Umping The Foul Lines

The Division Series round isn't even over yet and this post-season already has been a breeding ground for debate over umpiring. With the blown calls in Game 1 of the Angels-Red Sox series, TBS' introduction of PitchTRAX, and Phil Cuzzi's incorrect call on Joe Mauer's flyball in the eleventh inning Friday night, there's been no shortage of fuel for that fire.

No one wants to get jobbed by a bad call. But for better or worse they are part of the game. While the Yanks got shorted on one or two earlier this season, they've been fortunate to be on the good end of some bad calls in the post-season over the past 13 years. Friday night marks at least the third time that one of those calls involved an outfield umpire - the Jeffrey Maier homerun in ALCS Game 1 in 1996 and Jermaine Dye getting picked off by the right field ump in Atlanta during the 1996 World Series come to mind.

In Joel Sherman's Birth of Dynasty, chronicling the '96 team, former umpire Richie Garcia gave a lengthy explanation as to what happened during the Maier home run. Much of the explanation centered around the fact that umpires spend the entire six month season working the plate and the bases, and as such are unaccustomed to the rather unique task of working the foul lines in the post-season. In his post-game press conference Friday night, crew chief Tim Tschida gave a similar explanation as it related to Cuzzi's blown call. I think it's also possible that Melky Cabrera charging into Cuzzi's field of view may have had an impact on the mistake.

Neither Garcia nor Tschida used the unfamiliarity with the task as an excuse, but rather as an explanation as to how it could happen. I don't know if it's just correlation and not causation, but it does seem that umping the foul lines, which should be a rather anonymous task, too often becomes an ignominious task. That it happens when the games mean the most is very unfortunate, because I do think that the MLB umpires generally due a very good, if thankless, job.

I don't expect the Twins to be happy about Friday's call, nor should they be. They likely would have benefited from a lead-off double more than they did from Mauer's eventual single. But before anyone jumps to the conclusion that Mauer assuredly would have scored had he been rightly awarded the double, let me remind you of the "fallacy of the predetermined outcome" that local phallus-head Michael Kay so often likes to mention.

Mauer not getting the double does not change the fact that the Twins left 17 runners on base over the course of the game, nor does it change that they could easily have had an extra run in the fourth had Carlos Gomez either not stumbled or managed to get in a rundown after he did, nor does it change that they failed to score in a bases loaded, no out jam in that eleventh inning.

And as Ron Gardenhire rightly pointed out after the game, the Twins were the beneficiaries of an incorrect call in Tuesday's play-in game, as Brandon Inge was (technically) hit by a pitch with the bases loaded in the twelfth and final inning. Instead of forcing in the go-ahead run for the Tigers, Inge bounced into a force play, and the Twins, just as the Yankees did Friday, won it in the bottom of the inning.

Of course, I completely reserve the right to change my tune should the Yankees get hosed at any point this post-season...

I'm Pretty Sure That's Not What It Says In The Rule Book

I try to steer clear of talking about bad umpiring in this space for the most part. Poor officiating is a part of every sport (except maybe golf) and regardless of all the technology that could be installed, incorrect calls are still going to be made. It will always be a part of athletic competition and it's really not worth getting upset about. They aren't going to go back and start games from the point of a umpire's mistake.

That said, what happened in the first inning yesterday is worth bringing up, because it wasn't your typical blown call and as Cliff at Bronx Banter beautifully detailed, it wasn't the only one of the day.

[Most of you know the story, but if you aren't familiar, check out Rob Neyer, River Ave. Blues or Pete Abe.]

First of all, although replays conclusively showed that Jeter was safe, it was an extremely close play. You can't fault Marty Foster for thinking Jeter had been tagged.

[This is as close to a smoking gun as I could get. The video replay all

together is conclusive, but there wasn't really one decisive freezeframe.]

You can, however, fault him for telling Jeter he didn't have to be tagged if the ball beat him to the bag.

[Gotta love the look on Jeter's face here. "Are ya fuckin' kidding me?"]

That part of the story hasn't been officially confirmed, but Crew Chief John Hirschbeck admitted that incorrect calls were made yesterday, didn't deny words to that effect were said and did not make Foster available to the media. Instead, Hirschbeck took the questions.

“The best way I can answer it is to talk to Marty about it. Not here at the ballpark, but if I see him tonight, or if not, we’ll have lunch tomorrow and we’ll discuss it. Getting a play right is one thing, but how you handle it is also important. Nowadays, with the cameras, ESPN and the reporters, I say the media, I actually mean television — it used to be if the ball beat you, you were out, but it isn’t that way anymore. It’s not a reason to call someone out. You have to make a good tag.”

It's admirable of Hirschbeck to insulate one of his guys from the media like this, because especially in New York, it would have been a difficult spot for Foster. It's not the Crew Chief's spot to discipline one of his umpires, so keep that in mind as he tries to downplay the severity of the error. There is nothing that irks me more than an umpire using his own interpretation of the rules.

Having a quirky but consistent strike zone is one thing, but not giving a pitcher a strike because the catcher had to reach across the zone for it another. Missing a bang bang play on the basepaths is okay, but willfully ignoring the rules because of some arbitrary adage ("because the ball beat him...") is a crime of the highest order, in my opinion.

What's the appropriate action here? Suspension? Worse? Something has to be done. Not because of the impact on the game, but for what Foster's bold and foolish proclamation says about his objectivity and trustworthiness as an umpire.

I think a suspension sends an adequate message and will be heard loud and clear by umps. It might not keep them from abiding by their own rules, but it will certainly keep them from telling the players that's what they are doing.