The non-reversal of Jim Joyce’s call
Posted by Andy on June 6, 2010
The morning after Jim Joyce's mistaken call on what should have been the final out of a perfect game by Armando Galarraga, I posted on this blog that there was absolutely no way that Commissioner Selig would reverse or overturn Joyce's call and change the official account of the affected game.
I was so sure because in the long history of baseball, there are many such examples of questionable calls occurring in games of both much greater and much less significance, and no such call (a judgment call by an umpire) has ever been overturned. The only reversals have come after determination that the umpire incorrectly interpreted the official rules of baseball in making a game decision.
This still leaves the question of whether MLB was correct to leave the call unchanged. I feel that unequivocally this was the right decision.
My position is best summed up by Jim Bouton, who gave his opinion to the New York Times. The Times quotes Bouton as saying:
"I never believed a game was lost because of a bad call by an umpire. Games were lost because the loser didn’t build a sufficient margin to overcome the inevitable missed calls, part of any game. (Note: Players make far more mistakes than umpires)."
Bouton hit the nail on the head. Bad calls happen, including balls and strikes, fair and foul, catches and traps, tags and missed tags, bases touched and bases missed, and throws beating runners and runners beating throws. When a perfect game happens, we now know to say that not only did the pitcher and his defense perform exceptionally, but so did the umpires.
Moreover, this was not as simple a blown call by Joyce as many seem to think. Miguel Cabrera, a terrible defensive player, had no business coming off the bag to fetch a ball headed straight for second baseman Carlos Guillen. Cabrera panicked and made a bone-head move that resulted in a much tighter play at first than if he had simply retreated to the bag and allowed Guillen to field and flip the ball.
I'm not saying that this is Cabrera's fault--after all the play was still made. But the excess of moving parts and the awkward 3-1 defensive move contributed needlessly to the complexity of the play and increased the likelihood that any umpire would make a mistake.
To go back and reverse this call would be akin to tearing up all the box scores and records from the last 140 years. The 20 times that a pitcher was perfect, he overcame all obstacles including bad calls and mistakes by everyone in play. The 2010 Tigers did not overcome all obstacles. To artificially add Galarraga to this list would cheapen what was achieved before by the other pitchers. It would cheapen the Royals' victory in the 1985 World Series by implying that a very similar missed call was deemed not important enough to be reversed.
Does anybody think we should go back and reverse some of the late Eric Gregg's calls in Game 5 of the 1997 NLCS? If baseball ever decided to change old calls, I'd like to see this game erased from the record books. As the record stands, Livan Hernandez pitched a 3-hitter that included 15 strikeouts. Only, many of the strikeouts late in that game were on called strike-threes that should have been called balls. Some of these pitches were as much as 6 inches off the outside of the plate and some of them were called by Gregg before the ball was in the catcher's mitt. (That sounds like a joke based on the umpiring by Leslie Nielsen's character in 1988's The Naked Gun, but it really happened in this 1997 NLCS game.) After the game, we got what should have been mutually exclusive results: Hernandez became a legend and Gregg became a clown. How can both be true? In reality, Hernandez is a good pitcher with a good career and some great moments and Gregg was a bad umpire who didn't stick around in MLB much longer. The official record, however, has it that Hernandez was a superstar and Gregg was just another umpire.
The Braves were robbed of a chance to rally against a single-run deficit in this game by the umpiring of Eric Gregg....or were they? I doubt the Braves hitters would tell you that. They would tell you that every umpire is different and calls a different strike zone. Sometimes those strike zones differ from game to game. They would tell you that they knew that Gregg was calling outside strikes and they knew they needed to swing at those pitches or be prepared to take a strike. Is it fair? No, but nor is it unfair. It was the way it was. Perhaps Gregg got caught up in the emotion of an exciting playoff game. Perhaps this clouded his judgment. Gregg called that game like he saw it, and Joyce called his game the other night the way he saw it.
The fact of the matter is that the way these games were called is the way they shall stand forever in history. Hernandez is credited with an achievement a little bit better than what he deserves, and Galarraga is credited with something a little bit worse than what he deserves. It goes both ways. Maybe Joyce was distracted by the enormity of the moment or by Cabrera's plodding, but the fact of the matter is that the infield hit, the 3-1 fielding play, and the call by Joyce are all what happened. Those are the facts, that is reality, and it is never going to change.
