Did He Touch Home?

[Aces McGee]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Question:

I changed the chan instantly to watch Heroes afer the game was over, so I've seen zero replays.

Here's what I saw.

Holliday comes in, misses plate, is about to go back and touch plate and likely would have before he could be tagged, but ump calls him safe before he can move.

If that's the case, I have a hard time getting too upset at the call.

[/ QUOTE ]

it was more like, Holliday lied there half unconscious, Barrett was about to apply the tag, ref finally makes his mega-delayed safe call and Barrett never finishes the motion.

[/ QUOTE ]

Barrett did eventually tag him, for what it's worth.

-McGee

[TheNoodleMan]

[ QUOTE ]
Barrett did eventually tag him, for what it's worth.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yep, it was just after after the signal.

[Sayitloudernow]

My dad says he is "100% sure" he never touched home. Don't ask me how he formed such an opinion.

[Mojo56]

Am I the only who can't stand players sliding head first into the plate? It is the catchers job to protect the plate (I've been watching baseball for 45 years and I've seen obstruction called on the catcher ZERO x) and it is the runners job to get to the plate (Mike Scioscia, meet Jack Clark). A head first slide isn't going to move a catcher who is blocking the plate and when you add the risk of injury to your hand smacking into shin guards or cleats it is just a bone head move IMO.

FWIW, I thought he didn't touch the plate originally but after about 30 views there is a chance that he may have got his fingernail on the corner. If replay were in use I think the ruling on the field would have to stand. If he had been called out on the field that would stand also. I am a big proponent of replay in baseball but in this case it was inconclusive. Someone on the ESPN post game (Tim Kurkjian?) had the most moronic argument against replay I've ever heard. Something to the effect that he'd rather have the fans be able to celebrate instantly on an incorrect call then have to wait 10 minutes to get a call right and have the home fans get upset. I'm paraphrasing but this was the gist of what he said. Amazing.

[moayer]

it is pretty obvious that third base coach, mike gallego, should have had a bucket of neon yellow paint for holliday to dip his hand in before tagging up. baseball needs to get out of 1864

[Mondogarage]

I generally have a lot of respect for what Kurkjian says, but he was totally off his acorn with that statement.

That said, baseball is, fundamentally, a human game. Not just that, but it's essentially the same game as it has been since the end of the dead ball era. Really, other than lowering the mound, the effin' DH, and the wild card, how has the game itself changed? Technology in use in the game hasn't really advanced in decades (unlike football).

I'd hate for instant replay to come in to play. The human element is what makes this game far more fascinating than any other. Football? Meh, now it's all about point spread and gambloors, not the game, so of course it's most important to get it right. Baseball? It's still a game.

[DVaut1]

[ QUOTE ]
Football? Meh, now it's all about point spread and gambloors, not the game, so of course it's most important to get it right. Baseball? It's still a game.

[/ QUOTE ]

Baseball spent its first 50 years as a popular spectator sport in America (pretty much until the 1920s) as little more than a medium for gambling -- something akin to horse racing today. While the Black Sox were obviously the most notorious culprits, the so-called Golden Age of baseball was absolutely rife with gambling. Much of the reason baseball attained the popularity it did in the late 19th/early 20th century is because ballgames were populated with gambloors who used the game as a medium for prop bets with each other.

And if you think gambooling on baseball by the masses stopped after the Black Sox, consider that tens of thousands of dollars (if not more) changed hands just in twoplustwo run fantasy baseball leagues this season.

It has never been "just a game".

/hijack

[kyro]

[ QUOTE ]
... who the [censored] cares?

seriously, if padres fans are going to cry foul about this call, please remember that you guys blew 3 chances to lock this [censored] up, rockies won 14 out of the last 15 to even have a chance at this game, padres ace gave up 6 (SIX!) runs, they came back from an 8-6 deficit against a HOF reliever (albiet, he chokes a lot), and last but not least.. EVEN IF HE IS OUT, THERE IS 2 OUTS AND A GUY ON SECOND IN A TIE GAME.

So, no, this did not cost you the game. Quit crying.

Seriously, this is like Red Sox fans cursing Buckner's name until 2004.

[/ QUOTE ]

lol

Not a single person was "complaining" about the call in this thread before your stupid post. It was a valid question.

[kyro]

Wait, are people arguing that it was actually a HR too? I didn't see the final play of the game, so I can't comment on that, but I saw the replay of the "homer" several times and it really looked to me as if it hit the yellow marking at the top of the wall.

[CORed]

[ QUOTE ]
Denver homer. Voted Too hard to tell, but probably not.

[/ QUOTE ]