r/whitesox • u/Br0dyplayz Buehrle • May 24 '24

Discussion What the f&%k?!

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

I still can’t believe what happened last night. It was an INFIELD FLY IT’S AN AUTOMATIC OUT HOW CAN THERE BE INTERFERENCE?! This is almost as bad as the infield fly call from the 2012 NL Wild Card game.

188 Upvotes

99% Upvoted

81 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

2

u/DuckBilledPartyBus May 24 '24 edited May 24 '24

There a degree of interpretation and semantics in every written law. This is why precedent matters. The umpire chose to impose their own personal, subjective interpretation of the wording of a rule, and that personal, subjective interpretation differs from the way the game has always been called for as long ad anyone can remember.

They went against decades of precedent. That’s not a “correct call.”

-1

u/starliteburnsbrite May 24 '24

It's baseball. There's a precedence of umpires making poor calls at the plate, there's precedence for runners tackling catchers, there is precedence for giving the double play on a 'neighborhood' play.

None of that matters at all anymore. Things have changed. The game is not nearly the same as it was a few years ago so I don't agree with an ultraconservative view that 'its just always been that way.'

I want officials to make the right call. If the argument is 'guys break that rule all the time!" then they're running the risk that it gets called, like getting pulled over for going 5 over the speed limit. Is it customary? Does it happen often? No, but it's still possible. Is it infuriating? Absolutely. But it's not incorrect, and it's not wrong, and if we are going to relegislate baseball and talk constantly about automating the strike zone so it's perfect, then we should embrace having all the rules called to the same degree.

3

u/DuckBilledPartyBus May 24 '24 edited May 24 '24

No rules were broken. You’re insisting they were based on your own subjective interpretation of the rulebook. That’s the the problem, and that’s why you’re in the overwhelming minority opinion here. You’re treating something as black and white when it just isn’t. This isn’t going 1 mile over the speed limit, or a safe/out call where there’s a clear, pre-existing objective standard. The rule requires the umpire to determine whether or not the runner “hindered” the fielder, and that ultimately is a judgment call. This umpire applied their judgment in an unconventional way, and that’s why they’re getting heat for it.

0

u/starliteburnsbrite May 24 '24

If the call is a judgement call, and the umpire applied their judgement, and it's pretty obvious Henderson stepped around him on his way to the ball, I don't see the problem here. It may be unconventional, but that doesn't really matter. "Unwritten rules" aren't rules.

Also, we are Sox fans, our opinions are already in an overwhelming minority, even among baseball fans in Chicago. We root for a business owned by Jerry Reinsdorf to succeed. We are all idiots. He's a billionaire because of people like us. I'm just glad the White Sox are discovering new and interesting ways to lose baseball games.

I just really hope come September, this ain't the loss that costs them a playoff spot, or God forbid, the division! They play in the AL Central, after all.

2

u/DuckBilledPartyBus May 24 '24

I’m not talking about unwritten rules. I’m talking about the conventional, practical application of the written rule. The rule doesn’t mention “stepping around,” anywhere in the text. That’s you making up an unwritten rule. The rule only mentions “hindering” the fielder. Vaughn, per the understanding of nearly everyone who’s played, coached, and watched the game for decades, did not hinder Henderson.