Stop telling MLB to change history.
June 6th, 2010 at 7:38 am
Bouton's logic applies just fine if you lose a 5-4 game on a bad call, but it doesn't apply at all in this instance. A perfect game is just that - perfect. You have to get every batter out. There is no margin.
What make this play unique is that it occurred on the very last play of the game (or what should have been). If this call had occurred in the 3th inning, or 8th inning, or even with one out in the 9th inning, you could not reverse it because there were other plays that came after it. If it had happened in a 5-1 game you would have to let it stand because the game was of little significance. This is different. This happened on the last play of an extremely historic game. It was very unlike every other blown call that had ever come before it. It was easily correctable - and should have been. And could have been, without any ramifications to other blown calls in the past, because there is no precedent of this exact thing ever happening before. Bud Selig dropped the ball and in my opinion is as responsible for cheating Armando Galarraga out of a perfect game as Jim Joyce was. Perhaps more so, because he had a lot more time to think about his decision.
June 6th, 2010 at 7:55 am
You are missing something here. Your argument is all well and fine, except for one thing: We are not asking the Commissioner to "change history." We are asking the Commissioner to right a wrong. It is the right thing to do. 100 years from now, no on will no who Galarraga was, but they should because he threw the 21st Perfect game in ML history, and his name should be on the list of those who accomplished this feat. It would be a win win situation for the Commissioner. By the way, if an official scorer can change his mind after a game, why can't the Commissioner? I have never thought that Selig was much of a Commissioner and now I KNOW he isn't. You want to talk about buffoons, he is your poster boy. A real class act.
June 6th, 2010 at 7:56 am
You are missing something here. Your argument is all well and fine, except for one thing: We are not asking the Commissioner to "change history." We are asking the Commissioner to right a wrong. It is the right thing to do. 100 years from now, no one will know who Galarraga was, but they should because he threw the 21st Perfect game in ML history, and his name should be on the list of those who accomplished this feat. It would be a win win situation for the Commissioner. By the way, if an official scorer can change his mind after a game, why can't the Commissioner? I have never thought that Selig was much of a Commissioner and now I KNOW he isn't. You want to talk about buffoons, he is your poster boy. A real class act.
June 6th, 2010 at 8:25 am
Drew, an official scorer can't change a hit or error into an out. That can only be done on the field.
June 6th, 2010 at 8:43 am
I think you folks are missing the central point. This is not a case of right and wrong. There are mistakes in all aspect of the game. Sometimes a fielder forgets how many outs there are and makes a bonehead play. Sometimes a pitcher loses focus and grooves a pitch. There are mental errors in all facets of the came and they are either overcome or not. And it's unfounded to attempt to grade the seriousness of this call and what reversing it would affect. Next week let's say the same thing happens with 1 out in the ninth in a game that is otherwise the same? Do we change that one too? Why should the number of runs the other team has matter? People calling for this to be overturned are looking for a bit of perfection in a world where perfection does not exist. I truly beleve that those calling for reversal are subconsciously trying to correct for other things in the world that are less perfect and there is no recourse of fixing them.
June 6th, 2010 at 8:51 am
I never expected Selig to reverse the call. It stinks what happened but Selig could recommend NFL style challanges to questionable plays or umpire opinions. I really want to thank you for your insightful comments on this issue.
June 6th, 2010 at 8:59 am
Drew, yeah the official scorer can only change a hit to an error and vice versa, he's not in charge of calling outs. That's the umpires. Now he could of changed Donald's hit to an error, but the play really didn't warrant an error since it was well placed and a close play at first.
I also agree with Bud's call. It was unfortunate, but people need to get over it.
June 6th, 2010 at 9:12 am
Andy-
There is a HUGE difference between mistakes made by players and umpires. Players are supposed to determine the outcome of the game. Make less mistakes and you are a better player and your team is more likely to win. The umps are not supposed to be determining the outcome; that is the players' role. Now, mistakes are still going to happen. That's reality. We should do everything reasonable in our power to eliminate these mistakes. Expanded use of replay, stricter assessment and evaluation of umpire, higher standards, harsher penalties... all of these would be steps in the right direction.
