There was a game where Beckett was pitching against the Twins (search Varitek/Francona ejected) and you can hear Beckett swearing on the broadcast. It's absolutely worth the view.
I kept looking for a verbal missile attack and all I heard was him pointing out to the umpire how bad his calls were and the Ump wanting to escalate to DEFCON 2.
Looks low because the catcher did a shit job receiving. That was NOT good framing. Absolutely terrible. But it's one pitch, so don't expect catchers to be perfect receiving pitches that miss their spot by so much. To catch that pitch correctly is extremely hard... but just so we all know, it was NOT caught well to keep it a strike!
The frame job was horrible. Now, the frame job should mean nothing towards whether or not it's a strike, but nonetheless, I see why the ump called that a ball for sure
He actually missed his spot. Catcher gave him one finger (a fastball) and pointed outside. Verlander missed middle as the catcher was set up outside. The catcher still did a good job sticking the ball though
as an umpire myself, I do not understand the framing, if I see that glove move (which would be a peripheral thing because you don't use the glove to determine balls and strokes) it suggest to me that the catcher thinks it's a ball. Also I don't understand why catchers think umpires are stupid and would be fooled by such an obvious ploy
Brynden Rivers Well the catcher was set up outside, and Verlander missed his spot. The positioning of the catcher and how he caught the pitch can indicate that it was a ball. Nonetheless, it was a strike, but it looked like a ball.
Brynden Rivers , Framing means catching the pitch and holding the glove still. Dragging the pitch into the zone is not framing. But I completely understand what you are saying. Actually watching the pitch all the way to the catcher's glove is important because it gives you a better idea of where the ball was when it crossed the plate.
Yes it was definitely a strike. However, when the catcher must reach across his entire body to catch the pitch, it will 98% of the time result in being called a ball. At least it wasn't in a huge game or anything.
K Zone thought it was a ball. Could have been called either way though so I don't blame Verlander for getting mad. But you're right, missing his spot didn't help
kzone doesn't mean strike to me it was low kzone are mad for television by the station there not same on all stations there all different strike zone is 3-d zone
john johnson. The graphic on the right says that's impossible. Every pitch in the at bat gets mapped there. Catcher sets up outside, pitch misses target. Especially on a fastball, that's the recipe for the glove getting late to the target and comtinuing to move (downward, in this case) after catch. It ends up with an awful presentation of that pitch. In the days before the K zone graphic, viewers wouldn't have thought twice about that pitch ending up being called a ball.
Amazing that Verlander didn't get the ol' heave-ho. The call could have gone either way, but it's nice to see restraint from an umpire. They seem all too quick to pull the trigger these days when someone disagrees with them.
The pitch could have gone either way. The box showed that half the ball got the black of the plate and the other missed. No human being has eye site that perfect that they can distinguish that close a pitch on a consistent bases. I do have one question though. Does the rule book say that it is a strike if any part of the ball passes over the black of the plate or does the entire ball have to go over.
What exactly did he expect??? It's a borderline strike that didn't come close to hitting his spot. The catcher had to reach back for the ball. A strike that is barely in the zone but makes the catcher reach, is almost never getting called a strike.
It was more about previous pitches than that one. There were other strikes that the ump didn't call. I think the frustration just built up at that moment
Who gives a shit whether the catcher has to reach or if it's where it was intended? A strike should be a strike regardless, though I do agree that the pitch in particular was a bit low.
@@fromulus You think that you are going to get a borderline call, when the catcher has to reach all the way across the plate. In what delusional world do you live in
He didn't get the call because it was at the very bottom of the strike zone and the catcher dove at it making it appear further down. That one is on the catcher.
Not only did the catcher have to reach for the pitch, but the catcher framed the pitch below the strike zone for some reason. So yeah I would have called that a ball.
westmichile88 no ones going to call that a strike if you have to reach for it no umps going to call it hell a pitch down the middle was called a ball because the catcher had to reach back and missed the ball
It's where the pitch is when it cross the plate, not where the catcher receives it. A catcher will catch a good slider or breaking ball several inches bellow where it was when it was over the plate. That said, it was a boarder line pitch.
