Proper replay strategy?

KillerBs

lurker
Nov 16, 2006
812
Why didn't Farrell come out and insist on a video review of the tag play at 3rd in the 9th? Davis was pretty clearly out wasn't he?
 

MakMan44

stole corsi's dream
SoSH Member
Aug 22, 2009
19,310
KillerBs said:
Why didn't Farrell come out and insist on a video review of the tag play at 3rd in the 9th? Davis was pretty clearly out wasn't he?
I don't think it was clear at all. I agree he should have challenged it, it was the 9th, not worth saving your challenge at that point but I don't think it would have been over turned. Then again, I could be wrong but we don't know that because Farrell didn't use the challenge for some reason. 
 
 
EDIT: I have more of a problem with Middlebrooks not keeping the tag on Davis FWIW
 

soxhop411

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2009
34,209
MakMan44 said:
I don't think it was clear at all. I agree he should have challenged it, it was the 9th, not worth saving your challenge at that point but I don't think it would have been over turned. Then again, I could be wrong but we don't know that because Farrell didn't use the challenge for some reason. 
 
 
KillerBs said:
Why didn't Farrell come out and insist on a video review of the tag play at 3rd in the 9th? Davis was pretty clearly out wasn't he?
RT @ScottLauber On play at third base in 9th, Farrell said Sox determined replay was "inconclusive," decided not to challenge.
 
https://twitter.com/ScottLauber/status/452200464872783872
 
Still think they should have challenged, since It was the 9th, and even if they lost the challenge they could still ask the ump to review a play if they needed to later in the game
 

nattysez

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 30, 2010
3,873
According to Wikipedia:  "managers will be allotted one challenge per game (two if the first challenge results in an overturned call) while the umpiring crew chief will be empowered to initiate a review in innings 7 and later.
 
Doesn't this mean that the proper strategy is that as soon as you hit the 7th inning, you should be more liberal with your use of your challenge, since if there's a later bad call, you can run out and tell the crew chief to check it (and they can do so without a challenge)?  I understand that this adds risk -- the crew chief can always say no -- but on a late-inning game-changing play like the play at third today, I think you should always challenge even a close play, since it's in theory unnecessary to "save" your challenge at that point.
 
This makes today different than the Giants' situation earlier this week, where they used their challenge in the fourth inning, then were stuck without one later in the same inning when an even worse call was made.
 
 
 

KillerBs

lurker
Nov 16, 2006
812
Just asleep at the switch. The obvious response is to go out, beg the umps to review on own, wait for word from the dugout while you delay and use the freakin challenge if the umps refuse to review on own.
 

teddywingman

Looks like Zach Galifianakis
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2009
8,197
a basement on the hill
This is definitely a topic for discussion. It blows my mind that the play at third today was not reviewed. Even if the replay was inconclusive--which is possible--how the hell did JF stay in the dugout? Wouldn't you at least go out there and give the booth guys--I assume there has to be somebody employed for this--a chance to look at the play from every angle?
 
What I saw today gives me the impression that the Red Sox have failed to prepare well enough for the replay era.
 

Sampo Gida

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 7, 2010
5,038
KillerBs said:
No you are not being too harsh. Very clearly poorly played by WMB for reasons you state. But still looked like he was out. I thought the days of critical blown calls after the 6th were over?
 
I watched it a few times on mlb.tv clip and pausing and he was safe, or at the very least it was inconclusive.  The ball was certainly there in time if WMB was closer to the bag to apply a quicker tag.
 

Lose Remerswaal

Leaves after the 8th inning
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
KillerBs said:
Just asleep at the switch. The obvious response is to go out, beg the umps to review on own, wait for word from the dugout while you delay and use the freakin challenge if the umps refuse to review on own.
 
