Article about last seasons tag play

Rich Marazzi, rules expert for Baseball Digest, getting deeper into the tag play involving Jason Varitek, Reggie Willits, and Tim Welke.

5 months ago eyespy 10 comments 0 recs |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Great find

Very interesting read.

by MH252525 on Jun 7, 2009 12:31 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

not to beat a dead and decaying horse, but the problem once again is that the author (and interviewees) compare the play to once where the catcher (or other fielder) is receiving a throw and applying a tag as part of one play. In the case at bar, Varitek had the ball all along. The play really began with Varitek holding the ball, once he caught the pitch. He had it for between 4 and 5 seconds. Of course he had secure control of it, all the way up the line.

by jjackflash on Jun 7, 2009 12:42 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Having the ball before doesn't matter.

Referring to the play at home, if the ball gets there well in advance but the runner still charges the catcher, it still depends on whether the catcher MAINTAINS possession, and not whether he had possession before the contact.

The question posited, and stil unanswered, is for how long after the contact (charge, tag, etc) does the possession need to be maintained.

by matthiasstephan on Jun 7, 2009 8:39 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Interesting

but ultimately just more salt in the wound.

by rspencer on Jun 7, 2009 2:09 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

I know, dead horse, but

if the tag caused the ball to come out, safe. If the fall to the ground caused it, out. The various replays don’t show this?

This seems to be a key issue that doesn’t really come across well in the article.

Captain, there are doubt's...

by Match Day 5 on Jun 7, 2009 6:42 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs

bingo

unless the tag caused the ball to drop (see, e.g., the typical collision at home plate), the runner is out the instant the tag is applied; there’s no rule about how long you have to hold your mitt against the guy. You could apply a tag for a fraction of a second, then throw to another base, and the runner is still out. An instantaneous brush is all it takes. The question is whether the act of tagging caused the ball to drop, or did that occur when he hit the ground. I don’t think it has anything to do with interpreting the rule, but rather with perception of what actually happened, from a physical standpoint.

by jjackflash on Jun 7, 2009 10:48 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Thus,

it comes down to what the ump saw or what he thought he saw. The umpire’s judgement is a part of the game. Like, jtkelly86 says below: you have to keep yourself out of these situations to begin with.

Captain, there are doubt's...

by Match Day 5 on Jun 8, 2009 9:09 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

hmmm

If an outfielder makes a diving catch and falls to the ground and the ball pops out when his glove hits the ground, isn’t the runner safe? The OF has to get up with the ball in his glove. Shouldn’t this play be interpreted the same way?

by Fred Fredrix on Jun 7, 2009 8:14 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

the real issue

is the Angels ending up in situations where an umpire’s call relies within “gray area” of his ruling. From past experiences, we always end up getting screwed. It seems we’re always the victims. It’s partly because we end up in the gray area by not throwing a questionable dropped third strike to first or a miscued suicide squeeze. We put ourselves into these situations where we become victims when the call is unclear and we have to accept the ump’s deference on the play.

#34, never forget.

by jtkelly86 on Jun 7, 2009 2:49 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs