WORLD SERIES: DOGERS v BLUE Js 10/31/25 Game 6

[ashbury]

2 minutes ago, Parfigliano said:

Bad base running read on that ball.  Guy caught it shoulder high.

Absolutely.  But I still feel bad for him - he had multiple things on his mind since he wanted to score the tying run any way possible. Resulted in being the goat.

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

3 minutes ago, Parfigliano said:

Bad base running read on that ball.  Guy caught it shoulder high.

He was “feelin’ it”

Got too excited. Like when Punto ran through that stop sign at 3rd in 2009 or 2010

[Blyleven2011]

27 minutes ago, ashbury said:

Whale of an entertaining WS!

It would be alot more exciting if the twins could ever find the right formula to get to the World Series  ...

It has been a great Series for the ages , stress factor tomorrow night will be high ,...

Morris was in the stands , maybe he came to pitch a 10 inning shutout tomorrow night ...

[tony&rodney]

Just a query - Was anyone else surprised that the umpires did not go out to see if the ball was in fact not playable? I mean the centerfielder raised his hands over his head but that isn't his call. I didn't see video of who picked up the ball. I probably just missed it. Fox did not show a slow motion or stop action shot or again I just missed it. Wondering, wtf.

Went back and looked at the replay. CF puts hands up, umpires never got anywhere near ball, rule ground rule double, centerfielder just picks up the ball and throws it in. 

This was a little strange. It was a running scoring triple if the fielder picks it up and throws it in. No comment from Smoltz and crew. The ball didn't go under the padding. It hit flush and sat there. Maybe tomorrow there will be a different view. I think that was a decoy by Dean (CF) and he pulled it off. 

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

I thought the call was within the spirit of the rule. But as a fan, it’s hard to know. The runner circled the bases and scored, which excited people. With a normal bounce, the batter-runner only gets as far as second base. 

[tony&rodney]

9 hours ago, Hosken Bombo Disco said:

I thought the call was within the spirit of the rule. But as a fan, it’s hard to know. The runner circled the bases and scored, which excited people. With a normal bounce, the batter-runner only gets as far as second base. 

The more I think about it and after watching several replays, my only conclusion is that it was the single worst call of consequence that I have seen in baseball. Big claim. The ball was hit to the deepest part of the park. Dean pulls up to wait for a carom off the wall. No carom. At that point with Barger running it is an easy triple. He, smartly, throws his hands up. We see the ball at the base of the wall. The umpires emphatically rule it a dead ball, double. The protocol is for an umpire to then check to see that the ball is, in fact, wedged to a minimal degree which would require more than a minimal effort for the fielder to pick it up. Could the fielder pick the ball up with the same effort as if it was sitting on the grass. We then, via replays see the outfielder pick up the ball with zero effort. Also, we can see there is zero distance beneath the wall for the ball to go under. We cannot know unless we were actually there but it looks like a the ball hit at an angle that it just sat there. You know who could determine the exact situation without any shadow of doubt? Any one or all of the umpires going out and taking a look and having the crew chief pick up the ball. The final verdict is that Dean ruled the ball unplayable. He must have somehow instantly decided that it was worth the gamble because he wasn't close enough to the ball to know if it was actually wedged. He put his hand around the ball when he picked it up, which says all we need to know. The umpires made the biggest f'up in World Series history. 

FWIW, I actually don't care who wins the World Series unless it is the Twins. The Twins are my team and all the other 29 are equally loved when not playing the Twins because I'm a baseball fan. That's right, don't hate me because I don't hate the Yankees either, lol.

[Blyleven2011]

36 minutes ago, tony&rodney said:

The more I think about it and after watching several replays, my only conclusion is that it was the single worst call of consequence that I have seen in baseball. Big claim. The ball was hit to the deepest part of the park. Dean pulls up to wait for a carom off the wall. No carom. At that point with Barger running it is an easy triple. He, smartly, throws his hands up. We see the ball at the base of the wall. The umpires emphatically rule it a dead ball, double. The protocol is for an umpire to then check to see that the ball is, in fact, wedged to a minimal degree which would require more than a minimal effort for the fielder to pick it up. Could the fielder pick the ball up with the same effort as if it was sitting on the grass. We then, via replays see the outfielder pick up the ball with zero effort. Also, we can see there is zero distance beneath the wall for the ball to go under. We cannot know unless we were actually there but it looks like a the ball hit at an angle that it just sat there. You know who could determine the exact situation without any shadow of doubt? Any one or all of the umpires going out and taking a look and having the crew chief pick up the ball. The final verdict is that Dean ruled the ball unplayable. He must have somehow instantly decided that it was worth the gamble because he wasn't close enough to the ball to know if it was actually wedged. He put his hand around the ball when he picked it up, which says all we need to know. The umpires made the biggest f'up in World Series history. 

