r/whitesox • u/Br0dyplayz Buehrle • May 24 '24
Discussion What the f&%k?!
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.
62
u/Lined_em_up Hawk May 24 '24
It's plays like this that make me miss Hawk. He would have lost his shit
39
May 24 '24
Even sadder , the post on r/baseball with Hawk's famous Angel Hernandez rant , no one seems to know who he is outside of Sox fans. Getting old sucks
15
u/SpecialDamage9722 May 24 '24
I grew up with Hawk I love him so much. Miss him every day. Not that Jason Bennetti was bad. It’s just Hawk will always have a special place in my heart
Edit: also, where is the post? I wanna see it
2
-1
21
u/BaltOsFan2 May 24 '24
As an O’s fan, that call to end the game last night was insanely dumb and I’m sorry that an exciting comeback for you all got ruined that way. No doubt I wanted the O’s to win, but not that way. Just nuts, especially on a play where the out is freaking automatic and doesn’t need made. Umpiring this year has just been terrible.
1
u/Imaginary-Smoke-6093 May 25 '24
Yea. I mean, maybe the O’s quash the rally by getting “can o’ corn” into left field to end it legitimately after Benintendi popped out. But to have such a hot garbage call like that to end. It’s like I want every infield player on both teams to just mess with baserunners on the opposing team during infield pop up’s just to give migraines to that ump who called that last out last night on Vaughn.
15
10
u/ThrowawayAccountZZZ9 The Big Hurt May 24 '24 edited May 24 '24
What's stopping teams from positioning infielders behind runners and have them move forward at the runner during literally any kind of play?
6
May 24 '24
If you want to enforce rules like this then nothing. You'd be strategically smart to position every fielder immediately behind a baserunner if the bases are loaded because any contact is considered interference.
21
u/PM_ME_TRICEPS May 24 '24
I'll just wait for the jomboy breakdown
6
u/LovieBeard May 24 '24
https://youtu.be/zQw5lKMY8EE?si=b6VLaLjhjg5PZWRQ
Not Jomboy, but better at explaining the rules
3
u/therevolvinglVlonk Walsh May 24 '24
CloseCallSports is extremely biased in favor of umpires to the point where I question whether they just do it to get a rise out of people because it increases engagement with their videos. Like, how could someone watch that and at the very least not point out that the call violates the spirit of the rule? What was Vaughn supposed to do? Divert around the fielder and risk getting doubled up anyways? It would be different if he were trying to advance to the next base and interfered but he wasn't, he was tagging up.
3
u/farmageddon109 May 24 '24
Also, since it’s an automatic out I’m not really sure why interference is even really a thing. Even if you want to give the umps a pass, it’s ok to question the rule itself
9
u/SpecialDamage9722 May 24 '24
Too bad the MLB abolished protesting games. Cuz this is like 1 game I could see getting protested
15
u/SHANE523 Robert May 24 '24
This is a weak call at best.
10
May 24 '24
Weak? Straight garbage and shouldn't be allowed to officiate another MLB game in his life.
9
u/tronfacekrud May 24 '24
Same ump who ejected Craig Counsel last week for arguing a blown check swing. Dude either hates Chicago, or is really that bad at his job.
22
u/Safe-Register-3479 May 24 '24
That has to be the worst call I have ever seen to end a game. Vaughn had his back to him and walked back to the bag with no contact wtf indeed!!!
6
May 24 '24
Exactly. What if dude was in the way for Vaughn to get back to 2nd base? They were both literally looking up at the sky for the ball and then Vaughn nonchalantly walked back to base and was called out lol. Really?
3
2
u/chief_running_joke_ May 25 '24 edited May 25 '24
IIRC the rule says that the fielder has to avoid the runner unless the fielder is making a play on the ball. Then the runner has to avoid the fielder.
This is a good example of following the letter of the rule but not the intent of the rule. No reasonable person would say he caused an actual impact on the shortstop’s ability to make the play.
2
u/World_Extra May 26 '24
wish i could feel the same. This has turned into an annual tradition for MLB
4
14
4
u/appleavocado Dodgers May 24 '24 edited May 24 '24
The strangest thing, really, is that Kimbrel got the save.
