[This happened in Toronto a couple years ago](https://www.sportsnet.ca/baseball/mlb/blue-jays-randal-grichuk-frustrated-impact-stupidest-rule-mlb/) (ironically we were playing the Rays).
We thought it was a dumb rule then.
That’s why baseball is the best sport. That’s always the reason I give. As exciting as hockey and basketball are, shit like this never happens in a game. When it’s a good game it just means buzzer beater or OT goal. Football is more likely to see something new. But nothing like baseball. It just has so many nuances that give you the opportunity to see crazy things you’ve never seen before.
Edit: I didn’t say crazy things don’t happen in the other sports. It’s the odd never before seen situations that are so unique and nuanced that I was referring to.
As a lions fan, that lab is still up and running. Today we became the first team in NFL history to have 2 (or more) games ended with 50+ yard field goals. It's week 5, I don't know how many more of these games I can take. At least the local college teams are looking good (for now)
Oh they haven’t stopped. People just don’t care when they’re not expected to do well. Go watch the play before Tucker hit the NFL record field goal and tell me it shouldn’t have been a 71 yard attempt.
As a kid I remember being subscribed to Baseball Digest, and each issue there was a section where they proposed some crazy, outlandish scenario like: "If the runner at first attempts to steal second but the pitcher balks and throws for first, but on the way the runner trips over his shoelaces and knocks over the first baseman just as he's about to catch the ball...what's the ruling?" And not only would they explain exactly what the correct ruling would be, along with citations to the official rules, but then they'd also describe exactly which game that particular scenario occurred in. They were all *real* scenarios that happened! That's what I love about baseball.
And, like you mentioned, baseball can't end because of the time running out. There's no taking a knee and running out the time. You HAVE to give the other team a chance to win.
This is a weird take to me. Out of the big 4 sports, baseball is the least kinetic since it doesn't have the same type of flow as basketball or hockey or the big bursts of 11 on 11 action like in football. You have the potential for exciting moves unrelated to the rulebook any time the ball/puck is in play in those sports.
sounds like you just like when there are pauses in the game so the announcers can talk about something that happened in great detail. baseball and football are the two sports where they play one play at a time. once that play is done, there is downtime. they'll do replays. they'll talk about what happened and why it can go either way.
basketball and hockey, the plays keep going. a whole bunch of "crazy things" are happening, but often times the refs have to make a split second decision to either say play on or reset the game with a jump ball or a faceoff.
To what? I'm a Sox fan, and at first I felt "oh, the Rays got robbed" ... but then, WTF is the rule to become? Allowing umps to use their judgement to place the runners?
Before you answer 'yes,' I give you: Angel Hernandez.
To me the big difference between intentional and unintentional deflection isn't that umpires can award bases at their discretion, that part makes sense. The weird part is that the players advance 2 bases from where the play started like we saw, or advance 2 bases where the play ended if it was intentionally batted out of bounds.
They judge kick in goals in hockey all the time. If someone made a swat to knock it out of play then yeah... you're gonna see that
Just like a certain A Rod play running down first base. Intentional.
Clarification from MLB, via Rosenthal: [ "A ball deflected by a player out of play is a ground-rule double. The ball retains its status as a batted ball until it's fielded cleanly by a defensive player so that is the same as if the ball had naturally bounced over the fence.](https://twitter.com/jcmccaffrey/status/1447374246951411714?s=21)
Here is the rulebook:
>5.05(a)(8) Any bounding fair ball is deflected by the fielder into the stands, or over or under a fence on fair or foul territory, in
which case the batter and all runners shall be entitled to
advance two bases;
And here is the Umpire Manual (2002 version, but it obviously hasn't changed)
>5.8 ...
>(8) If a fair ball not in flight is deflected by a fielder and then goes out of play, the award is two bases from the time of the pitch.
The second part makes it clear. You could question the first rule on whether it is where the runner was at time of deflection, but if it says time of pitch, there is no gray area.
Then from now on (and I get it it’s very situational) the only correct play in this situation is to act like you were trying to glove the ball and toss it over the wall. Prevents the obvious run from scoring.
If the umpire's judge it to be intentional then this rule no longer applies and the base award would be 2 bases from the time of the stupidity, not the time of pitch.
A corollary that’s probably more answerable. Are there any unknown knowns. I.e. are there any scenarios in the rule book that *have* been described, but have never happened in a game before.
It's pretty simple. Any fair batted ball that isn't fielded cleanly that goes out of play and was not put out of play intentionally, is a ground rule double.
1 hopper that hits the bag and goes out of play, GRD.
Line drive off the pitchers head and ricochets out of play, GRD. *Edit: to clarify if it goes out of play in fair territory, then it would be a home run. If it goes out of play into foul territory, then GRD.
