwhelmingly indicate the call leading to the ejection was inaccurate. Certiorari denied.
You guys are a bunch of player loving rats. As umpires we should be supporting the guys that are at the highest level of play; that we strive to be at, This group should be a group of people that is in support of the major leaguers and we should give them the benefit of the doubt that they didn't have a conclusive camera angle. You should be embarrassed for immediately throwing Angel under the bus.
I completely agree! I love keeping up with this site, but I'm always discouraged to see people making such negative comments when there is absolutely no way for them to know the context of what went on either on the field or in the background...unless of course the commenter is an umpire that was on the field at the time. Not a single one of us knows what footage Angel seen, and all in all, I personally feel Angel is one of the better rules-minded umpires in the league, so I would definitely give him the benefit of the doubt that he was unable to 'conclusively' overturn the call.
Why are we surprised. It is Angel Hernandez after all. I don't see how guys like Angel stay in the majors. He's been horrible for a long time, and a jacka** as well. When he was paired with Joe West a couple of years back, that crew was hands-down the worst in MLB. He needs to be fired.
MLB Umpires are a bunch of coddled pansies. Professional umpires should be held to the highest expectations and standards of performance. They should be rewarded and held accountable for their performance to the same extent that professional players are. If a player is performs poorly, he gets it from the fans. Umpires shouldn't be treated any differently.
Matt...they made the wrong call on the field and then the wrong call again in review. What's your point? The constant challenges of the obvious are dragging this down from a pretty high level of entertainment...Oh, and forget the conspiracy theory of not giving the umps the right footage--it's 2013.
Melvin needed to be run--then needs to be met at the team plane by the owner with a big bonus check for sticking up for the team. Did you see the interview afterwards? He'll likely face a fine--but AH needs to be fined or suspended for his horrible call. Wonder what the other two umps were saying looking at the replay? Gotta believe at least one of those guys wished he was someplace else when it came time to go back out on that field...
Not a conspiracy, it's just that the umpires are only given home feed views. If the Cleveland feed does not have that zoomed in camera view, I can see them saying it is not indisputable evidence.
I agree that we should be supporting umpires - and most of us support the ones who are consistent and not confrontational. I don't like umpires who are either self-aggrandizing or simply cannot admit when they have made a mistake. Angel Hernandez, CB Bucknor, and a couple others are in the lower tier talentwise, in my opinion. It happens in every profession - not everyone can be as talented as Jim Joyce or Tim McClelland. And we're allowed to NOT like some people. That's life. Bob Davidson (until this season) also comes to mind.
C- for effort on this one, Angel, sorry. I don't like seeing umpires make mistakes that affect the outcome of the game, but when instant replay is there to help it makes me wonder how helpful it is indeed depending on the situation!
That dude sucks, and I'm an Indians fan! He's flat out bad for the game.
Joe Torre's statement.... http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20130509&content_id=47060278&vkey=news_mlb&c_id=mlb
Well, seems they had both teams views via Torre's comments.....so there was no flaw in the system. Next excuse?
"Home and away broadcast feeds are available for all uses of instant replay, and they were available to the crew last night."--Joe Torre
Well that should answer the question on what feeds and camera angles where available to Angel Hernandez and company last night. For the people that were trying to say that maybe he didn't see all the angles or whatever else.
I actually think Angel has been doing a fairly good job in recent years, and I think the people jumping on him are going off his past reputation.
However, there's no way to possibly sugar coat this one. Especially after they put in replay to try and fix situations like this, and he still blew the call. His attitude after the game certainly didn't help matters. He needs to take a page out of the Jim Joyce playbook, stand up and be a man, and admit he made a mistake. People would have a lot more respect for him if he did that.
Umpires "get it" from the fans even when they're doing their job right.
You should be embarrassed you UKJ. They had all the feeds - what more could you possibly want? What more conclusive camera angle could you need? I see missing it the first time and I wouldn't think anyone would question him missing it. But to come here and bash people after a miss on a video review is pretty unintelligent. How's the popcorn?
You would think they would add a provision for protesting a reviewed call. I mean if it is reviewed now, or reviewed later, whats the difference?The whole point is to get the callright.
This is the second wardrobe oddity I noticed this week. The other one was Fielden Culbreth wearing the old, pre-2010 style uniform last Sunday night behind the plate. Also, Chad Fairchild had a black jacket with white piping on when he ejected Cody Ross and Kirk Gibson, which I had thought were only worn by MiLB guys. Anyone have any specualtion on what some of these uniform variances are all about?
Yeah, that never happens to players.
Fair enough. Nobody said the job isn't tough.
So someone who has made the Playoffs every year but one since 2000 should all of the sudden be fired? Absolutely not. His judgement was very poor in this instance and I cannot defend his decision to uphold the double, but it's not something you get fired over.
One thing I do think it will effect is his ability to become a CC. The only reason he was the CC in this instance is because Dana Demuth is out and has been for awhile. I personally had Hernandez pegged as one of the next three CC's along with Wally Bell and Jeff Nelson, but this puts him behind those two. I'm sorry, if you are a CC you have to be able to use common sense in some instances. It is not possible for the ball to come down at the angle it did unless it hit behind the yellow line. I watched this play on my i-phone and it took me less than a minute to figure out it was gone. Now I don't know all the facts and all the Replays they saw but you could tell on both feeds it was clearly gone. I'm hoping Angel was being overly cautious and not on an ego trip. Remember it was call so the detractors could say he had too big of an ego to overturn his own call, but I don;t believe this was the case I think Angel was just being overly cautious and I do not agree with him for doing so.