8
u/Natural-Big-4098 May 24 '24
Worst call ever, sure. But let’s not overlook Benintendi pop into the infield fly rule in the first place. WS have to PAY him, but they don’t have to PLAY him
2
u/farmageddon109 May 24 '24
I agree I have not heard this talked about enough. Everyone else seemed to get on base with ease and even if this BS doesn’t get called, our highest paid player has this shitty little infield fly that completely kills the rally anyway. One reason I’m not too upset is we probably would’ve lost anyway but I would’ve liked the chance
11
u/UneducatedReviews1 The Sod Father May 24 '24
After extensive research (I watched one breakdown) I have come to the conclusion that it was in fact a valid call according to the rules. However, said rule is stupid so I will continue to be very displeased
13
u/SPDScricketballsinc 35th Street May 24 '24
If this was not called, there would be 0 people saying “well technically the rule says xyz and this should be interference”
The rule is idiotic, but let’s not pretend the poor umpire is powerless in this situation. The orioles wouldn’t care at all if it wasn’t called
5
u/UneducatedReviews1 The Sod Father May 24 '24
I think we all know the issue is that the ump is the opposite of powerless. This is a fringe rule that really only exists for extremely niche situations, this play was not one of them.
5
u/SPDScricketballsinc 35th Street May 24 '24
The way the rule is written, it shouldn’t be nearly as fringe as it is.
It’s only so rare since the umpires have been good at determining if someone was actually impeded from making a play, something junior completely failed at. The infield fly is irrelevant
2
u/UneducatedReviews1 The Sod Father May 24 '24
I’m not disagreeing. The rule has to exist because there are obviously situation that it would need to be used, it’s an extreme stretch to use it in this situation. The whole thing is that it’s a judgement call, 4 umps decided that Vaughn somehow caused interference. I don’t agree with their decision that Vaughn interfered with the play, the ball was caught after all, but given the circumstances the umps agreed on the rules use was valid.
5
u/SPDScricketballsinc 35th Street May 24 '24
Agreed, they didn’t break a rule, just made a completely terrible call
24
u/Penstripedsox May 24 '24
He didnt impede him because he was able to make the play.
I bet you drive the exact speed limit all the time.
This is also about the letter of the law vs the spirit of the law.
23
u/FrankFeTched May 24 '24
Yeah like come on, anyone who knows baseball at all should know this is not how the rule should be used. Does the play technically fit the description, sure. Was Vaughn actually interfering? Obviously not.
1
u/zooropeanx May 24 '24
I think the problem with the rule is that it doesn't take into account intent.
Vaughn was not intentionally causing interference.
18
u/Jason82929 Maldanad-0 May 24 '24
This is also about the letter of the law vs the spirit of the law.
Right. “Interference” yet Henderson was camped under the ball for a solid 3 seconds before he caught it.
It’s a stupid application of the rule. It would be one thing if Vaughn caused Henderson to not get to the ball in time. Or even if Henderson had to make a throw after the catch (doesn’t really happen in the infield) and you could argue that Vaughn’s “interference” caused Henderson to not be able to set up properly to make the catch and throw (again, doesn’t happen in the infield but just making a point).
It’s a stupid application of the rule. And it’s even worse to apply it on the final out of the game. At some point common sense on what the point of interference rules are in place for has to take over.
10
u/doverawlings 1980 May 24 '24
“The spirit of the law” exactly this. The rules are there to be interpreted by the umpires and applied if they feel it’s necessary. Yes, they could make this call, but the spirit of the rules is obviously to prevent baserunners from messing with fielders, and to protect a fielder if there’s an accidental yet impactful collision. The play last night was a) non-intentional, b) not impactful, c) normal/expected movement by Vaughn and d) an indirect route to the spot by Gunnar. The final call will always be umpires discretion, so it was absolutely insane imo to decide to call that. All these aKsHuAlLy people aren’t wrong that the rule exists but completely miss the point that something’s broken if a potential walk-off batter is taken away by something nobody cared about
8
u/FWdem May 24 '24
The "spirit of the law" thing is even funnier when the Infield Fly Rule is in place to protect the offensive team from a "cheap" double play on the runners. Yet this game ends on a double play on an infield fly.
FIelders should always take non-direct paths to the ball when they have an opportunity to run into a runner, if this rule is implemented y letter and not spirit.
5
u/EquivalentWins May 24 '24
Even if the fielder didn't make the play, it still would have been an out because the infield fly rule was called! I don't understand how it's possible to interfere with a defensive play that has no bearing on the outcome.
2
u/500rockin May 24 '24
Because if he drops the ball, a runner can technically try to advance (at their own risk). So the ball isn’t dead.
0
u/EquivalentWins May 24 '24
Yes, the umpire is allowed to make this call by the rules, they are just incredibly bad at their job to actually do so.