The imaginary CGI image had it as a strike, but it didn't look like a strike when actually watching the pitch itself. The computer generated pitch location is highly suspect, and even if it were accurate it would still have been extremely borderline. Combine that with the fact that he completely missed his intended pitch location and made his catcher dive back across the plate to catch it and there is a zero percent chance that's called a strike.
Rowgue51 What we see via the camera is subject to parallax, poor depth perception due to the use of a zoom lense, etc. Pitch trackers usually use multiple cameras / sensors from different angles to determine the ball's position and are generally going to be more reliable.
Arguing balls and strikes with an ump, especially at the MLB level is a huge no-no and a quick run to the showers. These umps are at the top of their craft and paid the same minor league dues as any player out there . Vetlander knows that over time it all evens out. If he ever gets a pitch called a strike that he thought was a ball, I doubt he'll say "thanks ump" out loud.
4th inning of a 1-0 game, who knows how many other close pitches led to Verlander's frustration here, chances are this wasn't the first pitch he wanted the strike call and didn't get it.
If you look at the box in the video, it's a strike but it was right on the bottom line. Not a terrible call by any means, but a pitcher ALWAYS wants the close ones. Umping in the Major Leagues ain't easy. Pitchers are throwing nasty shit and every call is scrutinized by thousands of people due to the centerfield camera.
As a Stros fan, I have watched every pitch JV has thrown...he has never once argued the strike zone. I am guessing that there had to be other bad calls in this outing!?
K J. yes, was just speaking about how he has conducted himself since coming from Detroit. Just seems out of character from what I have seen him like during his time in Houston, so I'm guessing there were other circumstances that merited this reaction in his mind...That is all
Everything about that was a ball. It was a ball by location, it was far from where the catcher set up, and the catcher had to reach and dip to catch it. So it was a ball to start, and made to look like even more of a ball due to the follow-up aesthetics.
You need new eyes friend, that came right across the tops of his knees and dropped off. Who cares where the catcher sets up, has nothing to do where the ball ends up.
Meh, borderline pitch that totally missed the catcher's glove. Yeah, it was a strike by the computer, but that's a very low percentage called strike. If he'd have been on target he might get the call, but not when the catcher's gotta stab at it.
You're missing the point. The only reason you or anyone else even remotely thinks that pitch is a strike is because of the computer grid. None of the players or the umpires see that grid in real-time. I guarantee you the ONLY person on the field actually playing the game who thought it was a strike was the pitcher. The announcers say "that looked like a strike" because the grid was there and they could see it. Take away that grid and they would not have said that. You're talking about a pitch that was just barely in the zone, that missed the glove, cross body catch low at the knees. That's not going to get called a strike by anyone. And what's more, without the grid nobody thinks its a strike.
michael mack no. Evem if you take out that computer grid most of people would think that is a strike. Look at Verlander's reaction. Can he check the grid? no. But he can definately tell his pitch was located in the zone. Strikes are still strikes even if hr misses catchers spot. The strike grid should be on the backscreen for umpires accurate judgment.
Dude you've never called a ball game in your life if you think that pitch would have been called a strike. No way. There's no way anyone other than Verlander thought that was a strike. No way you get a call when a catcher's gotta scoop the pitch up completely across his body. Sorry may, you gotta learn the game better if you think that pitch gets called a strike at MLB. If they want that pitch called, then go to a computerized zone. That isn't gonna be called a strike in Little League, let alone MLB.
michael mack Dude. Ive been watching and playing baseball for more than 10 years. Calling a pitch ball just because the catcher caught the ball across his body should not be an excuse for a bad call. I probably know baseball better than you. At least I know that the rule book does not say 'the strike zone changes depends on where catcher catches the pitch'. dumbass.
Does anyone else hate that cgi strike zone that is always in view now? Part of the game of baseball is each homeplate ump has a different strike zone(within reason). That's a wrinkle of baseball that makes it unique.
Catcher's glove is below pablos knees. Seems like a low pitch to me. Could see why verlander couldve gotten frustrated though. If I'm pitching in a one run game with a man on second, not getting a call that close might irk me too. Ump made a good call though
I'm an Umpire. Ump probably thought the pitch was inside due to how far the catcher had to move. You missed your spot badly. Your not gonna get that call. Ever
I know the purists are going to hate my comment but here goes: just make the computer call the strikes and balls, we have the technology now to accurately and objectively define what the strike zone is and have it called consistently day in and day out.
HaloToday Sports is one of the few things in this society that isn’t dominated by technology. Let’s keep it that way. I would go as far as to say the headpieces in the NFL is a little much.
Verlander got a ring throwing pitches at the ankles for strikes from overly friendly umps vs Yankees in 2017. If you can get the ump to give you a ridiculous call on a pitch at Aaron Judge's shoetops you force him to swing at garbage in the dirt all game long and negate a huge weapon without ever putting the ball in the real strike zone. Keuchel learned that too. Now they don't give him extra help and he doesn't handle it well. Not only did the Astros cheat to win, the umps were also helping them big time. I look at all the proof of the cheating and I'm disgusted. I look at the umps and it's almost as bad. MLB better get it's sh1t together soon - they're bleeding fans at an alarming rate. I watched the James Earl Jones speech near the end of "Field Of Dreams" and realize (and this is especially true of the Atlanta fans and the All Star game ) that none of his speech is true anymore. Baseball isn't nearly what it was. Cheating, lousy umps with big egos, and disgusting political activism by the Commissioner's office have killed the purity of the sport and the fans - the only VITAL group - have left the bleachers and are headed for the exits. Only they aren't coming back this time.
Umpires are never going to call that a strike at the professional level. The catcher had to catch the ball below the knees. Watch it again. Either it was a strike and the catcher f'd up or it wasn't a strike because the catcher had to catch the ball below the strike zone and pull it up to make it look like a strike. It's called framing a pitch. Catchers know this and so should pitchers at least at the professional level.
They have the technology - why are Umpires even required to make the calls on whether a strike or ball anymore? Just leaves it open for human error - Should be Hawkeye technology and a big ass screen making the calls - Umpire still there to rule on everything else, but this is a joke and just ruins things.
Actually looked real low to me, then again it’s where it crosses the plate, so borderline. But I’m here after the Bumgarner incident, Bellino is a power tripping fool
MLB, please take the umpires out of the ball/strike calls. The technology exists to have a consistent strike zone. Biggest variable with largest impact on the game.
a good catcher who knows how to catch would make that pitch look better. its a borderline call even though the K zone had it on the line.....but the catcher made it look lower from how he caught it.
I think certain umps are so egotistical that they'd rather call close pitches balls just to show pitchers who's the boss. This was definitely a strike. Heck, if it's 2 inches lower it's still close enough to swing at.
I would pay a lot of money to have players mic'd up so we could hear stuff like this all the time on live broadcasts.
Language would be a problem. That would be cool though.
they would have to put the game on a delay and you would get lots of beep beep beep, or just a silence depending on how they edit it.
There was a game where Beckett was pitching against the Twins (search Varitek/Francona ejected) and you can hear Beckett swearing on the broadcast. It's absolutely worth the view.
Grunkle Stan Maybe they could have a separate broadcast and rate it M
Grunkle Stan only a cheap bastard would say that
"Oh my god let's fucking go, gosh damn it!"- Justin Verlander
I think he said "goshdamnit" ._.
lol! that makes it 10x better actually
FaceInTheWindow "Aw, shucks! Well, shoot! Oh, fiddlesticks! Oh my stars and garters! I declare!"
I like how on the TV broadcast they replayed the sound with the swears lol
Verlander said, "screw it, I'm going to accept a trade to the Astros and win the world series."
wrong year larper
@@jsXanatos but I made the comment in 2017
As a lifelong Astros fan, it feels so good for them to be WS champions!
@@bullymaguire4234 Considering they cheated by stealing signs that year.
@@kevinmiller1985 noOooOOOoo! You dont say?!
WS champs baby!
this is something verlander should be use to, especially against the sox. he had the smallest strike zone in the ALCS against them a few years ago.
Sore loser
RedSoxNation92 incredible comeback. Thank you for the highly educated response.
Jared McHugh 😉
He probably got sick of it.
