Reds (Abbott) vs Brewers (Drohan): 7/1/26, 7:10pm

[HarryDoyle]

Suck it, New York.

[edfunderburk]

Nice win … but I’m still chapped by the NY confirmation of a bad call early in the game

[TURBO]

7 minutes ago, yourout said:

Good stuff from McGill. On the black.

Who?

You mean Megill, right?

:)

[adambr2]

4 minutes ago, edfunderburk said:

Nice win … but I’m still chapped by the NY confirmation of a ball call early in the game

It sucks and they owe us a better explanation than what we got. But the most important thing is that it did not change the outcome of a game.

[willie key]

Let’s go.    Uribe moving to the 8th and megill to closer was smart.    I don’t line uribe as a closer yet

[Jim French Stepstool]

7 minutes ago, adambr2 said:

It sucks and they owe us a better explanation than what we got. But the most important thing is that it did not change the outcome of a game.

It had to be the whole 'did his foot touch the plate' deal, with the review guys needing 100% confirmation that he DID, since they aren't overturning it w/o that proof. So the real culprit IMO was the HP ump making that call to begin with. I'm sure Mitchell was safe, since he couldn't do anything wrong all night.

 

[yourout]

Libman day tomorrow. Time to get out the brooms.

 

[duewizard]

lmao Ashby 12 wins

[Jim French Stepstool]

The chasing........really good in the first few innings despite the runners left on base, then got kinda ugly again. That idea of passing the baton & trusting one another is intermittent recently. When they grind this team scores more than enough runs. Of course if people got on ahead of Mitchell tonite who knows how many they put up. That oppo stroke he had going was sheer beauty.

All things considered, there's a chance for the BP to be in really nice shape. If you get length from Misiorowski tomorrow, in essence it's kinda a semi-day off for much of the pen since you have over 24 HRs before Friday night in Phoenix. About one-third through the busy stretch. So far so good.

[Jim French Stepstool]

6 minutes ago, duewizard said:

lmao Ashby 12 wins

As soon as the game ended, Vaughn held up one finger on one hand & two on the other in the dugout, right in front of Ashbys' face, signaling "12". He must be getting a lot of good-natured heat from his 'mates, which I love.

 

[Opening Day]

28 minutes ago, TURBO said:

Who?

You mean Megill, right?

:)

Don't worry. He's playing the long game.  Eventually, the Mandela effect will take hold, and "McGill" will be accepted as the correct spelling.

[markedman5]

 

[UsainJolt]

50 minutes ago, Jim French Stepstool said:

If you get length from Misiorowski tomorrow, in essence it's kinda a semi-day off for much of the pen since you have over 24 HRs before Friday night in Phoenix.

On the other hand, our batters are going to be exhausted from the conga line of hits if we hit 24 home runs tomorrow.

[Jim French Stepstool]

2 minutes ago, UsainJolt said:

On the other hand, our batters are going to be exhausted from the conga line of hits if we hit 24 home runs tomorrow.

I guess "hours" should be small-case, huh? 

[BruisedCrew]

One thing I wonder about the review of that play at the plate is whether the umpire who made the original call ever weighs in on whether Mitchell touched the plate. He would be in a better position to see that than cameras taking pictures from above  

if the umpire ruled that Mitchell was tagged before he reached the plate, but the replay shows clearly (as it seemed to) that he was at least over the plate before being tagged, then why should there have to be indisputable evidence that he actually touched the plate if the umpire thinks that he did.

Maybe when a play like that is reviewed the umpire should tell the review center what he saw and why he made the call that he did. Proponents of replays weren’t concerned about whether a runner came off the base by a millimeter for a millisecond. But that’s where we are. 

[SeaBass]

1 hour ago, BruisedCrew said:

One thing I wonder about the review of that play at the plate is whether the umpire who made the original call ever weighs in on whether Mitchell touched the plate. He would be in a better position to see that than cameras taking pictures from above  

if the umpire ruled that Mitchell was tagged before he reached the plate, but the replay shows clearly (as it seemed to) that he was at least over the plate before being tagged, then why should there have to be indisputable evidence that he actually touched the plate if the umpire thinks that he did.