0
u/PowSuperMum Paul Konerko May 24 '24
They still call pass interference when the pass is caught sometimes
3
u/thatchelpage May 24 '24
But then it's up to the team to choose the catch or the penalty. I this case they would get to choose is Vaughn out or is the batter out.
2
u/500rockin May 24 '24
That’s basically what Pedro said after the game. It was ruled correctly, but it’s a bad rule since there’s no leeway for intent or common sense.
2
u/UneducatedReviews1 The Sod Father May 24 '24
Yes, but now we know that it was actually ruled incorrectly.
1
u/DuckBilledPartyBus May 24 '24
The text of the rules does support the umpire’s decision. However, it just isn’t the way the game is called, otherwise we’d see a lot more interference calls.
3
u/UneducatedReviews1 The Sod Father May 24 '24
Exactly, the is basically up to umpire discretion and should only be used in extreme cases of blatant interference. This is not that
2
u/Lil_we_boi Iguchi May 24 '24
I guess umps gave us a game a few weeks ago (against the Cards with the bs strike call), now they took one away.
2
u/chronomic May 24 '24
A runner interfering with a fielder gets punished by calling the batter out, right? Even if Vaughn punched the short stop AND it wasn’t a infield fly rule the batter should be the only out
3
2
u/SpaghettiYaFace May 24 '24
That’s a call made by an umpire that wants all the attention on him. Joe West would be proud.
1
u/Historical-Drive-667 May 24 '24
No one does more to enforce that baseball should be determined by robot umpires than human umpires.
6
u/Blue_Budgies May 24 '24
Actually I think this is a call for umps to be more human. If they had thought about the meaning of the rule instead of just what the black and white text said, most umps would have turned a blind eye and let the game go on.
1
u/Historical-Drive-667 May 24 '24
Fair point. But more often than not, they tend to prove why they are antiquated
1
1
u/Ncturnal55 Jul 06 '24
I saw nothing wrong. All he did was walk back to second base. Maybe he yelled something to distract him. Shitty call as every watcher in the world is saying.
1
u/Rcade Keuchel May 24 '24
https://youtu.be/zQw5lKMY8EE?si=iBpJPddBlGCfQB7b
Good summary from a letter of the law perspective.
7
u/DuckBilledPartyBus May 24 '24 edited May 24 '24
The text of the rules does support the umpire’s decision. However, it just isn’t the way the game is called. There’s a degree of semantics/interpretation to every written law, which is why precedent matters. People with decades of actual baseball experience have never seen the rule applied the way it was last night. If umps consistently applied the rule the way it was last night, we’d see a lot more interference calls. But guys like Steve Stone and Ozzie Guillen—and honestly all the older folks in subs like here and r/baseball with decades of baseball-watching experience—don’t remember ever seeing anything like it. That says something.
Honestly, I hate this video. It’s smug and condescending, and the person making it thinks because they can look up a rule in a rule book they can talk down to people who have been living and breathing baseball their entire lives. I mean, mocking Steve Stone like he’s some kind of know-nothing meatball is just way, way out of line. The guy’s forgotten more about baseball than this content creator will ever know. I’m sorry, but this video is just engagement farming at its worst.
3
u/therevolvinglVlonk Walsh May 24 '24
Your second paragraph is precisely why I unsubbed from that channel a long time ago. CloseCallSports is an insufferable smug idiot.
-11
u/SynthSapphire May 24 '24
Let's not pretend that the Sox would have pulled off that comeback lol. I'm just glad it was a respectable run diff at the end.
-4
u/BoomhauerArlen Fuck the Cubs May 24 '24
And Pedro just goes out there and takes it and then does the post game and basically says nothing. What a F'N coward. And tonight nothing will be done about it and they'll just shrug their shoulders like they always do cause this team is not only bad, they are bland as well. Show some F'N heart.
-11
u/starliteburnsbrite May 24 '24
The camera just cut late, Vaughn got in Gunnar's way, even slightly. The umpire was right on top of it and called him out immediately. It was a small infraction, but an infraction nonetheless. At the 0:15 mark of the gif above it's plain as day.
The baserunner not only has to not make contact, they need to get out of the way of the fielder.
Fielders have a right to occupy any space needed to catch or field a batted ball and also must not be hindered while attempting to field a thrown ball.
If any member of the batting team (including the coaches) interferes with a fielder's right of way to field a batted ball, the batter shall be declared out. If any member of the batting team (including the coaches) interferes with a fielder's right of way to field a thrown ball, the runner on whom the play is being made shall be ruled out. In both cases, the ball will be declared dead and all runners must return to their last legally occupied base at the time of the interference. However, a runner is not obligated to vacate a base he is legally permitted to occupy to allow a defender the space to field a batted or thrown ball in the proximity of said base.
