Unusual plays

Al Zarilla

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 8, 2005
50,832
San Andreas Fault
A's protested last night's game over this obstruction call in the ninth inning when everybody's favorite pest Erick Aybar got himself to first base. Did he go onto the grass to get the call on an otherwise easy out? There was base path available to him if he kept running straight down the line. A's about accused him of deviousness after the game. Angels didn't score in that inning, winning it in the tenth, but if the protest is allowed, it would go back to the ninth inning.  At 20 seconds http://espn.go.com/video/clip?categoryId=2521705&id=11429490
 

jimc

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 28, 2006
527
Toronto
Al Zarilla said:
A's protested last night's game over this obstruction call in the ninth inning when everybody's favorite pest Erick Aybar got himself to first base. Did he go onto the grass to get the call on an otherwise easy out? There was base path available to him if he kept running straight down the line. A's about accused him of deviousness after the game. Angels didn't score in that inning, winning it in the tenth, but if the protest is allowed, it would go back to the ninth inning.  At 20 seconds http://espn.go.com/video/clip?categoryId=2521705&id=11429490
Yeah, I saw this one last night and still debating it with myself this morning. The big sticking point for me is that according to the CSNBA announcers the call was interference on Otero, but that seems odd. Otero fields the ball, is in fair territory, and tags the runner, so I don't get how that can be interference. If the call is interference on the first baseman, who is half in the basepath after going over to try to make the play, then I kinda sorta get the call. You could then argue that Aybar was obstructed in the basepath by the 1B which led to the collision with Otero... in any case I think the (morally) right call would be Aybar out, even if the "correct" call is interference.
 

Al Zarilla

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 8, 2005
50,832
San Andreas Fault
jimc said:
Yeah, I saw this one last night and still debating it with myself this morning. The big sticking point for me is that according to the CSNBA announcers the call was interference on Otero, but that seems odd. Otero fields the ball, is in fair territory, and tags the runner, so I don't get how that can be interference. If the call is interference on the first baseman, who is half in the basepath after going over to try to make the play, then I kinda sorta get the call. You could then argue that Aybar was obstructed in the basepath by the 1B which led to the collision with Otero... in any case I think the (morally) right call would be Aybar out, even if the "correct" call is interference.
One other thing in Aybar's favor may be that it happened so quickly that he may be forgiven for veering left into Otero because Otero and Moss were side by side and he had to go somewhere. Turned out to be the right way for him and the Angels though. 
 

snowmanny

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Dec 8, 2005
10,430
I can't see how that is fielder's interference. Neither the pitcher or the first baseman are ever in the running lane. The batter is out of his lane and runs into the fielder. If the batter is hit by a thrown ball in that exact spot he is out.

Edit: the runner was never denied a straight path to first base.
 

vadertime

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2006
1,259
Rhode Island
Not so much an unusual play, but unusual event.  Giants Andrew Susac gets 'first' hit on . September 1 but will count as May 22, for a game he wasn't even on the original roster for.
 
 
The Giants resumed Monday a suspended game against the Colorado Rockies from May 22 that was delayed three months and 10 days because of rain. Susac, who spells Buster Posey behind the plate these days, was still in Triple-A when the game began. But when he was inserted into the lineup for Monday's continuation, Susac was *technically* making his MLB debut.
The game goes down in the books for May 22, so even though this was Susac's 18th game with the Giants, it was *technically* his first.
 
 
 
http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/mlb-big-league-stew/the-curious-case-of-giants-rookie-andrew-susac-s--first--mlb-hit-074311960.html
 

Zedia

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 17, 2005
3,697
Pasadena, CA
The announcer said "2-2 pitch..." as the 1-2 pitch was being delivered. Maybe it was wrong on the scoreboard? Wouldn't explain how the ump lost track, though.
 

Rice4HOF

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 21, 2002
1,726
Calgary, Canada
Zedia said:
The announcer said "2-2 pitch..." as the 1-2 pitch was being delivered. Maybe it was wrong on the scoreboard? Wouldn't explain how the ump lost track, though.
Seen this several times at amateur levels. Count is 1-2... Umpire puts up 2 fingers on each hand and says 2-2... Scoreboard operator (and every single other person in the ballpark) thinks they've missed a pitch and updates the scoreboard. Now everyone is (incorrectly) in sync.
 