They still do :(
"We heard a lot" 🤣 yeah thats an understatement
Gotta respect the catcher getting up and distracting the umpire to protect his pitcher
It’s part of a catchers job
Wow, he really went ballistic. Yelled words.
I kept looking for a verbal missile attack and all I heard was him pointing out to the umpire how bad his calls were and the Ump wanting to escalate to DEFCON 2.
Strike or not, when you miss a spot by that much and your catcher stabs at it across the plate you're not gonna get that call most of the time.
Here after the bumgarner hand check
Looks low to me. Catcher framed it well but definitely below batter knee
Looks low because the catcher did a shit job receiving. That was NOT good framing. Absolutely terrible. But it's one pitch, so don't expect catchers to be perfect receiving pitches that miss their spot by so much. To catch that pitch correctly is extremely hard... but just so we all know, it was NOT caught well to keep it a strike!
Framed well? He didn’t move his glove up in any way whatsoever. He caught it moving his arm downward.
"No more, don't say anything else."
"I think we heard quite a bit."
The frame job was horrible. Now, the frame job should mean nothing towards whether or not it's a strike, but nonetheless, I see why the ump called that a ball for sure
sometimes we do enjoy frame and i don't want catcher moving that frame if they moving it.. they know inside there mind its a ball
He actually missed his spot. Catcher gave him one finger (a fastball) and pointed outside. Verlander missed middle as the catcher was set up outside. The catcher still did a good job sticking the ball though
as an umpire myself, I do not understand the framing, if I see that glove move (which would be a peripheral thing because you don't use the glove to determine balls and strokes) it suggest to me that the catcher thinks it's a ball. Also I don't understand why catchers think umpires are stupid and would be fooled by such an obvious ploy
Brynden Rivers Well the catcher was set up outside, and Verlander missed his spot. The positioning of the catcher and how he caught the pitch can indicate that it was a ball. Nonetheless, it was a strike, but it looked like a ball.
Brynden Rivers
, Framing means catching the pitch and holding the glove still. Dragging the pitch into the zone is not framing. But I completely understand what you are saying.
Actually watching the pitch all the way to the catcher's glove is important because it gives you a better idea of where the ball was when it crossed the plate.
Yes it was definitely a strike. However, when the catcher must reach across his entire body to catch the pitch, it will 98% of the time result in being called a ball. At least it wasn't in a huge game or anything.
K Zone thought it was a ball. Could have been called either way though so I don't blame Verlander for getting mad. But you're right, missing his spot didn't help
kzone doesn't mean strike to me it was low kzone are mad for television by the station there not same on all stations there all different strike zone is 3-d zone
MakeralHD the pitch right before it was probably in same exact spot
john johnson. The graphic on the right says that's impossible. Every pitch in the at bat gets mapped there.
Catcher sets up outside, pitch misses target. Especially on a fastball, that's the recipe for the glove getting late to the target and comtinuing to move (downward, in this case) after catch. It ends up with an awful presentation of that pitch. In the days before the K zone graphic, viewers wouldn't have thought twice about that pitch ending up being called a ball.
If you are a good umpire then it doesn’t matter where the catcher catches it it is we’re it crosses the plate
"Oh my god, let's fucking go. God damnit".
Red Sox announcers thought that pitch was a strike. I was amazed by them not being biased.
Amazing that Verlander didn't get the ol' heave-ho. The call could have gone either way, but it's nice to see restraint from an umpire. They seem all too quick to pull the trigger these days when someone disagrees with them.
Especially Bellino, who often overreacts
The pitch could have gone either way. The box showed that half the ball got the black of the plate and the other missed. No human being has eye site that perfect that they can distinguish that close a pitch on a consistent bases. I do have one question though. Does the rule book say that it is a strike if any part of the ball passes over the black of the plate or does the entire ball have to go over.
What exactly did he expect??? It's a borderline strike that didn't come close to hitting his spot. The catcher had to reach back for the ball. A strike that is barely in the zone but makes the catcher reach, is almost never getting called a strike.