Really?  I mean, it's fun to criticize the manager/coach of your team, but when you already have the answer I think it's a bit harsh to lead with "asleep at the switch"
 
soxhop411 said:
 
 
RT @ScottLauber On play at third base in 9th, Farrell said Sox determined replay was "inconclusive," decided not to challenge.
 
https://twitter.com/ScottLauber/status/452200464872783872
 
Still think they should have challenged, since It was the 9th, and even if they lost the challenge they could still ask the ump to review a play if they needed to later in the game
 

findguapo

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 7, 2006
782
The way the replay rules are designed, Farrell has to at least leave the dugout there and ask the umpire to do a review on their own. In my opinion, the glove was on him when he was off the bag for a split second. I really think they would have called him out on replay. That is a huge play in the game, you have to get that reviewed.
 

BoredViewer

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
3,092
Sampo Gida said:
 
I watched it a few times on mlb.tv clip and pausing and he was safe, or at the very least it was inconclusive.  The ball was certainly there in time if WMB was closer to the bag to apply a quicker tag.
 
I'd disagree.  I've got the ESPN close-up shot of the play - not the same angle they kept showing during the NESN telecast - and it looks pretty clear that for a fraction of a second, Middlebrooks' glove is touching the runner's butt, just as his left foot pops up off the bag and his right foot is dragging in the dirt.
 
Whether or not the Sox could have that info fast enough to know for sure... Farrell needed to protest.  Bad move on his part, hopefully he'll learn from it.  Also, Middlebrooks needs to keep the tag ON the runner.  If he does that, there is no question.  As other have mentioned, swipe tags just aren't going to cut it in this new era.
 

Section30

Well-Known Member
Bronze Supporter
SoSH Member
Aug 2, 2010
721
Portland OR
Maddon has the Rays playing through every play like playing to the whistle in football.
 
"It's all about putting pressure on the umpires to make judgment calls in their favor should an unusual scenario pop up."
 
"I know there's going to be some definites written down, but there's still going to be some gray that pops up that had not been thought about, or interpreted differently at the moment," Maddon said. "So it's not about gaming anything, it's about doing it for the first time and trying to not leave anything up to discretion."
 
https://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/mlb-big-league-stew/joe-maddon-preparing-rays-potential-loopholes-expanded-replay-081514484--mlb.html
 
from Yahoo Sports
 

MakMan44

stole corsi's dream
SoSH Member
Aug 22, 2009
19,310
I'm curious, did Farrell not challenge because he thought it wasn't worth wasting his one challenge or because it wasn't worth challenging at all?

If it's the former, I think that's a problem with the review system. I'm not a fan of only giving the manager one challenge for this reason.

If it's the latter though, that's just a mistake on Farrell's part which has been discussed already.
 

PayrodsFirstClutchHit

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 29, 2006
7,349
Winterport, ME
There is very little downside to challenging this late in the game.  The umps are not going to risk refusing to review a close play late in the game if the manager is out to argue. The last thing MLB wants is to have ESPN showing a potential reversal late in a game where the umps refused to take a look at the replay when the option is available.
 
Farrell clearly errored by not pushing for a review given how close it was.
 

radsoxfan

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 9, 2009
8,737
Pretty clear mistake by Farrell, hopefully he learned his lesson.
 
The replay being "inconclusive" in the team's eyes is reason enough to ask for a review, especially after the 7th inning when the umps can review any subsequent questionable calls if you don't have a challenge. 
 

Savin Hillbilly

loves the secret sauce
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2007
18,375
The wrong side of the bridge....
Sampo Gida said:
 
I watched it a few times on mlb.tv clip and pausing and he was safe, or at the very least it was inconclusive.  The ball was certainly there in time if WMB was closer to the bag to apply a quicker tag.
 
I've swatched the mlb clip about six times now and I can't see how you say this. The throw is a little short and toward the foul line of where it should have been. As it was, WMB had to field it near his shoetops, and reaching back a little across his body away from the runner (see screenshot below). If he had been straddling the bag he would have had to backhand it in the dirt. You can fault him for not keeping the tag on Davis' body longer, maybe--though the ump's position, with Davis directly between him and the glove, might have made this moot--but whatever is wrong with the initial tag seems to me to be more Mujica's fault than WMB's.
 