Now, would this situation qualify as appropriate to correct a mistake? I'm still not sure. I go back and forth on it. But I think your argument is slightly wrongheaded. Not to get all slippery-slope, but would you apply the same logic to a wrongful conviction based on faulty evidence? It would seem so. History is what it is, no? Yes, the DNA evidence was wrong, but that's what happened. Now, I realize the apparent absurdity of comparing a baseball game's result to our legal system, and maybe that is a fair criticism. But the general idea that history is history and mistakes should not be fixed because they amount to "changing history" is just flawed. If mistakes can be fixed, generally speaking, they should be IF the benefit derived from changing them offset the drawbacks. The question, for me at least, is whether the benefit here is greater than the drawback. And I'm not comfortable saying that it is. Yet. Still more for me to personally think about.
June 6th, 2010 at 9:19 am
The comparison between Joyce's call and those by Denkinger, Garcia, Gregg, etc. is not an apples-to-apples comparison. As you rightly point out, the Cardinals/Orioles/Braves had multiple opportunities before and after the umpire errors to win their respective games. The same is not true of the Tigers and Galarraga's perfect game. It is literally impossible to overcome this kind of umpire error and still get the perfect game. If Galarraga had worked harder in the third inning, it could not have overcome Joyce's mistake and still secured a perfect perfect game. Therein lies the difference. Your argument about Cabrera's overzealous play is not that the Tigers should have overcome Joyce's call, but that they had to somehow take steps to -prevent- it. That seems an unreasonable standard to me.
It is this that makes this play and game into a once-every-two-hundred-years exception that I think merited an overturning of the call. I'm not as angry about Selig's decision as some others are, but this play is so extraordinary--a perfect storm where it's the (legitimate) last play of the game, and a call that could not be "overcome," either before or after the call--that I don't see your slippery slope arguments about overturning other situations coming to fruition.
June 6th, 2010 at 9:22 am
Thank you, Scott. What you said has seemed to go over the head of just about everyone discussing this situation. If I may repeat some your words:
"If this call had occurred ... even with one out in the 9th inning, you could not reverse it because there were other plays that came after it. ... It was very unlike every other blown call that had ever come before it."
This has NOTHING to do with Andy's example of changing a call that happened with one out -- because other plays are affected by everything before it. That's why it is always silly when announcers say that, if a guy gets caught stealing and then the batter triples, that the team would have scored a run if the guy had been safe or stayed at first, because there would have been different pitch selection, different mindset of the hitter, different positions of players in the field, etc.
None of that would have happened in this case. And the 28th batter would have been wiped out like the first two innings of a game that gets called by rain. Someone may have hit his 10th home run of the year before the tarp came out, but the next morning, he is back to 9. And no one bats an eye.
June 6th, 2010 at 9:44 am
I wouldn't call Cabrera a terrible defensive player. He makes plenty of great plays and is still learning first base. The fact he went after that ball, it's his personality, he wanted to be the one making the play to finish off the game. Had he gone to first and let Guillen get it, yes, there would have been a huge gap between the runner and the bag, but Cabrera still made the play.
June 6th, 2010 at 9:45 am
The most important thing in any baseball game is who wins. If Selig changed this call, he would certainly be called on in the future to change any other bad call that could have been the last out of the game, at the very least. And that's a place I don't think he ought to be going.
June 6th, 2010 at 9:49 am
I don't know that I expected Selig to overturn the call-- it has always seemed to me that if there is a way to make a bad decision, Bud Selig will find it-- but I think it would have been appropriate.
As others have said, this was a unique situation. If the play hadn't been the last of the game, if the opposing team had gone on to score a run, if the next batter had homered or singled or even walked, I would agree. Okay. He didn't earn it. But the way it played out, Galarraga simply went out and got a 28-out perfect game instead of a 27-out one. There are literally no negative consequences to anyone for overturning that last play. The winners and losers are the same. Only two batters even have their statistics changed; one who should have been out anyway and one whose average will actually go up from losing that 28th out. It's win-win-win all around. It's as sad as what happened to Harvey Haddix, but in Haddix's case there was no element of unfairness to the situation. Here there was; so why not fix it?
You say the 2010 Tigers did not overcome ALL obstacles to a perfect game. Well, okay, but I think there's a huge distinction between the obstacles that they're supposed to have to overcome-- the other team's 27 batters-- and the obstacles that we make up for them. If someone runs a marathon, you don't wait until they get all the way to the end and then tell them "Oops, we measured wrong. This is actually a 27-mile marathon. I'm afraid you didn't finish after all." That would be insane. It's a simple matter of a wrong measurement, and it's eminently correctable. So is this call.