It was more about previous pitches than that one. There were other strikes that the ump didn't call. I think the frustration just built up at that moment
Who gives a shit whether the catcher has to reach or if it's where it was intended? A strike should be a strike regardless, though I do agree that the pitch in particular was a bit low.
@@fromulus You think that you are going to get a borderline call, when the catcher has to reach all the way across the plate. In what delusional world do you live in
He didn't get the call because it was at the very bottom of the strike zone and the catcher dove at it making it appear further down. That one is on the catcher.
Pitch was in the zone, but the catcher dropped the mitt and didn't frame it well, so it probably looked like he reached way lower from the umps POV.
Not only did the catcher have to reach for the pitch, but the catcher framed the pitch below the strike zone for some reason. So yeah I would have called that a ball.
westmichile88 no ones going to call that a strike if you have to reach for it no umps going to call it hell a pitch down the middle was called a ball because the catcher had to reach back and missed the ball
From the angle of the camera that looked like a low pitch.I think it was too low to be a strike.My opinion.
petey1214 so name one umps that will ever call that a strike in this game it’s obvious you don’t watch baseball
Finally someone with knowledge of baseball.
It's where the pitch is when it cross the plate, not where the catcher receives it. A catcher will catch a good slider or breaking ball several inches bellow where it was when it was over the plate. That said, it was a boarder line pitch.
absolutely, billy bob
Crazy ballistic! Wow!
How can we get that spin rate up?
Sometimes you gotta throw a plus plus fastball down the pipe and get your catcher to "miss" the pitch.... This will reboot umpire😜😂😂
The imaginary CGI image had it as a strike, but it didn't look like a strike when actually watching the pitch itself. The computer generated pitch location is highly suspect, and even if it were accurate it would still have been extremely borderline. Combine that with the fact that he completely missed his intended pitch location and made his catcher dive back across the plate to catch it and there is a zero percent chance that's called a strike.
Rowgue51 What we see via the camera is subject to parallax, poor depth perception due to the use of a zoom lense, etc. Pitch trackers usually use multiple cameras / sensors from different angles to determine the ball's position and are generally going to be more reliable.
Verlander - Hit your target.Catcher - Frame the pitch better.
John McEnroe is a damn good pitcher.
That’s my dad Bellino!!!
OMG LETS F***ING GO! GOD DAMNIT!
Where's the ballistic part? Would be nice if it was included in the video.
@@billybob042665 "were" would refer to plural. Ballistic partS were included. In the this case I said parT. Singular. Ballistic part was included.
So... your definition and my definition of “ballistic” are very different 🙄
Lol, ... "I think we heard quite a bit".
Arguing balls and strikes with an ump, especially at the MLB level is a huge no-no and a quick run to the showers. These umps are at the top of their craft and paid the same minor league dues as any player out there . Vetlander knows that over time it all evens out. If he ever gets a pitch called a strike that he thought was a ball, I doubt he'll say "thanks ump" out loud.
why do mlb players still argue balls and strikes even though they know they'll get ejected?
Looked low to me. Came in just below the knees.
Looked low to me also. I would have tossed the pitcher.
What do you mean, "that was a strike but wrongfully called a ball."? That pitch was down low.
GOSH DAMNIT
ummm...where did he go ballistic exactly?
Pitch was low?
Bad frame by the catcher is what made the call
Ump probably had the Boston F5 moneyline.. 🤨🤔🤣🤣
the strike zone will only shrink when you bark at the ump
Hey at least he said "Goshdamnit"..........
That was a ball.
4th inning of a 1-0 game, who knows how many other close pitches led to Verlander's frustration here, chances are this wasn't the first pitch he wanted the strike call and didn't get it.
did he actually say gosh damnit
If you look at the box in the video, it's a strike but it was right on the bottom line. Not a terrible call by any means, but a pitcher ALWAYS wants the close ones. Umping in the Major Leagues ain't easy. Pitchers are throwing nasty shit and every call is scrutinized by thousands of people due to the centerfield camera.
Wow he really went ballistic.
As a Stros fan, I have watched every pitch JV has thrown...he has never once argued the strike zone. I am guessing that there had to be other bad calls in this outing!?