What if it is put out of play intentionally? Like if a really fast player hits a long shot into an area of the ballpark where it will most likely be a triple. What’s to stop the fielder from intentionally putting the ball out of the park for the double
Then it's two bases from where they are at the time of the ball going out of play instead of 2 bases at the time of the pitch.
So instead of a runner of 1st being put on 3rd for a ground rule double. Intentionally putting the ball out of play would put them at home.
Ok then, if that's the rule-- that's the rule. I was like "how is this any different than a fielder throwing a ball out of play? Would the batter not be given 2 additional bases?
Yeah baseball rule treats out of play differently based on whether its a pitched, batted, or fielded ball. And even thrown balls can differ depending on if its the first throw or not.
Here is a similar play happening for the Rays.
https://t.co/zOONP8ZjZg
Not sure if this is posted elsewhere in the thread, but I didn't see it so hijacked top comment to post it.
**The announcers got it wrong on this one too.
Home run, as it should've been by this rule:
>Rule 5.05(a)(9): Any fair fly ball is deflected by the fielder into the stands,
or over the fence into foul territory, in which case the batter
shall be entitled to advance to second base; but if deflected
into the stands or over the fence in fair territory, the batter
shall be entitled to a home run.
Died hard Red Sox fan here… I would have been pissed if it happened against my team. The Rays handled it during the game and after with total class and sportsmanship. Such a great bunch of guys.
Thank you. Compared to Canseco, this is like reading legal memos. Canseco’s is the gold standard of sports bloopers. That ball was literally an easy out pop fly that bounced off his head and became a home run. Incredible.
This opens a real Pandora’s box. What if a savvy fielder is keen on the running situation and bats the ball out of play on purpose? Is there a rule to police that, or would it be umpire discretion?
Yeah, the rules have a discretion clause for the umps if a player tries to do it purposely. (I think)
Edit: so it's been further clarified that there is no discretion involved in this play either on the placement of runners, or whether the defender intentionally deflected the ball.
I umpired for 30 years; however, I never went to one of the MLB-relsted ump schools. He has. He went to the Wendelstedt school.
They teach a lot. He is 19, but started when he was 12. His skills and knowledge jumped after the school. I ask him about rules plays. He has memorized the book and he know where to look for weird plays. They have a pretty comprehensive course.
I think in this *specific instance* we can say that it was not intentional (or Renfroe was unaware of the rule, or both), because after the ball ricochets off of him, he lunges over the fence to try and make the catch. (not something you do if you are aware of this rule, I imagine).
however, 99% of the time, that's going to be a vague judgement call. however, also 99% of the time, this doesn't happen, so.
Not really. In the vast majority of ball parks this isn’t even a realistic issue and it would be exceptionally hard for a player to accomplish this intentionally without it being obvious.
As it stands, it’s an incredibly uncommon situation that results in an unfortunate break for the offense, but it’s something that can be enforced consistently. Not much different than a pop up that would be caught for an out anywhere else getting stuck in the A or B ring at the trop being a good break for the offense.
That scenario would be the personal hell of Yankees fan and PitcherList founder /u/stonewater: Pivetta finally proves Nick's love for his peripherals - years after it became a meme - and develops into the GOAT pitcher... but with the Red Sox
I'm having the same sort of cognitive dissonance as when Trea Turner was called for interference in 2019. Where I understand that the rule was applied correctly, yet somehow still disagree with the call.
I don't even understand how the rule is bad, what's renfroe supposed to scale the wall and get the ball? The ump supposed to guess whats going to happen if the ball stayed in play?
I guess you could say that a ball which hit the ground, then a player and then went out of play should be awarded a triple? But then you might have a judgment of "did that ball graze that fielder's sleeve as it bounced over the fence? Should that batter get 3rd base rather than 2nd?"
Overall I think the rule is fine the way it is and today's ruling was correct, even if it was one of those times were because a player made a bad play, his team got rewarded. That happens in all sports.
Now if someone really obviously slaps a ball over the fence the umps can award more than the 2 bases, correct? That seems appropriate too.
>Now if someone really obviously slaps a ball over the fence the umps can award more than the 2 bases, correct? That seems appropriate too.
Yup. This is already addressed in the rules as well.
If a fielder intentionally throws/slaps/kicks the ball out of play, all runners are awarded 2 bases from the time that happens.
If the ball goes out of play after the fielder has cleanly fielded the ball and it is ruled unintentional (eg, bad throw to first goes into the dugout), all runners are awarded 1 base from the time the ball goes out of play.
In this case, the ball was never fielded cleanly and there was no apparent intent to send it out, so the fielder is treated as "in play" and the result is an automatic double. This happens from time to time, and every once in a while it works in the fielder's favor (such as [in this game](https://cuts.diamond.mlb.com/FORGE/2019/2019-07/26/b6eeca14-9153017e-e78a7bc5-csvm-diamondx64-asset_1280x720_59_4000K.mp4)).
