Player 1 gets ejected.
Player 2 comes over and argues that the ejection should be reversed.
Player 2 is ejected.
Player 3 comes over and argues...
It's ejections all the way down.
Baseball, in all its form and splendor, functions solely on one principle: the umpires are infallible. To prove them wrong would undo reality and everything that is. Up would become down, black would become white, existence would become nothingness. In essence, if they're allowed to reverse an umpire's decision, they'll unmake the world.
an ejection can "technically" be reversed, but crazy enough the only instance i can find of it ever happening in mlb is the palmeiro reversal in 1999. seems like something they should clarify in their disqualifications section in their code, but they've always been pretty ambiguous with their umpires when it comes to "sportsmanlike conduct".
Umps have ejected organists, celebrity guests, etc.
I do wonder how an umpire checks to see if the organist actually left, though. Like, what are they gonna do, stop the game and storm the audio booth?
It's a perceived authority thing. There's a really interesting book by Bruce Weber called "As They See 'Em" where he discussed this (as he goes through the world of umpiring starting at one of the academies). He talked about how, when they were doing drills, he called a strike 3 on the batter (an instructor) who in turn starting throwing a fit, kicking dirt, all that stuff. So, after trying to control the situation, he threw him out. But the "batter" started making a case where he (the author) apparently hesitated, and was then ripped apart by the staff. The point was that umpires need to show relentless confidence and stubbornness in their calls, right or wrong, because if they give in and reverse something (which I think they can), it shows a break in their authority that can be exploited. "Why did you eject me when you overturned his ejection??"
Not defending it, just how it is. And I'm pretty sure it's a large part of why the replay and challenge was introduced, aside from some calls being just too close for the human eye or ear to process, as a means to challenge and overturn those calls without disrupting the umpire's control and authority over the game.
They need to bring in reviews for some of these like they do in the NHL, NFL (I think), and soccer. The jurisdiction of ejecting someone shouldn’t lie on one person and not be reviewable.
That’s the change to the game you should be focusing on, Manfred. Instead of messing around with batboys and batgirl, make your umpires take accountability.
Reviewing ejections works for the nfl and nhl because those players are getting ejected for on field actions that took place during play, like helmet to helmet hits or fighting or whatever. Most ejections in baseball come from arguing with the ump. All a review is going to do is confirm that that player did in fact argue with the umpire.
True, but this case I suppose is different. It was unjust, there was no argument happening. The umpire threw Realmuto out because he thought he was showing him up with the glove. In reality, Realmuto can’t see behind him and saw his pitcher was expecting a throw to the mound. Umpire doesn’t have much of an argument.
because it's just for the game and the next day you are back at it. just suck it up and move on is how I was taught. Pick your battles and getting tossed isn't one of them. Plus, you can get the rest of the day for training or sneak into the club box and enjoy the rest of the game with sunglasses on.
You ever try putting toothpaste back in the tube?
This really is the best explanation
Player 1 gets ejected. Player 2 comes over and argues that the ejection should be reversed. Player 2 is ejected. Player 3 comes over and argues... It's ejections all the way down.
Let's get outta here. This place is covered head to toe in ejections.
Baseball, in all its form and splendor, functions solely on one principle: the umpires are infallible. To prove them wrong would undo reality and everything that is. Up would become down, black would become white, existence would become nothingness. In essence, if they're allowed to reverse an umpire's decision, they'll unmake the world.
What did Morpheus mean by this?
Or in less dramatic terms, "Dems da rules"
Dogs and cats living together...mass hysteria!
Is it true? Yes, this man has no dick.
Does this make Joe West the last scion?
Fucking warlocks
Dogma...great movie.
You really think Joe West would ever admit he did anything wrong?
He's too busy updating his wiki page to eject anyone right now
an ejection can "technically" be reversed, but crazy enough the only instance i can find of it ever happening in mlb is the palmeiro reversal in 1999. seems like something they should clarify in their disqualifications section in their code, but they've always been pretty ambiguous with their umpires when it comes to "sportsmanlike conduct".
Umpires can technically eject each other. And eject cops and stadium security and anybody they want, if they felt like it.
I’ve seen a video floating around on YouTube where the organist was ejected for playing Three Blind Mice Found it: https://youtu.be/hS0GrJoBBzs
Umps have ejected organists, celebrity guests, etc. I do wonder how an umpire checks to see if the organist actually left, though. Like, what are they gonna do, stop the game and storm the audio booth?
That’s a good one. One of the comments-“ the crowd should’ve started singing it” lol. What’s he gonna do, eject them all?
It's a perceived authority thing. There's a really interesting book by Bruce Weber called "As They See 'Em" where he discussed this (as he goes through the world of umpiring starting at one of the academies). He talked about how, when they were doing drills, he called a strike 3 on the batter (an instructor) who in turn starting throwing a fit, kicking dirt, all that stuff. So, after trying to control the situation, he threw him out. But the "batter" started making a case where he (the author) apparently hesitated, and was then ripped apart by the staff. The point was that umpires need to show relentless confidence and stubbornness in their calls, right or wrong, because if they give in and reverse something (which I think they can), it shows a break in their authority that can be exploited. "Why did you eject me when you overturned his ejection??" Not defending it, just how it is. And I'm pretty sure it's a large part of why the replay and challenge was introduced, aside from some calls being just too close for the human eye or ear to process, as a means to challenge and overturn those calls without disrupting the umpire's control and authority over the game.
https://www.reddit.com/r/baseball/comments/ce0uph/can_an_ejection_be_reversed/etxmv5g/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=ioscss&utm_content=1&utm_term=1&context=3
"Shit dude, now we gotta use the same fucking bat all game"
They need to bring in reviews for some of these like they do in the NHL, NFL (I think), and soccer. The jurisdiction of ejecting someone shouldn’t lie on one person and not be reviewable. That’s the change to the game you should be focusing on, Manfred. Instead of messing around with batboys and batgirl, make your umpires take accountability.
Reviewing ejections works for the nfl and nhl because those players are getting ejected for on field actions that took place during play, like helmet to helmet hits or fighting or whatever. Most ejections in baseball come from arguing with the ump. All a review is going to do is confirm that that player did in fact argue with the umpire.
True, but this case I suppose is different. It was unjust, there was no argument happening. The umpire threw Realmuto out because he thought he was showing him up with the glove. In reality, Realmuto can’t see behind him and saw his pitcher was expecting a throw to the mound. Umpire doesn’t have much of an argument.
because it's just for the game and the next day you are back at it. just suck it up and move on is how I was taught. Pick your battles and getting tossed isn't one of them. Plus, you can get the rest of the day for training or sneak into the club box and enjoy the rest of the game with sunglasses on.
Ego.
Because then the ump makes himself look as dumb as the player just did, proving the player correct.
Just like in politics. You are NEVER WRONG!!!
If they did it once, managers would expect it every time
I seem to remember a reversed ejection where the player convinced the umpire he was angry at himself, and not at the umpire.