 

DennyDoyle'sBoil

Found no thrill on Blueberry Hill
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2008
27,386
AZ
Does anyone have the actual text of the rule? Google was unhelpful but I am a bad googler. MLB only has 2013 rules online.
 

rembrat

Well-Known Member
Bronze Supporter
SoSH Member
May 26, 2006
36,074
Sigh. Farrell gets his cues from personnel above who can watch multiple replays. If they tell him to stay put he is going to stay put. New year, same old shit it seems.
 

radsoxfan

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 9, 2009
8,737
rembrat said:
Sigh. Farrell gets his cues from personnel above who can watch multiple replays. If they tell him to stay put he is going to stay put. New year, same old shit it seems.
 
 
If Farrell has no authority to make a decision on his own after the feedback that the play was inconclusive, then the we can shift the blame to the personnel above who told him he wasn't allowed to challenge the play.
 
If Farrell has authority to make the decision on his own after the feedback that the play was inconclusive, he should have challenged the play. It was worth at least the small chance it gets overturned if they thought it was that close/hard to tell on replay initially.  Almost no penalty to challenge in that situation. 
 
Farrell does a good job overall, but he's not infallible. Not sure why pointing out when he botches something automatically gets a rise out of people.  
 

DennyDoyle'sBoil

Found no thrill on Blueberry Hill
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2008
27,386
AZ
Thanks for posting the rules. There is some interesting stuff in there. In no particular order:

It should be relatively easy to buy extra time for the manager. Batter in box and pitcher in ready position is the standard. So pitcher can get rosin or batter can dilly dally. But on the third out, manager only gets 10 seconds to enter the field. Clearly the networks got some input.

Missed tag missed the plate is interesting. Runner is safe unless defensive manager appeals.

Fair foul calls are only reviewable for balls that first land beyond first or third.

Catch no catch is only reviewable in the outfield.

There are a few substantive rule changes embedded in these rules. Basically, there were a couple of substantive rule modifications made in order to deal with a replay world. Force out timing is one. A throw beats the runner if the ball touches the fielder's glove before the runner touches the base, so long as the ball is then caught. At least that is how I read it. I don't think a juggle and catch would work. Also when in doubt on hbp assume ball hit bat.
 

teddywingman

Looks like Zach Galifianakis
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2009
8,197
a basement on the hill
rembrat said:
Sigh. Farrell gets his cues from personnel above who can watch multiple replays. If they tell him to stay put he is going to stay put. New year, same old shit it seems.
No.
Not the same old shit.
I want to know the name of the guy in the booth. He should be on notice.
 

terrisus

formerly: imgran
SoSH Member
According to Castiglione during the game when it happened, plays can't be challenged if they happen in front of the umpire.
Which, if true, is absolutely absurd. Since, as we saw during the 2013 World Series, umpires are perfectly capable of blowing calls that are right in front of them.
 

DennyDoyle'sBoil

Found no thrill on Blueberry Hill
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2008
27,386
AZ
terrisus said:
According to Castiglione during the game when it happened, plays can't be challenged if they happen in front of the umpire.
Which, if true, is absolutely absurd. Since, as we saw during the 2013 World Series, umpires are perfectly capable of blowing calls that are right in front of them.
Does not appear to be correct. What he was talking about is that fair foul is not revieawable in front of the bag. In other words when the ball first lands before the bag, whether it bounds over the bag or over foul ground when it passes the bag is non reviewable. Fair foul where the ball lands first past the bag (e.g., on the line or not) is reviewable.
 

terrisus

formerly: imgran
SoSH Member
DennyDoyle'sBoil said:
Does not appear to be correct. What he was talking about is that fair foul is not revieawable in front of the bag. In other words when the ball first lands before the bag, whether it bounds over the bag or over foul ground when it passes the bag is non reviewable. Fair foul where the ball lands first past the bag (e.g., on the line or not) is reviewable.
 
