Dana Demuth (home plate umpire) called it right then and there. And, it was the right call... by the rulebook. If they didn't call it, the Cardinals would have every right to claim the runner was obstructed, and would have scored had he not tripped over a lying down fielder. Rules are there for a reason... and baseball has more rules than any other sport. And the real issue was the horrible throw by Saltalamachhia to 3B. That's twice in this series that an errant throw from HP to 3rd (other one by Breslow) has cost the Red Sox.. maybe they should stop trying to make the high-risk/low-reward throws, and stick with getting the outs that are within reach.
Yeah, you're right. Looked like he called it right before Joyce. That's good for Joyce, that's for damn sure.
I honestly didn't think his throw to 3B was that horrible. It wasn't perfect, but it didn't seem like that bad of a throw to me. Especially knowing that he wanted it to be on that side so that the third baseman could apply the tag.
It was horrible in the sense that the baserunner was already in his slide when he released the throw. Had no shot of getting him.
Agree, the rule should take into consideration whether the fielder was able to get out of the way. A bang-bang play like that should just be part of the game, unless the ump thinks there was intent to trip. I'm not a big fan of football, but one of the many great things about the king of US sports is how fast they change rules when an old rule becomes stupid. I doubt baseball will change this rule. Too prideful about their tradition.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p>Jim Joyce looking closely at the play in order to call obstruction <a href="http://t.co/sTBVUCKK7U" title="http://twitter.com/redsoxstats/status/394325381949296640/photo/1" org_href="http://twitter.com/redsoxstats/status/394325381949296640/photo/1">pic.twitter.com/sTBVUCKK7U</a></p>— Red Sox Stats (@redsoxstats) <a href="https://twitter.com/redsoxstats/status/394325381949296640" data-datetime="2013-10-26T23:51:12+00:00">October 26, 2013</a></blockquote> <script src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
yep...throwing to third to get the winning run out is high risk. Even if Middletbrooks catches that and the running is safe, the hitter has a chance to get to 2nd to take away the force out again.
whoa!! that's criminal. And from that angle, the runner is clearly NOT in the basepath. And Middlebrooks is clearly OUT of the base path. Combine that with the other GIF and I think the Red Sox have a beef that Obstruction requires the runner to be in the base path. Plus, the 3rd base Ump wasn't even WATCHING the play. fwiw: I'm not for one team or another.
Yeah, but the call requires the runner to be in the base path. Joyce should have given an opinion of that, but he couldn't because he wasn't watching the play.
That's why I was asking the wild-scenario-ed question about a runner running the basepath backwards a few posts back.
I'm seeing it differently. Because the runner looks clearly like he's in the base path. The base path is the dirt area, and not just the foul line. It looks like the runner is on the mound side of the dirt area, and in base path. Look at Middlebrooks legs. They are in the base path almost all the way up to his butt. And the tangle up happened on Middlebrooks legs just about the back of his knees.
Well, no goat on the field like I wanted, but some ridiculous stuff out there. They gave us something to remember. Would be interesting if Middlebrooks lifted his legs to get out of the base path, but highly unlikely. My own personal opinion is that he deserves an opportunity to move after acting on the ball. And he never had that opportunity. In all likelihood he probably lifted them to impede the runner. It's what I would have tried to do naturally in a situation like that. Funny that Joyce was doing the right thing by watching the ball, but hilarious that he had no line of sight on the questionable call. Plenty to talk about now.
3rd baseman lifted both his legs/heels up, why? probably to get out of the way of the cardinals guy. wouldn't want to obstruct
Doesn't matter what middlebrooks "intent" was. All that matters is that Craig would have scored if he hadn't tripped over a fielder. Since he did trip over a fielder (who was no longer going for the ball) it's obstruction.
That's basically the best summary of this. It may not have been Middlebrooks' fault, but it did prevent the runner from scoring. It wouldn't be fair to the Cardinals to NOT call it. The last thing you want is to make that a judgment call by umpires to try to determine intent.
I disagree. I HATE judgment calls. The NFL has a ton of judgment calls that are often suspect... especially pass interference and holding. The purpose of the rule is to eliminate subjective "judgement" from the final decision... so that the umpire doesn't have to decipher if the obstruction is intentional or not. In this day/age of flopping, super slow-mo HD instant replay, and social media scrutinizing every call... judgement calls are more dangerous than ever. I for one appreciated the MLB rulebook specifically saying that obstruction can be called regardless of intent... pretty much sums up this call perfectly. As Major said, had they NOT called it, the Cardinals would rightfully have a valid complaint.