K J. yes, was just speaking about how he has conducted himself since coming from Detroit. Just seems out of character from what I have seen him like during his time in Houston, so I'm guessing there were other circumstances that merited this reaction in his mind...That is all
Verlander, you're not Weaver. You're better than that.
Everything about that was a ball. It was a ball by location, it was far from where the catcher set up, and the catcher had to reach and dip to catch it. So it was a ball to start, and made to look like even more of a ball due to the follow-up aesthetics.
You need new eyes friend, that came right across the tops of his knees and dropped off. Who cares where the catcher sets up, has nothing to do where the ball ends up.
Meh, borderline pitch that totally missed the catcher's glove. Yeah, it was a strike by the computer, but that's a very low percentage called strike. If he'd have been on target he might get the call, but not when the catcher's gotta stab at it.
michael mack so strike is not a strike? Seems legit...
You're missing the point. The only reason you or anyone else even remotely thinks that pitch is a strike is because of the computer grid. None of the players or the umpires see that grid in real-time. I guarantee you the ONLY person on the field actually playing the game who thought it was a strike was the pitcher. The announcers say "that looked like a strike" because the grid was there and they could see it. Take away that grid and they would not have said that. You're talking about a pitch that was just barely in the zone, that missed the glove, cross body catch low at the knees. That's not going to get called a strike by anyone. And what's more, without the grid nobody thinks its a strike.
michael mack no. Evem if you take out that computer grid most of people would think that is a strike. Look at Verlander's reaction. Can he check the grid? no. But he can definately tell his pitch was located in the zone. Strikes are still strikes even if hr misses catchers spot. The strike grid should be on the backscreen for umpires accurate judgment.
Dude you've never called a ball game in your life if you think that pitch would have been called a strike. No way. There's no way anyone other than Verlander thought that was a strike. No way you get a call when a catcher's gotta scoop the pitch up completely across his body. Sorry may, you gotta learn the game better if you think that pitch gets called a strike at MLB. If they want that pitch called, then go to a computerized zone. That isn't gonna be called a strike in Little League, let alone MLB.
michael mack Dude. Ive been watching and playing baseball for more than 10 years. Calling a pitch ball just because the catcher caught the ball across his body should not be an excuse for a bad call. I probably know baseball better than you. At least I know that the rule book does not say 'the strike zone changes depends on where catcher catches the pitch'. dumbass.
Good call by the umpire. It was well below the knees.
The way the catcher caught it probably fooled him on that one
yeah it was set up a little outside
Justin got the red sox back last season when he destroyed them in ALDS.
Ballistic
Did he really just say “gosh damnit”
Conik god damnit
He got that mad and the pitch was a ball. Like I get being mad if he misses strikes, but not when it’s a ball lmao
Does anyone else hate that cgi strike zone that is always in view now? Part of the game of baseball is each homeplate ump has a different strike zone(within reason). That's a wrinkle of baseball that makes it unique.
Catcher's glove is below pablos knees. Seems like a low pitch to me. Could see why verlander couldve gotten frustrated though. If I'm pitching in a one run game with a man on second, not getting a call that close might irk me too. Ump made a good call though
Catcher blew it by chasing the ball and carrying it low out of the strike zone. The opposite of framing it.
I'm an Umpire. Ump probably thought the pitch was inside due to how far the catcher had to move. You missed your spot badly. Your not gonna get that call. Ever
Hahahahahahahahaha, ya, you having even left mommies house yet.
you cant even remember the difference between you're or your and you expect us to believe your LARP
@@jsXanatos and what does the grammar police know about umpiring?
Bad calls never go against the Red Sox.
That's what that ump says to his wife when she goes ballistic when he finishes in :15 while having sex - "...that's it!! no more!!!..." :-)
It's a wonder Verlander didn't get tossed from the game.
Good call... that was a ball
Oh my god lets fucking go gosh damnit lol
Balls and strikes are not judgement calls. Computers, now.
That was low, and when calling balls and strikes, at least when I umpire, that low strike is the hardest to read
I know the purists are going to hate my comment but here goes: just make the computer call the strikes and balls, we have the technology now to accurately and objectively define what the strike zone is and have it called consistently day in and day out.
