Pages

▼

Sunday, April 27, 2014

MLB Ejection 023: Tim Timmons (1; Joe Maddon)

HP Umpire Tim Timmons ejected Rays Manager Joe Maddon for arguing a check swing (ball) call by 3B Umpire Chris Segal in the bottom of the 8th inning of the Rays-White Sox game. With none out and none on, White Sox batter Adam Eaton attempted to check his swing on a 2-2 splitter from Rays pitcher Brandon Gomes. Replays indicate Eaton did not attempt to strike the pitch, the call was correct. At the time of the ejection, the Rays were leading, 4-0. The Rays ultimately won the contest, 4-0.

This is Tim Timmons (95)'s first ejection of 2014.
Tim Timmons now has 6 points in the UEFL (3 Prev + 2 MLB + 1 Correct [Crewmate] = 6).
Tim Welke now has 6 points in the UEFL's Crew Division (5 Prev + 0 Correct = 6).

This is the 23rd ejection of the 2014 MLB Regular Season.
This is the 6th Manager ejection of 2014.
This is the Rays' 1st ejection of 2014, T-2nd in the AL East (NYY 2; BOS, TB, TOR 1; BAL 0).
This is Joe Maddon's first ejection since September 29, 2013 (Paul Schrieber; QOC = N).
This is Tim Timmons' first ejection since July 27, 2013 (David Ortiz; QOC = Y).

Wrap: Tampa Bay Rays vs. Chicago White Sox, 4/27/14
Video: Prolonged arguing leads to Maddon's premature departure (TB)
at

5 comments:

  1. LindsayApril 27, 2014 at 3:48 PM

    Funny you would say that to anyone!

    ReplyDelete
  2. LindsayApril 27, 2014 at 3:50 PM

    And why would that be?

    ReplyDelete
  3. LindsayApril 27, 2014 at 3:54 PM

    Joe, I respect the Umpires like crazy and defend them on a regular basis. I just feel like Kellogg's incorrectly called pitch did have a realistic outcome on the at bat. I'm not saying Kellogg is a bad Umpire or anything like that, he is one of the best in the game and has worked 4 World Series. Missed pitches happen and he did miss a pitch in that at bat. If the appeal is denied I will not lose sleep over it and will respect the appeals board's decision.

    ReplyDelete
  4. LindsayApril 27, 2014 at 4:30 PM

    Why? The majority of posters on here have no idea how the game is played or called!

    ReplyDelete
  5. LindsayApril 27, 2014 at 9:11 PM

    In re E-021 Kellogg 1;

    This appeal has been summarily denied by the UEFL Appellate Interpreter.

    UEFL Rule 6-5-c-5 thoroughly specifies the language of "realistically resulted in a different outcome" and requires such consideration to be adjudged pursuant to a schedule, which includes, in part:
    (d) NO (Defense) = 0-0, 0-1 ==> Called Ball, meaning that a 0-0 pitch improperly ruled a ball, as exists in E-021 Kellogg 1, shall not be considered to have "realistically resulted in a different outcome" of the at-bat, "given that such contributing pitch has preceded a decisive pitch (not necessarily consecutively)." The 0-0 pitch ruled ball one preceded the 3-2 pitch of the at-bat; with the criteria satisfied, Rule 6-5-c-5 precludes further deliberation.

    Certiorari denied.

    ReplyDelete