have you ever seen an umpire

[BalmyBreezes]

Just like middlebrooks said after the game he was trying to get out of his way. It was a bang bang play and he didn't have time to do much. If you notice only the lower part of his body, actually lower legs was in/near the baseline so he was clearly trying to get his legs out of the way for the base runner. When has a baseball player tried to trip another player? Craig try's to go over him but his left leg trips over middlebrooks ass. Unfortunately it's obstruction and the correct call IMO. But in reality middlebrooks is making an effort to get out of the baseline.

Do you have a clue what the baseline is? I explained it earlier. What were you sox fans watching? Oh, I guess I just answered my own question

 

[halekulani]

whether you like the rule or not, it's obviously obstruction

it's not like pitchers who lose control of the ball get a take back if they hit the batter b/c it was an "accident"

 

[NickPappagiorgio]

It was decided by the players, when you try a WWF move and trip a player it will get called. It was an easy call. Only real controversy this series was that green substance crap in Jon Lester's glove when he was pitching.

Hardly a WWF move, and the substance was rosin, as is approved. Good Luck rest of the series

 

[PatsFanatic]

Do you have a clue what the baseline is? I explained it earlier. What were you sox fans watching? Oh, I guess I just answered my own question

Hey smartass I said it was the correct call and that he was in the baseline. Read before you speak.
What I disagreed with you on is that he tried to trip him which which obviosly not the case.

Your wrong about that. We agree on the obstruction.

I mean geeze I said he was IN the baseline...wtf

 

[Willie99]

Watch the replay, he did it twice, if he's trying to get up his feet would be on the ground not flailing in the air

well then, maybe you can explain why the umps never mentioned an intentional trip

thanks in advance

 

[gmrcharity]

Im a Sox fan through and through and it was the right call. Do I like it? Absolutely not but the ump made the right call just like the umps got the call right in the first game after getting together.

 

[BalmyBreezes]

Hey smartass I said it was the correct call and that he was in the baseline. Read before you speak.
What I disagreed with you on is that he tried to trip him which which obviosly not the case.

Your wrong about that. We agree on the obstruction.

I mean geeze I said he was IN the baseline...wtf

you're right, sorry

 

[PatsFanatic]

Im a Sox fan through and through and it was the right call. Do I like it? Absolutely not but the ump made the right call just like the umps got the call right in the first game after getting together.

^this

Sucks don't it

 

[PatsFanatic]

you're right, sorry

no prob mang

 

[BalmyBreezes]

well then, maybe you can explain why the umps never mentioned an intentional trip

thanks in advance

The ump mentioned it in the post game press conference. You need to quit bonding with belichek and Ernie Adams about rules interpretation. It was an easy call.

 

[Illini]

All I know is I'm the only one on here that is qualified to assess the umpiring. And what they did was textbook and absolutely right, without question. The rest of you have no idea what you are talking about.

Carry on.

 

[Willie99]

All I know is I'm the only one on here that is qualified to assess the umpiring. And what they did was textbook and absolutely right, without question. The rest of you have no idea what you are talking about.

Carry on.

you must not comprehend what some people are saying, but thanks for your expertise

carry on

 

[Willie99]

The ump mentioned it in the post game press conference. You need to quit bonding with belichek and Ernie Adams about rules interpretation. It was an easy call.

"With the defensive player on the ground, without intent or intent, it's still obstruction," Joyce said. "You'd probably have to ask Middlebrooks that one, if he could have done anything. But that's not in our determination."

yep, you're right, the ump said he called it because it was an intentional trip

please, and try to comprehend what arguments are being made and what arguments are not being made, not comprehending a simple discussion and then throwing in lies and other irrelevant bullshit just make you look silly

 

[BalmyBreezes]

"With the defensive player on the ground, without intent or intent, it's still obstruction," Joyce said. "You'd probably have to ask Middlebrooks that one, if he could have done anything. But that's not in our determination."

yep, you're right, the ump said he called it because it was an intentional trip

please, and try to comprehend what arguments are being made and what arguments are not being made, not comprehending a simple discussion and then throwing in lies and other irrelevant bullshit just make you look silly

He made mention of the trip as well in the conference, you think he only said 1 sentence, dumfuk?

 

[BalmyBreezes]

"With the defensive player on the ground, without intent or intent, it's still obstruction," Joyce said. "You'd probably have to ask Middlebrooks that one, if he could have done anything. But that's not in our determination."

yep, you're right, the ump said he called it because it was an intentional trip

please, and try to comprehend what arguments are being made and what arguments are not being made, not comprehending a simple discussion and then throwing in lies and other irrelevant bullshit just make you look silly

"When [Craig] tried to advance to home, the feet were up in the air and he tripped over Middlebrooks right there and immediately and instinctively I called obstruction," Joyce said.

Sounds like if Middlebrook kept his feet on the ground no call would have been made. Is it getting clearer dumass?

 

[Illini]

you must not comprehend what some people are saying, but thanks for your expertise

carry on

Not many experts on here in anything. I'm certainly no expert on much. But umpiring, I am. And all of you guys have no clue wtf you are talking about. Sorry, that is the truth.

 

[WVJOE]

Not many experts on here in anything. I'm certainly no expert on much. But umpiring, I am. And all of you guys have no clue wtf you are talking about. Sorry, that is the truth.

Well I'm expert enough to know the ump got that call right at 1B tonight in the bottom of the 9th! k:

 

[Willie99]

"When [Craig] tried to advance to home, the feet were up in the air and he tripped over Middlebrooks right there and immediately and instinctively I called obstruction," Joyce said.

Sounds like if Middlebrook kept his feet on the ground no call would have been made. Is it getting clearer dumass?

why don't you go to the follow up question? why did you choose to stop there? let me help you

---------------------------------------------------

Q. I understand what John said, that there doesn't have to be intent, but the fact that his feet were up, did that play into it at all? And is there any wiggle room, like where else could he be after he dives for the ball, what else could he be doing but laying on the floor, if you do think there's intent?
JIM JOYCE: No, as a matter of fact, the feet didn't play too much into that because he was still in the area where the baserunner needs to go to advance to home plate. And the baserunner has every right to go unobstructed to home plate, and unfortunately for Middlebrooks he was right there. And there was contact, so he could not advance to home plate naturally.

 

[Willie99]

Not many experts on here in anything. I'm certainly no expert on much. But umpiring, I am. And all of you guys have no clue wtf you are talking about. Sorry, that is the truth.

do you understand the arguments most people are making? seriously? what is it I'm arguing that I'm wrong about that your expertise overshadows?

 

[Willie99]

during the coverage of game 4, Fox Sports reports that Joe Torre says MLB will review the obstruction rule during the off season, I wonder why that may be?

would anyone be surprised if they tweak it?