Maybe when a play like that is reviewed the umpire should tell the review center what he saw and why he made the call that he did. Proponents of replays weren’t concerned about whether a runner came off the base by a millimeter for a millisecond. But that’s where we are. 

I suppose it comes down to, if we trust what the umpire saw then why is there a replay review?

Don't get me wrong though, I had the same thought at the time lol

[Jopal78]

1 hour ago, SeaBass said:

I suppose it comes down to, if we trust what the umpire saw then why is there a replay review?

Don't get me wrong though, I had the same thought at the time lol

The Posey rule is stupid to begin with, and was yet another knee jerk reaction from MLB because a star got hurt in national television.
 

If the catcher is going to block the plate fine, but the runner should be able to push them out of the way to score. Sliding into a shin guard at full speed is also a good way to get hurt.  Besides, now the game is subject to interpretation when the ball got to the catcher, when the catcher blocked the plate, etc. 

[Turning2]

15 hours ago, markedman5 said:

 

Swap Contreras and Sanches in those roles, and that is probably their most competitive starting lineup currently that they can field (not counting pitching). It runs out the most balanced offense and defense in my opinion. One could quibble about Ortiz or Hammy at 3B. Frelick's bat is heating up, but I still like at least starting the game with both Vaughn and Bauers. 

[Outlander]

Obviously great game from Mitchell, so many people have doubted him even saying he would be non tendered. Good on the Brewers sticking with him and ignoring all the noise.

[BruisedCrew]

3 hours ago, SeaBass said:

I suppose it comes down to, if we trust what the umpire saw then why is there a replay review?

Don't get me wrong though, I had the same thought at the time lol

But it would affect the “burden of proof”. 

If the umpire thought he touched the plate there would have to be clear evidence that he didn’t, instead of the other way around.

 

 

[Jim French Stepstool]

2 hours ago, Jopal78 said:

 yet another knee jerk reaction from MLB because a star got hurt in national television.
 

 

That's what's always bothered me. Would there have ever been a rule adopted if, say, Johah Heim or Erik Kratz was run over & injured?

[SeaBass]

43 minutes ago, BruisedCrew said:

But it would affect the “burden of proof”. 

If the umpire thought he touched the plate there would have to be clear evidence that he didn’t, instead of the other way around.

 

 

I 100% understand what you're saying but the review was not challenging whether Mitchell touched the plate, it was to overturn an out call.

Objectively, the umpire could tell the NY crew that is reviewing the play that he saw Mitchell touch the plate but in reality umpires have gotten that wrong too (see CB Bucknor's call on Jake Bauers not touching first base).

Yes they review all aspects of the play but I believe at that point it doesn't matter anymore what the umpire saw, only the original call on the field matters which way a non-definitive replay review defaults to.

[Dragonbait]

Didn't Prince Fielder end someone's career by plowing him over?

[BruisedCrew]

1 hour ago, SeaBass said:

I 100% understand what you're saying but the review was not challenging whether Mitchell touched the plate, it was to overturn an out call.

Objectively, the umpire could tell the NY crew that is reviewing the play that he saw Mitchell touch the plate but in reality umpires have gotten that wrong too (see CB Bucknor's call on Jake Bauers not touching first base).

Yes they review all aspects of the play but I believe at that point it doesn't matter anymore what the umpire saw, only the original call on the field matters which way a non-definitive replay review defaults to.

This is where you get into some of the flaws of the system and it results in things that weren’t intended.

Like when a runner steals a base and is in safely, but while “holding the tag” the fielder forcibly moves the runner off the base by a fraction of an inch for a fraction of a a second. The runner is called safe and the opponent challenges. If they are going to review “all aspects of the play” they should look at whether the fielder pushed the runner off the base, not just whether the runner lost contact with the base. But that aspect of the play is apparently not reviewable.