Game Report: Snakes v. Dodgers, April 12, 2009
* PHANTOM RUN - We took a break from biting the heads of chocolate bunnies to take in the Diamondbacks-Dodgers game on Sunday. Unlike the Friday or Saturday night affairs, Sunday's game was a close contest throughout, ending with a 3-1 loss that gave Los Angeles the series win. Dan Haren (6 IP, 4 H, 2 ER, 3 BB, 2 K) pitched another great game and was once again denied the victory.
The turning point in the contest came in the top of the second inning. With the Diamondbacks up 1-0, the Dodgers had runners on 2B and 3B with one out and Los Angeles pitcher Randy Wolf at the plate. On a 2-2 pitch, Wolf hit a line-drive back through the box, which Haren fielded on the fly for the second out. In an instant, Haren wheeled and threw to Felipe Lopez, who retired Juan Pierre at 2B to end the inning.
The Arizona players jogged into the dugout under the apprehension that they had kept the Dodgers off the board in the inning. But by the time Mark Reynolds stepped in to lead off the bottom of the the third, the scoreboard showed a 1-1 tie. What happened?
Well, the story from the umpires is that Andre Ethier had raced home from 3B before the final out was recorded in the inning. It seemed implausible to us. Ninety feet is a long way to run in the time it took Haren to catch and throw to 2B, even if Lopez did not immediately secure the third out.
So we checked the replay. Having reviewed the play several times over, we understand the element of the play that gave the umpires pause. While Lopez could have forced Pierre out by stepping on the 2B bag, he instead trotted over towards the Dodgers' speedster and applied the tag directly. OK, maybe Ethier could have finished his sprint to home in the extra time Lopez afforded him by tagging the runner instead of the bag.
But then again, Ethier didn't have to run 90' on the play. He should have run about 100' to score that run. See, Ethier started the play with a lead off 3B. He maintained that lead even when Haren plucked Wolf's line-drive from the air. So for Ethier to advance on the play, he would have had to tag up ... which he could do only after Haren made the catch.
The replay images demonstrate that Ethier did no such thing. Ethier can be clearly seen in images Nos. 1 and 2 standing off the bag when Haren sets to deliver the pitch and then spears the ball off Wolf's bat. Image No. 3, taken a split second later, shows Ethier racing down the line as Haren turns to throw. In images Nos. 4 and 5, Lopez bypasses the 2B bag and then touches Pierre with ball in his glove.
Maybe Ethier did touch home plate before Lopez tagged out Pierre. It's impossible to see from the broadcast footage. We'd also argue that it's irrelevant. Since Ethier crossed the plate without tagging up, no run should be registered on the play.
* LETTER OF THE LAW - Bob Melvin came out immediately to argue once it became clear that the umpires had awarded Los Angeles the phantom run. In a post-game interview, however, Melvin seemed resigned to the outcome.
"I'm searching for whatever I can," Melvin told MLB.com. "Are you guys sure he didn't touch second base? Can I protest this call, or is it a judgment call? They did get it right. That's the call. They got it right. We had thought Lopez had touched second base."
We looked up the rule and we're still not sure that the umpires got it right. The provisions at issue read like so:
Rule 7.08. Any runner is out when -- (d) He fails to retouch his base after a fair or foul ball is legally caught before he, or his base, is tagged by a fielder. He shall not be called out for failure to retouch his base after the first following pitch, or any play or attempted play. This is an appeal play;
Rule 7.10. Any runner shall be called out, on appeal, when -- (a) After a fly ball is caught, he fails to retouch his original base before he or his original base is tagged ...
If the violation occurs during a play which ends a half-inning, the appeal must be made before the defensive team leaves the field. ...
Appeal plays may require an umpire to recognize an apparent "fourth out." If the third out is made during a play in which an appeal play is sustained on another runner, the appeal play decision takes precedence in determining the out. If there is more than one appeal play that ends a half-inning, the defense may elect to take the out that gives it the advantage. For purposes of this rule, the defensive team has "left the field" when the pitcher and all infielders have left fair territory on their way to the bench or clubhouse.
It's complicated, but bear with us for a moment. Rule 7.08(d) describes circumstances applicable to both Ethier and Pierre on the play in question. Haren caught a ball on the fly, so either Ethier or Pierre could have been called out for failure to retouch his bag (3B and 2B, respectively) before an Arizona player tagged the base-runner or his base.
The apparent reason the umpires counted Ethier's run was that the Diamondbacks made no effort to tag Ethier or the 3B bag before leaving the field. Having walked off the field without appealing for Ethier to be called out, Arizona was prohibited under Rule 7.10 from challenging the run with which he was credited ... or so the umpires persuaded Melvin.
