 |
| Ethier stares at Dan as Mattingly, Hillman intercede. |
This is Dan Bellino (2)'s first ejection of 2013.
Dan Bellino now has 2 points in the UEFL (0 Previous + 2 MLB + 0 Irrecusable Call = 2).
Crew Chief Wally Bell now has 1 point in the Crew Division (0 Previous + 1 Irrecusable Call = 1).
This is the 38th ejection of 2013.
This is the 17th player ejection of 2013. Prior to his ejection, Ethier was 2-4 with 2 RBI in the contest.
This is the Dodgers' 4th ejection of 2013, 1st in the NL West (LAD 4; ARI 3; SD, SF 1; COL 0).
This is Andre Ethier's first ejection since May 13, 2012 (Mark Carlson; QOC = Y).
This is Dan Bellino's first ejection since August 26, 2012 (Bobby Valentine; QOC = N).
Wrap: Los Angeles Dodgers vs. Milwaukee Brewers, 5/20/13
Video: After a strikeout in which an 0-2 pitch flies wildly, Ethier ejected arguing pitcher's intent (LAD)
18 comments :
They showed no video of any of this on the milwaukee feed. I hope they did for the dodgers feed.
Don't waste your breath around here...if he would have warned him and then a Brewer would have got ejected, it would have been a case of "great game management". A Dodger is ejected for sticking up for his health (which Bellino collects a check either way), and he is an arrogant player. Same old record.....
I don't know man, it could go either way. Warnings are issued? Someone would have bitched. The thing that makes me want to side with the UIC here is that no one (managers) defended him, so no one else seemed to think warnings were warranted in a 3-1 tight game. That being said, I'd like to know what "magic words" got him tossed.
Looking at how the pitcher and catcher react, it really doesn't look intentional. No reason to warn here, this is not headhunting. As poorly as Los Angeles is playing right now, the Dodgers surely must be looking for a scapegoat or something to fire up the team. Who knows, maybe this was Ethier's attempt?
I am sure Etheir is a good guy and I am certainly not judging the kind of person he is, but his ejections over past seasons have been pretty stupid. Last year when Mark Carlson tossed him, the pitch was clearly a strike over the inside corner. And here, to get ejected arguing over this, its kind of silly. You could have a conversation with Bellino, but to get ejected over this????
Wouldn't Ethier "collect a check either way" as well?
And that's why there are umpires in baseball..
MLB.com video title: "Ethier ejected after close pitch"
Huh?
You're on a site about umpires. A lot of the users are umpires. Guess what? A lot of the users will side with the umpires. You're not surprised by this, are you?
Clueless You Are.
That high pitch was not delivered with purpose and did not fit in with the rest of the at-bat. There was no need for a warning. Good no-call.
Umpires aren't supposed to side with people. They're supposed to side with the rules of the game. And your comment is indicative of the reason fans are skeptical of umpires motivations in making certain calls. If umpires just did their jobs no one would question their decisions. If umpires have some other agenda, well the you can expect the fans to call you out on that.
What? Are you sure you read my comment right? Where are you pulling "other agenda" from? Are you saying that people are skeptical of calls made by umpires because umpires tend to agree with judgement calls made by other umpires?
Rather than saying "siding with the umpire", I would just say something less loaded, like "defering to the judgement of the professional." But, I totally understand what you are saying, BAPACop. For me, I see "siding with the umpire" or "defering to the judgement of the professional" as the view that, unless there is eveidence to the contrary, I default to the position that the umpire made the best call he could at the moment, with the information he had. And, I don't think that there is anything unreasonable in saying that the burden of proof to the contrary, that the umpire intentionally screwed up because of an "agenda", is on the person making the accusation. Also, we're getting away from the fact that there doesn't seem to be any reason to suspect that Ethier was being thrown at intentionally, and thus Bellino's no-call seems to be the absolutely correct and appropriate response. If anyone wants to umpire bash, this just doesn't seem like a very validating thread to do it on.
Yes, that's what I meant. I didn't expect "side with" to be interpreted as a loaded statement, but I guess it was.
Well, when people come to this site strictly to try and start arguments, any little word or phrase can always be jumped on by them.
Certainly deferring to the judgment of the pro is a very reasonable position. But that's clearly not what he wrote.
WTH is Ethier doing? That stare-down though is freaking hilarious, so I'll cut him some slack.
Post a Comment