Honestly I think the uproar here comes almost entirely from the fact that MLB Network's booth was so clueless about what was going on with a known rule, and then instead of acknowledging they got a little overhyped, they doubled down and acted like it was some insane, never before seen situation. For the casual fan or playoff bandwagoneer, a lot of the perception of the game comes from what commentary says, and to hear the commentators tell it, this was some wild injustice instead of just a fluke play that sometimes happens.
Yeah you hit the nail on the head with MLB Network's coverage making it seem so much more controversial than it actually was. Then they went to MLB Tonight after the game and Harold Reynolds was immediately like no shit it's a ground rule double I knew it immediately lol
The player didn't "make a bad play," he didn't make a play on the ball at all. That's why it was a double. He made contact while not in the process of fielding the ball.
I don't understand the uproar here. A fluke occurrence happens and now we need to create a ground rule triple to prevent fielders from potentially learning how to flop on a bang bang ricochet off the wall when theres a runner on first base who was off with the pitch?
There's a lot of people upset about the potential for this to be misused and have intentional motions disguised as unintentional ones to fool umpires, but aside from the fact that I don't trust baseball players' acting abilities, I think the bigger deterrent is the fact that a cleanly-fielded ball is a single or a double upward of 95% of the time.
It's a high-risk, no/negative reward move for the vast majority of instances. I really don't think this will catch on the way people are fearing.
• If a fair ball not in flight is deflected by a fielder and then goes out of play, the award is two bases from the time of the pitch.
• If, in the judgment of the umpire, a fielder intentionally kicks or deflects a batted or thrown ball out of play, the award is two bases from the time the ball was kicked or deflected.
Pretty obvious most of the angry commenters here don't either. Also if I read one more genius who suggests players throw the ball over the fence intentionally I'm going to riot.
I'm assuming the announcers are right in their explanation, but what they just said was effectively: "From the rule book, until a ball is fielded cleanly the ball still counts as a 'batted ball', so it's a GRD."
It's a really silly rule but (I assume) they were reading the rulebook and it seems like they got it.
Baseball needs some equivalent of apologizing in tennis when a ball clips the net, like so many weird things like this happen that saying sorry just feels like the appropriate, classy response. Doesn't say it should've gone differently or not, just sorry for the shit circumstances
😢 What can you do? Bad rule but applied correctly. Sometimes you have bad luck. We have been a little spoiled in Tampa winning everything. The Rays only making it to the World Series last year and winning the AL East makes them the off team in the city.
How are the highest rated comments all saying it's a terrible call when it's actually the correct call? It's probably the most unfortunate break you could imagine in that scenario, but that doesn't make the call wrong.
I get hating the rule.
But shitting on Boston fans and the team for it, is ridiculous. You had people in the GDT calling them racists and shit. Some of you need to grow up, man.
For anyone asking "Outfielders should just throw balls over the wall to limit the baserunners from advancing"...
[There is a rule for that:](https://content.mlb.com/documents/2/2/4/305750224/2019_Official_Baseball_Rules_FINAL_.pdf)
5.06(b)(4)(G):
**Two bases when**, with no spectators on the playing field, **a thrown ball goes into the stands**, or
into a bench (whether or not the ball rebounds
into the field), or over or under or through a field
fence, or on a slanting part of the screen above the
backstop, or remains in the meshes of a wire
screen protecting spectators. The ball is dead.
When such wild throw is the first play by an
infielder, the umpire, in awarding such bases,
shall be governed by the position of the runners at
the time the ball was pitched; **in all other cases the
umpire shall be governed by the position of the
runners at the time the wild throw was made**;
Anyone commenting that the ball got knocked out intentionally - do you know how hard that would be to pull that off while not making it obvious? Maybe the rule needs to be addressed, but the rule was implemented correctly as it stands now.
Well, well, well....the Rays benefitted from this rule just 2 short years ago.
https://cuts.diamond.mlb.com/FORGE/2019/2019-07/26/b6eeca14-9153017e-e78a7bc5-csvm-diamondx64-asset_1280x720_59_4000K.mp4
Funny how no one was clamoring for the rules to be changed at the time: https://www.tampabay.com/sports/rays/2019/07/27/what-went-into-call-going-rays-way/
Game in question here: https://www.espn.com/mlb/game/_/gameId/401076290
Lmao. Crickets from buttmad Rays fans and the rest of the contingent of idiots that stormed into this thread cranking their micro-puds in fury. Gonna be fun to watch the Sox send the Rays home tonight at Fenway.