FWIW, I actually don't care who wins the World Series unless it is the Twins. The Twins are my team and all the other 29 are equally loved when not playing the Twins because I'm a baseball fan. That's right, don't hate me because I don't hate the Yankees either, lol.

I thought the same thing , the ball was exposed more than 3/4 showing  , it wasn't stuck stuck and yes CF had no problem wrapping his hand around the ball and throwing it back in , it was a very bad call , I may be mistaken , I think it was sent to new York for review and they also ruled it a dead ball ( did they rule it a dead ball for a possible 7th game to increase revenue for MLB , its quite possible , love of money is the root of all evil )  investigating minds want to know ...

It was a very bad call that crushed the excitement of the game , Toronto has outplayed the dodgers in my opinion  ...

[tony&rodney]

3 minutes ago, Blyleven2011 said:

I thought the same thing , the ball was exposed more than 3/4 showing  , it wasn't stuck stuck and yes CF had no problem wrapping his hand around the ball and throwing it back in , it was a very bad call , I may be mistaken , I think it was sent to new York for review and they also ruled it a dead ball ( did they rule it a dead ball for a possible 7th game to increase revenue for MLB , its quite possible , love of money is the root of all evil )  investigating minds want to know ...

It was a very bad call that crushed the excitement of the game , Toronto has outplayed the dodgers in my opinion  ...

My thing is we don't know, nobody can know unless one actually went out to the ball, took a look, and picked up the ball. We can see a dent, much like when a player or the ball hits a padded wall. We can see there is no gap beneath the wall. Our brain tells us the ball should have caromed. Is it stuck? Only the umpires could know and for some strange reason they did not go out to the wall to check. The replay was a joke. They made the decision in less than 60 seconds. At no time during the past season was there a decision from New York rendered that quickly. Actually, they couldn't possibly rule on it and they knew it, thus the quick call. It was too funny to watch, via replay, that Dean just casually picks up the ball with zero effort. I believe it would be a learning moment for baseball if Dean states he thought the ball was wedged in the wall and raised his hands but realized when he picked it up that the ball was playable. Doubtful that plays out. 

The whole thing was ridiculous. I have seen umpires in high school, college, town ball, amateur, and minor league games run out to determine whether an outfielder could not play the ball. In the World Series the umpires could not WALK out to check? Last thing ... I actually stood up when the play was still in action before Dean picked up the ball and said "Go out and check the ball!"

It's over but what a missed chance for MLB. Tie game, bottom of the 9th inning with extra innings coming. I'll avoid the idea that MLB wanted a 7th game.

[IndianaTwin]

It was also a risk on the part of Dean to throw his hands up. By doing so, he turned it into a sure triple and potential homer if the umps don't give him the call. 

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

And that was only the first crazy play of the inning! The applicable rule talks about the ball going “through or under the fence [or scoreboard etc]”. The ball was under that fence padding. It was easy to pick up but the rule doesn’t touch on that aspect of it. I also give Kike Hernandez (LF) credit for knowing the rule and working the umps too, and to the Blue Jays for treating it like a live ball,

[ashbury]

I figured there had to be an official rule covering the case but couldn't find it quickly last night, and assumed it was some sort of ground rule.  I looked again this morning and found Rule 5.05(a)(7).  Among the cases it covers is "...or which sticks in a fence" in which case 2 bases are awarded. 

The rule doesn't say it has to be un-dislodge-able, and by ordinary use of the word "sticks" I'd say the replay confirms that that's what happened.  The ball didn't bounce like one normally does - it stuck to the bottom of the outfield wall. (Maybe the rules should be rewritten to get rid of the quaint term "fence.")

One might wonder why the case last night is different than the ball taking a "bad bounce" that similarly defeats a good defender's positioning, but I can't think of a way to reword the rule that wouldn't lead to hair-splitting in the heat of the moment.

A ball hit to that spot, landing either six inches further or six inches shorter, would be a run-scoring double with ordinary defense. The rule recognizes that but shortchanges the lead runner by probably one base.  Toronto fans are left in the position of pleading for a fluke outcome akin to a bad bounce that didn't actually happen, in order to score the tying run in addition. And allowing that first runner to score (by a slightly changed rule) would not have changed the situation when the game-ending play happened - Barger would have had the same incentive to be exactly as aggressive, and would have been burned.

Good straightforward call by the umps, I say now.