Finally, I don't understand the hatred towards Angel calling him incompetent and jackass and what not. If he was incompetent he would not have worked 2 World Series and he would have missed the Playoffs more than once in the last 13 seasons. Maybe he is not CC material yet, but he is still a good Umpire. Interestingly enough, this is the same "jacka**" who had 0 ejections all of last season and this was his first ejection in almost 2 years and his first ejection since being moved off of Joe West's crew. I didn't like his comments after the game but he handled this argument and ejection about as well as you could. He wasn't confrontational and let Melvin have his say. He handled the Reporters pooerly after the game, but nothing wrong with what he did with Melvin.
IFR4:
The only jack*** here is you....your comments offer nothing to what is an otherwise reasonable discussion of this mess.
Is Hernandez incompetent? Let's look at his official MLB bio:
...worked the All-Star Game (1999, 2009), Division Series (1997, 98, 2002, 05, 09, 11), League Championship Series (2000-01, 2003-04, 07, 10) and the World Series (2002, 05).
If that's incompetence, then I want to be that incompetent.
He is a good official who made a bad call....we have all been there and done that, except his comes in front of thousands and live TV coverage.
Except of course for you...I suspect you have never strapped it on and given it a go. And until you do, take the fan boy crap somewhere else,
Mariano Duncan would beg to differ about Hernandez being a jack***. The guy is a horrible umpire and has been confrontational on more than one occasion. The fact that he's made the playoffs that many times must mean he has friends in high places. How anyone, ANYONE, could've missed that call last night after looking at the replay is beyond me.
Matt, I think it's preference. Dana DeMuth never wears a jacket or long sleeve shirt behind the plate. He wears the old short sleeve shirt, and then a long sleeve undershirt.
I'm with you on this. Like I said before, just because we levy criticism at an umpire does not make us "umpire-haters" and just because we support a dubious decision does not make us "umpire-apologists". People make mistakes. However, some (like Angel), make more mistakes than others. I challenge anyone to list me their top 10 umpires (in terms of gamesmanship and talent) and have Angel anywhere on that list. Or CB Bucknor. I bet Jim Joyce and maybe even Joe West might be on that list! But not Angel. I cite his "argument" with Ron Washington and Gary Pettis last year as one prime example, and the fact that he is the only umpire to be "threatened" (during a 7th inning stretch) by an ex-NFL player because of his interesting calls! =-)
You've obviously never worked as an umpire at 2nd base in a MLB ballpark with a difficult backdrop. There aren't many umpires who could have gotten that one right, initially.
Here is the MLB replay 'system' :
http://deadspin.com/mlbs-crappy-replay-tech-its-a-miracle-umps-ever-get-499041275
My LAPTOP screen is better
no wonder...
You appear to be taking my statement out of context. I am not in any way referring to the difficulty of making the call. I am simply referring to the fact that the UEFL cannot set a precedent of basing QOC on whether or not the calling umpire had access to a replay.
I don't understand how Cubby gets a 2-game suspension for his egregious error, yet Angel cost a team a game and there are no repercussions!
Nobody but the umpires know what camera angles they had for the review.
Do you really believe everything Joe Torre says? C'mon, it's obvious the umpires did not have the same feed we all did. You can thank the home team for providing the umpires with a crappy feed. They are the ones to blame here, not the umpires. I can't believe how many people here don't see that.
Hallelujah! Most of the people commenting don't know how the only way to overturn a call is with conclusive proof. It's obvious they didn't provide the umpires with a good feed to determine that.
Do you want to measure unintelligence? Look in the mirror and apologize to yourself for jumping the gun and saying something so ridiculous. You are mistakenly assuming the umpires had access to the same feed but word is already going on around the league that the opposite is true. Even Bob Melvin knows the truth already! He is no longer pointing a finger at Hernandez or the other crewmates.
Amazing how unintelligent people are always quick to criticize without even considering another angle to a story.
Yeah, they are coddled, alright. They spend 8 1/2 months away from their families every year while you get to wake up in the morning and go to your thankless job. The difference is; you get to see your family, they don't. They are not paid nearly enough for what they do!
By the way, they are disciplined. I bet that brain of yours could never understand how MLB usually keeps most disciplining of umpires under wraps to protect the integrity of the game.
You are entirely correct! You are one of the very few open-minded and prudent human beings writing on this thread.
I hear from inside sources that although the press has verbally raped Hernandez (on occasion, rightly so), he still remains one of the most respected umpires in MLB today. It's obvious he has changed his attitude. He didn't even have an ejection in 2012. That's highly difficult to accomplish unless you are doing your job and you are somewhat fortunate.
You are right on the money! People who write negative comments about an umpire of his caliber are merely followers who believe media hype without taking anything else into account.
Yeah, but Mariano Duncan was always known as one of the worst "rats" in baseball by the majority of MLB umpires.
Once again, you are assuming just because home and away feeds were provided, they were all in high definition like we all saw. MLB baseball is probably to blame here, not Hernandez and his crew. It's unlikely MLB will take responsibility, however, just to protect the integrity of the game.
Imagine how the public opinion on MLB would change if they found out with all the millions they have, teams can't provide the umpires with state of the art "review monitors" so they can get the call right. Something to think about!
You are dead on. That's all I have to say.
MLB and the Indians should fine themselves for dropping the ball on the quality of the feed they allow umpires to see.
You guys are getting sucked into and believing the umpire-hating media frenzy on this one. Angel Hernandez is probably tight-lipped about it because he does not want to betray MLB, his employer.
He's probably taking the full brunt of this one on the nose because MLB would create a huge blemish on its reputation by admitting they are at fault for not providing umpires with a clear, high def review box screen. If anything, Hernandez has done the honorable thing here. It's so sad the media has fallen victim once again to its inability to gather facts and lash out at someone, instead.
I agree, and MLB should be held accountable, not the umpires. They were obviously not afforded the same feed as you and I!
Post a Comment