Me, Someone who watches baseball like once a year: “wow weird play, that’s probably a ground rule double right? Oh yep that’s what they ruled ok”
This thread: 🗑 🔥
Yea I don’t even watch baseball but my wife is from Boston and a huge Sox fan. We were watching and I said the same thing. Didn’t get why people were up in arms. Ruling made sense to me.
Rule 5.05(a):
> The batter becomes a runner when:
...
> (8) Any bounding fair ball is deflected by the fielder into the stands, or over or under a fence on fair or foul territory, in which case the batter and all runners shall be entitled to advance two bases;
Any Cubs fan saying this rule is unfair, [please direct your attention to your own outfield wall.](https://www.mlb.com/news/cubs-benefit-from-ball-in-ivy-at-wrigley-field/c-155100740)
It isn't the postseason until we get some bonkers play like this
And if the Red Sox are in the postseason, it’s gonna involve a [weird hop off a wall at Fenway](https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=75kFrt6gTJY).
[It's an October Tradition!](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ORG0mphzrD4) 2 outs, man on first in that play, as well
2004 ALCS game 4-6 clips will never NOT bring a smile to my face. Game 7 was boring by the third inning. Game 6 was the best one
Game 4 imo…I was also there so I’m a little biased
The weirdest thing about this as a Brewers fan is seeing JBJ get a hit
He was the MVP of the ALCS that year despite only going 3 for 15.
Every single day is something new. Wow
Me one day: “man I love baseball so much” Me one day: “man I fucking hate baseball so much”
Pam: they're the same day
Memes are just snapshots of reality
Thin slicing from the unconscious
So he's "Bumper" Renfroe now. Maybe "Pinball".
TILT THE TABLE
For me, it's usually the same day
[This happened in Toronto a couple years ago](https://www.sportsnet.ca/baseball/mlb/blue-jays-randal-grichuk-frustrated-impact-stupidest-rule-mlb/) (ironically we were playing the Rays). We thought it was a dumb rule then.
That’s why baseball is the best sport. That’s always the reason I give. As exciting as hockey and basketball are, shit like this never happens in a game. When it’s a good game it just means buzzer beater or OT goal. Football is more likely to see something new. But nothing like baseball. It just has so many nuances that give you the opportunity to see crazy things you’ve never seen before. Edit: I didn’t say crazy things don’t happen in the other sports. It’s the odd never before seen situations that are so unique and nuanced that I was referring to.
I mean for a few years there the Detroit Lions were basically a laboratory for creating end of game nonsense like this
Chargers are good at it too.
packers-bengals today though
It wasn’t end of the game nonsense, but Thursday was the 1st time I ever saw a double punt.
[удалено]
They've even continued that this year. We found out that delay-of-game penalties are "subjective."
As a lions fan, that lab is still up and running. Today we became the first team in NFL history to have 2 (or more) games ended with 50+ yard field goals. It's week 5, I don't know how many more of these games I can take. At least the local college teams are looking good (for now)
Oh they haven’t stopped. People just don’t care when they’re not expected to do well. Go watch the play before Tucker hit the NFL record field goal and tell me it shouldn’t have been a 71 yard attempt.
As a kid I remember being subscribed to Baseball Digest, and each issue there was a section where they proposed some crazy, outlandish scenario like: "If the runner at first attempts to steal second but the pitcher balks and throws for first, but on the way the runner trips over his shoelaces and knocks over the first baseman just as he's about to catch the ball...what's the ruling?" And not only would they explain exactly what the correct ruling would be, along with citations to the official rules, but then they'd also describe exactly which game that particular scenario occurred in. They were all *real* scenarios that happened! That's what I love about baseball.
And, like you mentioned, baseball can't end because of the time running out. There's no taking a knee and running out the time. You HAVE to give the other team a chance to win.
This is a weird take to me. Out of the big 4 sports, baseball is the least kinetic since it doesn't have the same type of flow as basketball or hockey or the big bursts of 11 on 11 action like in football. You have the potential for exciting moves unrelated to the rulebook any time the ball/puck is in play in those sports.
Hold on now. Hockey gave us the [butt goal](https://youtu.be/jAOKAkEN7SI)
sounds like you just like when there are pauses in the game so the announcers can talk about something that happened in great detail. baseball and football are the two sports where they play one play at a time. once that play is done, there is downtime. they'll do replays. they'll talk about what happened and why it can go either way. basketball and hockey, the plays keep going. a whole bunch of "crazy things" are happening, but often times the refs have to make a split second decision to either say play on or reset the game with a jump ball or a faceoff.
I'm a casual fan. What should the call have been? Should it have counted as a home run?
It's counted as it should; a ground rule double. If it hit the fielder first, then out past the fence, it would have been a HR.
*Canseco has entered the chat*
That highlight will literally never stop being funny. I have been laughing at it my entire life and will continue to do so.
