Wait for it ...

That's what surprised me last night. Just about every angle showed he missed the plate. I just don't understand why Bud Black didn't come out of the dugout and protest the call.

 

No angle showed he missed the plate. Holliday is blocking the view of the plate from one angle and Barrett is blocking the view from the other angle.

The best the replays show you is that Holliday's hand hits Barrett's foot. Where, exactly, Barrett's foot is is not discernible from any replay I have seen.

 

I've been saying all day that replay would have done absolutely no good here. I've seen the play probably 50 times, and not once could you overrule the safe call.

 

Well never mind that argument then. Was trying to get the paper done last night when the play happened and have yet to see a replay of it on SC or anywhere today.

 

......Rack him. Great interview. [/Rome]

 

Bingo. Once Barrett's foot comes across, you can't tell if it's in front of the plate or on it.

The call on the field would have stood, so calls for replay are silly.

KY -- On the replay you cannot see him touch the plate, but you really can't tell that he didn't, either.

Without an overhead camera, there's just no way to tell.

Guy with the best look at it took his time and made the call. That's the best anyone can hope out of sports or life, really.

 

Thanks for clearing it up, Zeke.

 

I like to work in a little philosophy from time to time.

It is what it is, you know? Think about it, analyze it...

 

Not trying to be an ass ... really asking here.

What could have protesting the call do for the Padres? Nothing, right? Wasted breath?

 

They could've had a do-over. Right?

No?

 

That's my thing. The purpose of arguing with an umpire in baseball generally is to try to get a call to go your way later in the game (or later in the series.) The Paders ain't playing until April either way.

 

Go Paders!

Oh, wait.