First time a batter gets called out on a letters high pitch or a pitch in the dirt and you'll see the fans howl that its ruining the game.
That would call for rigging accusations
HaloToday Sports is one of the few things in this society that isn’t dominated by technology. Let’s keep it that way. I would go as far as to say the headpieces in the NFL is a little much.
Yeah. . how about you don't give anymore baseball opinions bud. They've been revoked
Cristian Montoya how
He missed his spot & the pitch was low. You can't get both
A borderline pitch that close can go either way. He needs to calm down and keep going.
Ball!
I guess Justin wasn't aware that everyone paid good money to see the umpires ump and not to see him pitch. It must have been a rude awakening.
Did he say gosh damn it? Lol
One of the stupidest excuses for not calling a strike a strike - it wasn't where the catcher was expecting it.
Not sure what the argument was, it tailed down
He missed badly and the catcher reached way back to get it. Shut up and pitch.
That shit was low, JV.
Definitely called correctly by the umpire. The Ump should have tossed him.
Verlander got a ring throwing pitches at the ankles for strikes from overly friendly umps vs Yankees in 2017. If you can get the ump to give you a ridiculous call on a pitch at Aaron Judge's shoetops you force him to swing at garbage in the dirt all game long and negate a huge weapon without ever putting the ball in the real strike zone. Keuchel learned that too. Now they don't give him extra help and he doesn't handle it well. Not only did the Astros cheat to win, the umps were also helping them big time. I look at all the proof of the cheating and I'm disgusted. I look at the umps and it's almost as bad. MLB better get it's sh1t together soon - they're bleeding fans at an alarming rate. I watched the James Earl Jones speech near the end of "Field Of Dreams" and realize (and this is especially true of the Atlanta fans and the All Star game ) that none of his speech is true anymore. Baseball isn't nearly what it was. Cheating, lousy umps with big egos, and disgusting political activism by the Commissioner's office have killed the purity of the sport and the fans - the only VITAL group - have left the bleachers and are headed for the exits. Only they aren't coming back this time.
Umpires are never going to call that a strike at the professional level. The catcher had to catch the ball below the knees. Watch it again. Either it was a strike and the catcher f'd up or it wasn't a strike because the catcher had to catch the ball below the strike zone and pull it up to make it look like a strike. It's called framing a pitch. Catchers know this and so should pitchers at least at the professional level.
How was that going ballistic?
"Ballistic?"
They have the technology - why are Umpires even required to make the calls on whether a strike or ball anymore? Just leaves it open for human error - Should be Hawkeye technology and a big ass screen making the calls - Umpire still there to rule on everything else, but this is a joke and just ruins things.
Actually looked real low to me, then again it’s where it crosses the plate, so borderline. But I’m here after the Bumgarner incident, Bellino is a power tripping fool
how all baseball players/managers say, "Let's go"?
Finally, an ump without thin skin
Got to to blame the the catch on the set up. Blue was going off the catcher. Hard to to call that pitch behind the plate
MLB, please take the umpires out of the ball/strike calls. The technology exists to have a consistent strike zone. Biggest variable with largest impact on the game.
So when does he go ballistic
a good catcher who knows how to catch would make that pitch look better. its a borderline call even though the K zone had it on the line.....but the catcher made it look lower from how he caught it.
He has every right to be upset, I could have seen that was a strike if I was watching from a blimp.
Just Me It was a strike on the corner - you could've saw that from a blimp?!?!
Ya, ok. Another expert arm chair umpire. Yawn
Don't argue if you can't throw a strike in the first place
Jon Ross lmao what
So where did he go ballistic. He yelled that was it
All the more reason to automate the strike zones.
If this is ballistic then how would you describe harper yelling at an umpire?
Rob Scott Harper being Harper. In other words being an idiot
Hahaha well said my friend. I would go with "apeshit/bonkers/someone shot my dog in front of him rage"
I think certain umps are so egotistical that they'd rather call close pitches balls just to show pitchers who's the boss. This was definitely a strike. Heck, if it's 2 inches lower it's still close enough to swing at.
if only Greg Gibson was the homeplate umpire
It was low, I don't get his beef