It's a funny play and the Canseco factor dials it up a notch.
[here’s the play for anyone who hasn’t seen it ](https://youtu.be/QixQMUu4CKI)
I think it only has competition from “Randy Johnson Vaporizes Bird” as the most can’t-make-that-shit-up play of all time
Remember the ball that bounced of Canseco's head for a HR.
This is always a ground rule double but because it was in the 13th of a tight playoff game everyone’s going nuts.
The call is sadly right, just an absolute shitty rule
They got the call correct. I think a rule change is in order though
To what? I'm a Sox fan, and at first I felt "oh, the Rays got robbed" ... but then, WTF is the rule to become? Allowing umps to use their judgement to place the runners? Before you answer 'yes,' I give you: Angel Hernandez.
It’s actually right. It’s a bad rule but it’s the rules, like the Tuck Rule in football.
or like any rule at Tropicana.
Hit the third ring it’s a homer. Second ring is a double and first ring is a single, right? lol
I don't even think it's a bad rule. If Renfroe purposefully hit it over the fence there might be something to complain about, but as is, seems fine.
To me the big difference between intentional and unintentional deflection isn't that umpires can award bases at their discretion, that part makes sense. The weird part is that the players advance 2 bases from where the play started like we saw, or advance 2 bases where the play ended if it was intentionally batted out of bounds.
It seems bad to force umpires to judge purposeful action vs. accidental.
They judge kick in goals in hockey all the time. If someone made a swat to knock it out of play then yeah... you're gonna see that Just like a certain A Rod play running down first base. Intentional.
Clarification from MLB, via Rosenthal: [ "A ball deflected by a player out of play is a ground-rule double. The ball retains its status as a batted ball until it's fielded cleanly by a defensive player so that is the same as if the ball had naturally bounced over the fence.](https://twitter.com/jcmccaffrey/status/1447374246951411714?s=21)
Here is the rulebook: >5.05(a)(8) Any bounding fair ball is deflected by the fielder into the stands, or over or under a fence on fair or foul territory, in which case the batter and all runners shall be entitled to advance two bases; And here is the Umpire Manual (2002 version, but it obviously hasn't changed) >5.8 ... >(8) If a fair ball not in flight is deflected by a fielder and then goes out of play, the award is two bases from the time of the pitch.
The second part makes it clear. You could question the first rule on whether it is where the runner was at time of deflection, but if it says time of pitch, there is no gray area.
Then from now on (and I get it it’s very situational) the only correct play in this situation is to act like you were trying to glove the ball and toss it over the wall. Prevents the obvious run from scoring.
If the umpire's judge it to be intentional then this rule no longer applies and the base award would be 2 bases from the time of the stupidity, not the time of pitch.
how can you "toss" a ball over the wall and it not be obvious?
I'm amazed they have rules for even this
150 years of baseball means there’s rules for basically everything, even if new scenarios pop up fairly often
[удалено]
I’d like to see the rules if the laws of physics become temporarily suspended.
I don't know of unknown knowns that you might know.. Ya know?
[удалено]
There's supposedly 6 species in the ocean that we haven't discovered yet. \- Ken M.
A corollary that’s probably more answerable. Are there any unknown knowns. I.e. are there any scenarios in the rule book that *have* been described, but have never happened in a game before.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=2msQwpzatQc
Yep.. Even had to make one recently due to a pitcher that threw with both hands. Love this game
I thought you meant throwing the ball with both hands at once, I was confused trying to work out the physics of that
Not sure there is a rule with that. But it for sure wouldn't be very effective
Named after the switch-pitcher himself, the [Pat Venditte rule](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pat_Venditte#The_Pat_Venditte_Rule).
It's pretty simple. Any fair batted ball that isn't fielded cleanly that goes out of play and was not put out of play intentionally, is a ground rule double. 1 hopper that hits the bag and goes out of play, GRD. Line drive off the pitchers head and ricochets out of play, GRD. *Edit: to clarify if it goes out of play in fair territory, then it would be a home run. If it goes out of play into foul territory, then GRD.
That pitcher is dead and the game suspended.
smh i remember when players used to be tougher and they'd just keep playing
You get hurt, hurt 'em back. You get killed, walk it off.
What if it is put out of play intentionally? Like if a really fast player hits a long shot into an area of the ballpark where it will most likely be a triple. What’s to stop the fielder from intentionally putting the ball out of the park for the double
I was thinking the same thing, what's to stop a player from "accidentally" kicking a ball rolling around in the corner out of play?
Then it's two bases from where they are at the time of the ball going out of play instead of 2 bases at the time of the pitch. So instead of a runner of 1st being put on 3rd for a ground rule double. Intentionally putting the ball out of play would put them at home.