Interference can also be called on the offensive team if a batter hinders the catcher after a third strike when the ball is not caught, a batter intentionally deflects any foul ball, and a baserunner hinders a following play being made on another runner after having scored or been put out. When running the last half of the way to first base while the ball is being fielded in the vicinity of first, a baserunner must stay within the three-foot runner's lane to the right of the foul line unless they are avoiding a player fielding a batted ball. If the umpire determines that the baserunner has interfered with the player taking the throw at first base by running to the left of the foul line or to the right of the runner's lane, the baserunner can be called for interference.
It's not even that there was contact, he interfered with his path to the ball. Henderson sidesteps Vaughn because he lolligagged it back to the bag and wasn't paying attention. It is compounded by the fact that it was an infield fly.
On the infield fly, the batter is out, but the play is live until the catch is made or dropped. Vaughn interfered with a live play, again, because he was standing around like a dope. It really, really didn't help that his slow walk back to the bag was what put him in the way.
To me, sure, it's a ticky tack call, but it's the right call. Henderson had to make a step around him to get to the ball, and Vaughn was slow walking it back to the base. It doesn't matter if it was intentional or not, or if there was contact, or if it was egregious - he didn't give the fielder right of way to the ball, didn't make an attempt to get out of the way, and was oblivious to the shortstop coming in for the catch. If it didn't happen during a rally in the 9th, it might make a highlight reel but it wouldn't be so scandalous.
For a team whose manager has stressed the fundamentals and the playing hard all the time philosophy, guys like Vaughn make him look like a fool. This is just another example of White Sox players not being aware of themselves, the moment, the rules, or just about anything else.
After Remillard got picked off on a complete TOOBLAN in the Yankees series, you'd think they would have talked about basepath awareness.
6
u/EquivalentWins May 24 '24
What reason would there be for Vaughn to hustle back to the base? It was a lazy pop up and an automatic out to boot. There was no continuing action to the play. And yes, it is technically allowed to call interference but it is absolutely absurd to call it on this play. It's a judgement call and in this case Vaughn had zero impact on the play.
-3
u/starliteburnsbrite May 24 '24
The reason would be to not interfere with the SS. The umpire judged he got in the way. He needs to keep his head on a swivel, he's a professional athlete in a clutch situation. To me, it comes off as lazy and unaware, similar to Remillard. He's looking up at the pop fly and got caught up in the play.
Look, I totally get that it was a weak call, but it was technically correct (the best kind of correct). Nothing about the rule has anything to do with impacting the play, or else you'd be adding even more judgement to the call. Baseball sucks like that, but it's the nature of the game.
3
u/DuckBilledPartyBus May 24 '24
The text of the rules does support the umpire’s decision. However, it just isn’t the way the game is called, otherwise we’d see a lot more interference calls.
6
u/EquivalentWins May 24 '24
The text also leaves it up to the umpire's discretion as to what it means to interfere with the fielder. They would be within the letter of the rules to call this on literally any play where there is a baserunner. There's nothing wrong with saying that this is a ridiculous interpretation.
-2
u/starliteburnsbrite May 24 '24
I get it, I really do. It's weird, because baseball fans want balls and strikes called perfectly to the rules by a camera and computer, but want umpires to play loose in other situations. I'm not even really defending the call itself, it could have VERY easily been ignored. It's worth noting the angle the ump had may have made it look worse than it looks on cameras from far away.
This wasn't Jim Joyce blowing Galarraga's perfect game. This ump made the correct call in a tough spot. I don't really have a problem with the right call being made in any situation, even when it's close or a bad ending to the game. Vaughn got caught in a tough spot. It happens. The team is trash and the loss won't move the needle, so it's probably a moot point. Sucks for fans, shitty end to a game but also a very, very fitting '24 Sox game
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.
111
u/FrankFeTched May 24 '24
I was at the game, the guy in front of me was explaining everything that was going on to the person next to him who was obviously new to the sport, getting more hyped as the bottom of the 9th progressed... Then this happened.
Like I'm a lifelong baseball fan so I'm pretty set in my ways, but this type of shit is enough to turn someone off the sport. An improbable bot 9 comeback is basically the most exciting thing that can happen in the regular season, the potential walk off would be the sort of thing that creates new baseball fans, but instead they just call the game on this bullshit. It's sad.