BlackJack

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 11, 2007
1,505
Infield Infidel said:
College game, batter scores on a fielder's choice
Taking 3rd was a pretty good heads up play. Going home was overconfidence and he would have been out by a mile if the catcher had held onto the ball.
 

CarolinaBeerGuy

Don't know him from Adam
SoSH Member
Mar 14, 2006
5,033
Kernersville, NC
BlackJack said:
Taking 3rd was a pretty good heads up play. Going home was overconfidence and he would have been out by a mile if the catcher had held onto the ball.
After watching it several times, I don't think the catcher ever had the ball. I think the throw hit the runner. I'm giving the kid credit for thinking that, at worst, it would be a footrace against the catcher and end up as a bang bang play. With 2 outs in the 6th, it's worth the risk and it paid off.
 
EDIT: Grammar.
 

BlackJack

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 11, 2007
1,505
Watching it a few more times, I agree it looks like the throw hit him. But you've got a point about the 2 outs. Still a bit risky for my tastes but it probably falls more into the 'aggressive' category than 'greedy' given the situation.
 

grimshaw

the new rudy
SoSH Member
May 16, 2007
3,365
Portland
Andrelton Simmons just threw his glove at a ball and made contact with it.  Pittsburgh wanted to challenge but didn't have one.  Should have been an automatic triple.
 

Tangled Up In Red

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Nov 8, 2004
2,710
Bernal
grimshaw said:
Andrelton Simmons just threw his glove at a ball and made contact with it.  Pittsburgh wanted to challenge but didn't have one.  Should have been an automatic triple.
Is that a rule?
 

Rice4HOF

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 21, 2002
1,726
Calgary, Canada
Tangled Up In Red said:
Outstanding.
Three bases pretty rare. And ball still in play?
Absolutely. 3 bases for detached equipment making contact with a batted ball and batter can try to stretch it to home at his own risk. Have yet to see this in any game I've umpired.
 

Rice4HOF

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 21, 2002
1,726
Calgary, Canada
Soxfan in Fla said:
He's referring to the 27 K kind of no hitters.
Pfft... I've seen innings where the pitcher strikes out the side, and the 1st baseman STILL gets a putout (K2-3 on a dropped third strike).
 

santadevil

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
4,106
Saskatchestan

flymrfreakjar

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 30, 2006
2,704
Brooklyn
santadevil said:
Seth Maness gets the boot last night after Addison Russell hits a ball down the right field line that started foul, but went fair.
 
Must have been some weird spin. This was a decent hit that went down past the bullpen in right field.
http://m.mlb.com/video/v238347083/stlchc-russell-singles-to-tie-the-game-in-the-7th/?game_pk=414915
 
Shorter video:
http://m.mlb.com/video/v238418083/stlchc-maness-ejected-following-disputed-call/?game_pk=414915
Definitely showing my ignorance here, but a batted ball can make contact in foul ground first and still be considered a fair ball if it ends up in fair territory? This must only hold true in the infield then? I'm confused.
 

LogansDad

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
17,503
Alamogordo
Yes, if it hits foul before the bag and spins back into play, again, before the bag and without being touched, it is a fair ball.
 

santadevil

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
4,106
Saskatchestan
Definitely correct, but I've never seen a ball hit that hard get back into fair territory like that before. Normally it's a bunt, or a squibber that it happens to.
 

Lose Remerswaal

Leaves after the 8th inning
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
flymrfreakjar said:
Definitely showing my ignorance here, but a batted ball can make contact in foul ground first and still be considered a fair ball if it ends up in fair territory? This must only hold true in the infield then? I'm confused.
 
Happens all the time, especially with bunts.  This is why you'll see a fielder wait for it to get across the foul line and then dive in to grab it before it has a chance to roll back in to fair ground.  Can be because the ground around the foul line is sloped a bit (no MLB rule against that), or if it hits the edge of the grass it might roll back towards fair territory.
 

Homar

lurker
Aug 9, 2010
84
santadevil said:
Definitely correct, but I've never seen a ball hit that hard get back into fair territory like that before. Normally it's a bunt, or a squibber that it happens to.
Saw this happen just last week at Sea Dogs Game in Portland.  A pitch was chopped into foul territory down the first baseline, hit six or eight feet foul.  Batter stopped running, and it bounced back into fair territory spinning like crazy.  Easy out at first.