On a check swing when the plate umpire calls a ball, the catcher can appeal for the umpire down the line for help. (Its funny that the catcher can only get that appeal if the home plate ump grants it.) The plate umpire thinks he has it right - they only appeal if the catcher asks. The assumption is the plate umpire is humble and generous and admits he might have missed it - lets ask the gentleman down the line if he got a better view.
My question is, why does the catcher have to appeal? Why can't the umpire down the line just make the call if the plate umpire missed it? Don't they want the right call anyways? You could actually have a situation where the line ump sees a strike after the plate ump called a ball and if the catcher never asks for an appeal, the game goes on with a missed call. This is ridiculous. Eliminate appeals. Just let the line ump correct a call without the catcher asking.
In this line of thinking, the opposite should also be true. Sometimes the batter has a close check swing. The plate ump points at the batter and calls a strike. Shouldn't the batter be able to ask the line ump for an appeal like the catcher can? The situation is no different. In both cases the plate ump thinks he's right. Why is it that he can only get help to correct a ball?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
When does the discussion of Schoernering and Illegal Caucasian Dancing come?
If a caucasian ever scores an NFL touchdown we can begin that discussion.
How many times did I get the called third strike...and would often appeal, to no avail. I think this "appeal" stuff should simply be repealed.
Post a Comment