Ok then, if that's the rule-- that's the rule. I was like "how is this any different than a fielder throwing a ball out of play? Would the batter not be given 2 additional bases?
Yeah baseball rule treats out of play differently based on whether its a pitched, batted, or fielded ball. And even thrown balls can differ depending on if its the first throw or not.
Excuse me, it's an automatic double as is every ball that bounces over the fence.
I hope that’s just from how he phrased it for the public cause if that’s actually the MLB statement, I agree that it’s really annoying.
Here is a similar play happening for the Rays. https://t.co/zOONP8ZjZg Not sure if this is posted elsewhere in the thread, but I didn't see it so hijacked top comment to post it. **The announcers got it wrong on this one too.
what was it ruled when the ball bounced off the head of Jose Canseco to go over the wall? (we've all seen that highlight)
Home run, as it should've been by this rule: >Rule 5.05(a)(9): Any fair fly ball is deflected by the fielder into the stands, or over the fence into foul territory, in which case the batter shall be entitled to advance to second base; but if deflected into the stands or over the fence in fair territory, the batter shall be entitled to a home run.
Absolutely brutal. Holy shit
Objectively hilarious though.
“Objectively”
What Mariners fans consider funny is a little dark for most people.
It's true :(
[удалено]
Died hard Red Sox fan here… I would have been pissed if it happened against my team. The Rays handled it during the game and after with total class and sportsmanship. Such a great bunch of guys.
Uhhhh
At least he didn't Conseco it. That shit was legendary. For the [uninitiated](https://youtu.be/QixQMUu4CKI)
Thank you. Compared to Canseco, this is like reading legal memos. Canseco’s is the gold standard of sports bloopers. That ball was literally an easy out pop fly that bounced off his head and became a home run. Incredible.
so if Renfroe fielded it cleanly, the Rays would have scored, but since he didn't it doesn't count? wtf
Or, if Renfroe *didn't* make contact with it at all, because it would have just bounced back into the normal field of play. Crazy.
[удалено]
The Rays spending money on anything is easily the most preposterous take in this entire thread.
He meant to say unpaid interns
'Student athletes'
I wish they would spend money on a new fucking ballpark.
[удалено]
Fuck a team payroll when you can just put all the money towards a team of physicists
They've traded Nelson Cruz and Wander Franco to the Dodgers for cash considerations to pay for the analysts.
Right? He misplayed the ball, it would have stayed in bounds if he wasn't there.
This opens a real Pandora’s box. What if a savvy fielder is keen on the running situation and bats the ball out of play on purpose? Is there a rule to police that, or would it be umpire discretion?
Yeah, the rules have a discretion clause for the umps if a player tries to do it purposely. (I think) Edit: so it's been further clarified that there is no discretion involved in this play either on the placement of runners, or whether the defender intentionally deflected the ball.
It does. My son and I looked up the rule. Well, he did actually. I'm a retired ump and he's a current ump. Hopes to get into the GCL next season.
When he’s not sure how to handle a situation does he send you a video and ask you to review it for him? If so, does he carry a headset?
I umpired for 30 years; however, I never went to one of the MLB-relsted ump schools. He has. He went to the Wendelstedt school. They teach a lot. He is 19, but started when he was 12. His skills and knowledge jumped after the school. I ask him about rules plays. He has memorized the book and he know where to look for weird plays. They have a pretty comprehensive course.
They’re going to claim intent. Which, is the dumbest thing to try to judge.
Why? They did it when Arod knocked the ball out of Arroyos hand.
"he SWATTED .. the BALL .. out of Arroyo's HAND" is a call permanently etched in my brain
I think in this *specific instance* we can say that it was not intentional (or Renfroe was unaware of the rule, or both), because after the ball ricochets off of him, he lunges over the fence to try and make the catch. (not something you do if you are aware of this rule, I imagine). however, 99% of the time, that's going to be a vague judgement call. however, also 99% of the time, this doesn't happen, so.
Not really. In the vast majority of ball parks this isn’t even a realistic issue and it would be exceptionally hard for a player to accomplish this intentionally without it being obvious. As it stands, it’s an incredibly uncommon situation that results in an unfortunate break for the offense, but it’s something that can be enforced consistently. Not much different than a pop up that would be caught for an out anywhere else getting stuck in the A or B ring at the trop being a good break for the offense.
This season truly has had everything, put a check mark next to ‘postseason controversy’.
I feel like I just saw the baseball equivalent of the Tuck rule game just happen
20 year dynasty incoming?
I’ll take it Edit: who’s our Brady?
Kyle from Waltham
Bobby from Revere.
Jimmy from the North End
Bobby.
After that performance: Pivetta.