What's not in the rules cited above is any requirement that the Diamondbacks appeal to have Ethier called out. Arizona complied with the rule with respect to Pierre when Lopez applied the tag; the Pierre out was also an appeal play under the rules. While the Diamondbacks could have called for an appeal on Ethier and while such an appeal may have required the umpires to recognize a "fourth out" on the play, nowhere in the rules does it state that Arizona must lodge an appeal.
The rules cited here are not the most lucid we've ever read. But we think there's one more clause that should give to Snakes the benefit of any doubt in the matter. The second-to-last line in Rule 7.10 reads: "If there is more than one appeal play that ends a half-inning, the defense may elect to take the out that gives it the advantage." (Emphasis added.)
At the very least, the ambiguity in these rules and Melvin's apparent attempt to protest give Arizona some opening to lodge a request for the league office to review the call. If a request for review is filed, the worst that could happen is that MLB tells the club to go pound sand; the best that could happen is that the game is ordered to be replayed from the point at which the protested play occurred.
It's a long-shot, but in a division race that could easily be decided by a single game, it's an opportunity the Diamondbacks should pursue.
* MADNESS - Diamondbacks Nation thinks Eric Byrnes is a nice guy, a player who is fun to watch, plays hard, and contributed significantly to Arizona's 2007 NL West title run. For entertainment value, he's an All-Star, with his shaggy blond hair, his full-body throws, and his bitchin' on-deck music. We like Byrnes. We're glad to have him play for the Diamondbacks. Under no circumstances do we want Byrnes to be a regular in the outfield at the expense of Justin Upton.
A feature ran in the Arizona Republic explaining that Upton has introduced a wrap into his swing and that his bat speed has suffered as a result. OK, that helps us understand why Upton struggled in the Cactus League (12/61, .197 BA) and is hitless to start the season. Nick Piecoro goes on to write in the article that Upton has failed to earn playing time because he has gone 0/9 with five strikeouts in his three starts on the year.
Piecoro quotes general manager Josh Byrnes as saying: "Justin's extremely talented and we have tremendous belief in that talent. But he has to make some adjustments, like any player. He realizes we have a roster, at this point, where performance will determine playing time."
On Easter Sunday, Byrnes made his third start of the season in right field. For the third time in six 2009 games, Upton was on the bench. Byrnes is supposedly playing because he gives Arizona a better chance to win. But Byrnes went 0/3 on Sunday and is now 1/13 on the season, with two walks, two strikeouts and two of his infamous pop-ups on the infield. Diamondbacks Nation fails to comprehend how Byrnes commands as much run as he's getting if the edict is that "performance will determine playing time."
We hate to harp on this again, but another day riding pines for Upton compels us to underscore the point we made yesterday. In his career year of 2007, a 31-year old Byrnes had an .813 OPS. At age 20 and playing his first year as a ML-regular in 2008, Upton had an .816 OPS. Byrnes' ceiling is the same as Upton's floor. No amount of additional playing time is likely to make Byrnes any better than he is right now. Upton has the raw talent to improve dramatically with experience.
We get that Upton's not swinging the bat great right now. But we don't buy that any benefit is served by sitting him on the bench. If the field manager doesn't believe that Upton's a better option than Byrnes right now, then the front office should step in and send Upton down to the minor leagues to work out the issues with his swing.
5 responses to this Post, with 4 unique participants
appeal
Nice analysis, but the DBacks blew by leaving the field without a formal appeal to the Ump. That is on Mr. Melvin.
Fez
04/13/09
9:42am
Melvin
Yah, based on his quote, it sounds like Melvin asked the umps whether he could protest. I'll follow up a bit later with a brief discussion of his options under the circumstances. Given that he apparently tried to protest the call, I don't see any harm in applying to the league office for a clarification of the rule.
Clarification
The clarification is easy. The rules state that even though Ethier did not tag up, the D-Backs need to stay on the field and appeal to the 3rd base ump on whether he left early or not. Since the D-Backs left the field, they could not appeal. Hence the run counts.(Assuming he did cross before the runner was tagged out.)
Phoenix05
The Diamondbacks evidently agree w/ you. I just don't believe the rules are written very clearly. I looked a bit further into it after I wrote this article and I'm still not convinced.
Maybe I will revisit the issue briefly in a follow-up piece. Since the team let the matter die, further debate is academic. But it wouldn't be baseball unless we were debating hyptotheticals.
Phantom Run
What is this football or something? He did not tag up... no run should be awarded.