That still doesn't make too much sense to me, but if that is the case, it's at least not nearly as egregious. So, that's something.
 

DennyDoyle'sBoil

Found no thrill on Blueberry Hill
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2008
27,386
AZ
terrisus said:
 
That still doesn't make too much sense to me, but if that is the case, it's at least not nearly as egregious. So, that's something.
Maybe the idea is that video is not that helpful for over the bag calls. I find it always to be inconclusive because the camera doesn't show depth. A camera directly over the bag or a triangulating system like in tennis replays would maybe be helpful for a replay official, but this is actually one area where a properly positioned and trained human might be more reliable than a camera mounted 200 feet away and at an angle different from the foul line.
 

DrewDawg

Dorito Dink
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
37,479
I have a hard time faulting JF for this. The Sox put a system in place, that system said a challenge would not have worked, so they didn't challenge.
 
If there's an issue it's whoever made the call on whether or not to challenge needs to be a bit more liberal at that point.
 

benhogan

Baynes Hogan (pending trade)
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
7,230
Santa Monica
Savin Hillbilly said:
 
I've swatched the mlb clip about six times now and I can't see how you say this. The throw is a little short and toward the foul line of where it should have been. As it was, WMB had to field it near his shoetops, and reaching back a little across his body away from the runner (see screenshot below). If he had been straddling the bag he would have had to backhand it in the dirt. You can fault him for not keeping the tag on Davis' body longer, maybe--though the ump's position, with Davis directly between him and the glove, might have made this moot--but whatever is wrong with the initial tag seems to me to be more Mujica's fault than WMB's.
 
This is my pet peeve and something Butterfield has to work with our infielders on.  Apply the tag, keep it on the baserunner. Sometimes the runners momentum pops them off the bag OR the fielders applied tag can slightly nudge an off-balance baserunner from the bag. It happened twice yesterday with WMB and Pedroia.
 
Instant replay, as Joe Maddon has pointed out, is changing a few things in the game. The 'swipe tag' being called an out simply because the ball beat the runner to the base is going to be challenged if the tag isn't applied.
 
Also Pedroia made a smart play in the 8th inning of game 3. Xander made a nice play on a grounder to the hole throwing to Pedroia for a force out at 2nd. Jones went in hard to 2nd and it was a close force play. After Jones barreled over 2nd, Petey immediately applied a tag on Jones just in case if Jones beat the force.
 

edoug

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
2,259
Middlebrooks thought he did get him. He held up the glove to show he had the control of the ball.
 

findguapo

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 7, 2006
782
DrewDawg said:
I have a hard time faulting JF for this. The Sox put a system in place, that system said a challenge would not have worked, so they didn't challenge.
 
If there's an issue it's whoever made the call on whether or not to challenge needs to be a bit more liberal at that point.
 
All that matters is the system did not work. They needed to review that play, and they didn't. At the very least, Farrell could have gone out there, talked to the umpire with an eye on whoever sends the signal from the dugout, and asked the umpire to review on his own. If the Sox have some strategy in place where that is not a procedure they follow, then they need to fix it.
 

Lose Remerswaal

Leaves after the 8th inning
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
edoug said:
Middlebrooks thought he did get him. He held up the glove to show he had the control of the ball.
 
Players have been doing that for years, all the way back to Little League.  It's partially to show they have the ball, but mostly to try to show that "I know I got the out, now you call it that way Mr. Ump"
 

benhogan

Baynes Hogan (pending trade)
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
7,230
Santa Monica
edoug said:
Middlebrooks thought he did get him. He held up the glove to show he had the control of the ball.
The ball is in the glove. If it pops out then he doesn't have control, if it stays in the glove it is under control. He doesn't need to show it to the Ump