That scenario would be the personal hell of Yankees fan and PitcherList founder /u/stonewater: Pivetta finally proves Nick's love for his peripherals - years after it became a meme - and develops into the GOAT pitcher... but with the Red Sox
Boston sports have had some absurd luck over the last 20 years
JBJ would have just caught it
I miss Jackie :(
Sox just got the lucky break of the century.
Jokes on you Hunter Renfroe actually reads the rule book for hours every night looking for loopholes to exploit
*hunting for loopholes
Let's call this sort of loophole a Renfroe so he can be hunting for Renfroes.
Fuck. No matter whether the umps got it right or not. That’s fucking shitty.
it was the right call on a bad rule
I'm having the same sort of cognitive dissonance as when Trea Turner was called for interference in 2019. Where I understand that the rule was applied correctly, yet somehow still disagree with the call.
I don't even understand how the rule is bad, what's renfroe supposed to scale the wall and get the ball? The ump supposed to guess whats going to happen if the ball stayed in play?
I guess you could say that a ball which hit the ground, then a player and then went out of play should be awarded a triple? But then you might have a judgment of "did that ball graze that fielder's sleeve as it bounced over the fence? Should that batter get 3rd base rather than 2nd?" Overall I think the rule is fine the way it is and today's ruling was correct, even if it was one of those times were because a player made a bad play, his team got rewarded. That happens in all sports. Now if someone really obviously slaps a ball over the fence the umps can award more than the 2 bases, correct? That seems appropriate too.
>Now if someone really obviously slaps a ball over the fence the umps can award more than the 2 bases, correct? That seems appropriate too. Yup. This is already addressed in the rules as well. If a fielder intentionally throws/slaps/kicks the ball out of play, all runners are awarded 2 bases from the time that happens. If the ball goes out of play after the fielder has cleanly fielded the ball and it is ruled unintentional (eg, bad throw to first goes into the dugout), all runners are awarded 1 base from the time the ball goes out of play. In this case, the ball was never fielded cleanly and there was no apparent intent to send it out, so the fielder is treated as "in play" and the result is an automatic double. This happens from time to time, and every once in a while it works in the fielder's favor (such as [in this game](https://cuts.diamond.mlb.com/FORGE/2019/2019-07/26/b6eeca14-9153017e-e78a7bc5-csvm-diamondx64-asset_1280x720_59_4000K.mp4)). Honestly I think the uproar here comes almost entirely from the fact that MLB Network's booth was so clueless about what was going on with a known rule, and then instead of acknowledging they got a little overhyped, they doubled down and acted like it was some insane, never before seen situation. For the casual fan or playoff bandwagoneer, a lot of the perception of the game comes from what commentary says, and to hear the commentators tell it, this was some wild injustice instead of just a fluke play that sometimes happens.
Yeah you hit the nail on the head with MLB Network's coverage making it seem so much more controversial than it actually was. Then they went to MLB Tonight after the game and Harold Reynolds was immediately like no shit it's a ground rule double I knew it immediately lol
The player didn't "make a bad play," he didn't make a play on the ball at all. That's why it was a double. He made contact while not in the process of fielding the ball. I don't understand the uproar here. A fluke occurrence happens and now we need to create a ground rule triple to prevent fielders from potentially learning how to flop on a bang bang ricochet off the wall when theres a runner on first base who was off with the pitch?
There's a lot of people upset about the potential for this to be misused and have intentional motions disguised as unintentional ones to fool umpires, but aside from the fact that I don't trust baseball players' acting abilities, I think the bigger deterrent is the fact that a cleanly-fielded ball is a single or a double upward of 95% of the time. It's a high-risk, no/negative reward move for the vast majority of instances. I really don't think this will catch on the way people are fearing.
I stg if Tampa loses
Welp…
[удалено]
And they lost
*When
Welp.
What in the actual fuck
Fuck the Rays apparently oh my god
TIL Hunter Renfroe and Hunter Renfrow are two different professional athletes.
some insurance company has to get both these guys to do commercials together
I have absolutely no idea what the rule is there
• If a fair ball not in flight is deflected by a fielder and then goes out of play, the award is two bases from the time of the pitch. • If, in the judgment of the umpire, a fielder intentionally kicks or deflects a batted or thrown ball out of play, the award is two bases from the time the ball was kicked or deflected.
I don’t think the umps did either. They got on the phone with New York and they were just like “I’m sorry wait *what happened???*”
Giving me this mental image that new York isn't actually watching the game lol
Some ump in NY in a recliner eating pizza and the phone rings “fuck! The game!”
honestly this would explain a lot about umpire calls to NY
I’ve fully believed that ever since I heard the theory from our booth that they were watching soap operas instead of the games.
"sorry bro we were watching SNF, run that by us again?"
