RSS
Home
Good call!
Print
Email
RSS
Subscribe
There had to be some controversy. All the talk shows needed something extra to talk about other than the Red Sox going back to the ALCS to take on the "worst-to-first" Tampa Bay Rays.
The "controversy" occurred in the ninth inning of last night's 2-2 ball game. Angels Manager Mike Scioscia called for a suicide squeeze with outfielder Reggie Willits on third and shortstop Erick Aybar at the plate. After Aybar whiffed on the third pitch, Varitek went charging down the third base line to tag out Willits. Varitek dove and made a tremendous tag in time to get Willits. However, upon falling to the dirt Varitek fumbled the ball. The key here is that Varitek made the tag and after completing the out, he dropped the ball.
In the aftermath of the series loss, questions about this play and comparisons to other situations have run rampant. Immediately following the loss, Scoscia, the former major league catcher, compared this to a play at the plate. This cannot be compared to a play at plate, however. When a runner crashes into a catcher and the catcher drops the ball, the catcher did not have possession of the ball when the tag was made. In the play last night, Varitek had the ball in his glove, made the tag, then fell after the fact and dropped the ball. The tag was already made.
Scoscia went on to say, "Any time a guy makes a tag and the ball pops out, he doesn't have possession of that ball. I don't care if he hit the ground or what happened." Scoscia is actually wrong here as well. Think of a double play ball: the shortstop flips it to the second baseman, who catches the ball with his foot on the bag, and loses control of the ball when taking it out of his glove to throw on to first base. One-hundred percent of the time the runner at second is called out.
As far as when Scoscia says, "any time the ball pops out," he is being too broad. An outfielder diving for a fly ball and dropping it is a completely different play than the play last night. The outfielder never had possession of the ball. Varitek, however, had possession of the ball the entire play while running down the line and making the tag. The loss of possession came after the tag was made. Scoscia is being ignorant by saying that all dropped balls are called the same.
On ESPN Radio's "Mike and Mike," the fatter of the two, Mike Golic, compares this play with a NFL wide receiver catching a ball on the sideline with both feet in bounds. Obviously Golic has to bring up something he knows about, the NFL, but this is two different sports with two completely different set of rules. Without wasting time talking about all the different scenerios in the NFL of what's a catch, an incompletion, and a fumble. He may just want to stick to commenting on the gridiron. Golic and "Greenie" go on to interview Dave Campbell to get his take on the play. Campbell makes a few corny old-man jokes and then compares this play to a play at the plate. Just like Scoscia, Soup (Campbell's nickname) is not making a fair comparison. Plays at the plate have a different set of rules then plays at other bases. For instance, a first baseman cannot block a player running to first, yet a catcher can block the plate. Therefore a play at any other base in any other circumstance has to be treated differently then a play at home plate.
A few analysts have said that they went searching through the MLB official rule book after this game trying to find out what the rules state for a situation like this. I didn't waste my time researching, because quite frankly, I'd rather let others do the work. None of them could find a clear-cut answer. Unfortunately this type of play doesn't happen all that often, so maybe the crew should have talked it over a bit more. That is the only argument Soup, Golic, Greenie, or Scoscia has here.
As much luck and success as Boston teams have had this millenium, we have lived through an ambundance of sketchy calls. Not that we are owed anything, but when we put up a fuss about a call it usually is brushed to the side. When Chuck Knoblauch made that ghost tag on Jose Offerman in the 1999 ALCS, Sox fans deemed it the "worst call ever!" The media claimed the Red Sox had many other opportunities to win. Well, the same can be said for the Angels. After all, look at how many mistakes they made during this series. Vlad Guerrero, who is completely painful to watch run, ran through a stop sign in Game 1, which killed any hope of the Angels putting a run up on the board that inning. Then there was Torrii Hunter and Howie Kendrick letting a routine fly drop between them allowing three runs to score. And everyone on the Angels, except for Hunter, hitting 3-27 with runners in scoring position. Or how about their best bunter not being able to lay down on a bunt in the first place? That should be the focus here!
Bottom line -- the Angels were outplayed in this series. The Red Sox pitched better, fielded better, hit in the clutch, and had the bottom of the order contribute. The Red Sox deserved to win and don't deserve this one play to tarnish their accomplishment.
Related Articles:
Comments