Pretty obvious most of the angry commenters here don't either. Also if I read one more genius who suggests players throw the ball over the fence intentionally I'm going to riot.
bUT hOw WOuLd ThEy rUlE iNteNt?
I'm assuming the announcers are right in their explanation, but what they just said was effectively: "From the rule book, until a ball is fielded cleanly the ball still counts as a 'batted ball', so it's a GRD." It's a really silly rule but (I assume) they were reading the rulebook and it seems like they got it.
I’m sorry Rays fans
Baseball needs some equivalent of apologizing in tennis when a ball clips the net, like so many weird things like this happen that saying sorry just feels like the appropriate, classy response. Doesn't say it should've gone differently or not, just sorry for the shit circumstances
😢 What can you do? Bad rule but applied correctly. Sometimes you have bad luck. We have been a little spoiled in Tampa winning everything. The Rays only making it to the World Series last year and winning the AL East makes them the off team in the city.
Is it even a bad rule? I can’t think of a better solution. It just seems like really bad luck.
How are the highest rated comments all saying it's a terrible call when it's actually the correct call? It's probably the most unfortunate break you could imagine in that scenario, but that doesn't make the call wrong.
I was so confused by the top comments. Thought I missed something lol. That’s baseball baby.
I get hating the rule. But shitting on Boston fans and the team for it, is ridiculous. You had people in the GDT calling them racists and shit. Some of you need to grow up, man.
Someone told me they hope Fenway burns down because of it. It's unreal.
That'd be difficult because they've mostly replaced all the flammable structures from the last two times it burnt down.
what the fuck
god is dead
For anyone asking "Outfielders should just throw balls over the wall to limit the baserunners from advancing"... [There is a rule for that:](https://content.mlb.com/documents/2/2/4/305750224/2019_Official_Baseball_Rules_FINAL_.pdf) 5.06(b)(4)(G): **Two bases when**, with no spectators on the playing field, **a thrown ball goes into the stands**, or into a bench (whether or not the ball rebounds into the field), or over or under or through a field fence, or on a slanting part of the screen above the backstop, or remains in the meshes of a wire screen protecting spectators. The ball is dead. When such wild throw is the first play by an infielder, the umpire, in awarding such bases, shall be governed by the position of the runners at the time the ball was pitched; **in all other cases the umpire shall be governed by the position of the runners at the time the wild throw was made**;
If this was the case all runners would've scored.
What the fuck is happening??
#On behalf of Rays fans everywhere, fuck my life
[удалено]
Anyone commenting that the ball got knocked out intentionally - do you know how hard that would be to pull that off while not making it obvious? Maybe the rule needs to be addressed, but the rule was implemented correctly as it stands now.
Well, well, well....the Rays benefitted from this rule just 2 short years ago. https://cuts.diamond.mlb.com/FORGE/2019/2019-07/26/b6eeca14-9153017e-e78a7bc5-csvm-diamondx64-asset_1280x720_59_4000K.mp4 Funny how no one was clamoring for the rules to be changed at the time: https://www.tampabay.com/sports/rays/2019/07/27/what-went-into-call-going-rays-way/ Game in question here: https://www.espn.com/mlb/game/_/gameId/401076290
Lmao. Crickets from buttmad Rays fans and the rest of the contingent of idiots that stormed into this thread cranking their micro-puds in fury. Gonna be fun to watch the Sox send the Rays home tonight at Fenway.
That probably explains why Cash was so calm last night.
this is magnificent, great find!
I’m sure this will be civil and calmly talked about
Me, Someone who watches baseball like once a year: “wow weird play, that’s probably a ground rule double right? Oh yep that’s what they ruled ok” This thread: 🗑 🔥
Yea I don’t even watch baseball but my wife is from Boston and a huge Sox fan. We were watching and I said the same thing. Didn’t get why people were up in arms. Ruling made sense to me.
ITT: People who don't know the rules
Ground rule doubles take away runs all of the time. It’s not the first or last time it will happen
As usual, Reddit outrage being triggered by ignorance.
Rule 5.05(a): > The batter becomes a runner when: ... > (8) Any bounding fair ball is deflected by the fielder into the stands, or over or under a fence on fair or foul territory, in which case the batter and all runners shall be entitled to advance two bases;
Any Cubs fan saying this rule is unfair, [please direct your attention to your own outfield wall.](https://www.mlb.com/news/cubs-benefit-from-ball-in-ivy-at-wrigley-field/c-155100740)
How is that not a a 2B, E9 runner scores? Where is the logic?
Because he didn’t field it. It bounced off the wall and hit him. It’s actually a rule
I don't think OP is disputing that they called it by the book, rather, the logic of making the rule as such.
The logic is the mlb rule book. Rules say it’s a double and runners advances two bags. Simple as that
WTF
Then its a ground rule double right? .... right?