June 6th, 2010 at 9:53 am
Here we go again, making excuses for bad umpiring. Cabrera got in his way! He was overcome by the emotion! Boo-freakin-hoo. These guys are paid well to do one thing, and to do it well, and when they do it wrong, they deserve all the criticism they get. The worst part of this whole fiasco is that Joyce, by acting all contrite and profusely apologizing, apparently feels better about the whole thing now. That sickens me. This guy should feel HORRIBLE for a LONG time, and frankly, he should be FIRED, just like any other person in any other profession would if they so blatantly fouled up in such momentous circumstances.
And by the way, this was NOT a "judgment call." This was a black-and-white, yes-or-no, concrete bang-bang play. I'm not saying it's easy to get it right all the time, but UNLIKE Gregg's strike calls, there is a DEFINITIVE right answer to the question of "Was this call correct?" here. And the answer is no. It was not correct. If MLB joined the 21st century and allowed for video replay review, there is no question the call would be overturned. So why doesn't Selig take action to correct this grievous injustice? Don't tell me it's about the precedent that such a ruling would create. Guess what, I am perfectly comfortable with Selig reversing EVERY bad call that should have ENDED a game but didn't. (If you can't figure out the difference between this and Denkinger or Gregg, you need to have your head examined.... and if you can't figure out the difference between this and a PLAYER making an error, you need to stop blogging and check into a mental institution.)
It's time to stop coddling umpires and start holding them to standards that the rest of us hold ourselves to in our own work.
June 6th, 2010 at 9:56 am
Why is no one bringing up the George Brett pine tar incident. In that case a ruling by an umpire was overturned and the outcome of the game was actually changed. This is a much smaller, more clerical change, that effects the outcome 0%.
June 6th, 2010 at 9:56 am
This is priceless, Andy, really. I'm gonna use this line next time my boss chews me out for making a mistake. I'll let you know how it works out!
June 6th, 2010 at 10:24 am
Cool your jets, Surly Duff. You've gone too far in attacking me personally.
June 6th, 2010 at 10:28 am
The idea of comparing this to the '85 Series is asinine. Honestly, I never thought that was a call that "decided" a game. That put a runner on first with none out; I think teams have overcome that before. The Galarraga call is a unique situation. We're all huge baseball fans; have you ever, ever experienced anything like this? A blown call to cost a pitcher a perfect game? And I agree with a poster above: this is NOT a judgement call! Out and safe, like fair and foul, are not about "judgement"...they are about accuracy and getting it right. Calls on the the bases are not hard, and the out/safe at first is easier than a lot of other calls. It's right in front of the ump. Joyce blew it. Donald was out. The Tigers made the play. Blaming it on Cabrera is gutless; ball beat foot. Out. Game over. Perfect game completed. It was a unique situation, and uniquely correctable. Bud could have made it right, but chose not to.
June 6th, 2010 at 12:14 pm
I didn't think for a second that Selig would overturn the call, and I'm not sure it would have been the right thing to do, a day after the play happened. However, I strongly believe this incident should be the wake-up call MLB needs to institute some form of expanded instant replay for calls like this. The umpires have their jobs for one reason and one reason only: to call the game correctly, according to the rules of baseball. Jim Joyce failed to do that last week (he's human, he made a mistake), and it doesn't really matter whether it came on the last out of a perfect game or a "meaningless" call in a blowout -- the right call is the right call, and we should strive for it to be made by the umpires as frequently as possible. If that requires the introduction of new technology to aid umpires, then so be it. But it is the responsibility of MLB to do everything within their power to ensure that officials' calls are as close to 100% accurate as possible. Not using replay because it's not traditional, would supposedly slow the game down, or would "take away the human element" are not acceptable excuses. The right call is the right call, but humans in the heat of the moment are not always capable of making the right call (as Joyce proved), so we need to provide the umpires with as much help as possible. Mistakes should only be part of the game for players; fixable mistakes by officials are unacceptable.
June 6th, 2010 at 12:37 pm
The 20 times that a pitcher was perfect, he overcame all obstacles including bad calls and mistakes by everyone in play. The 2010 Tigers did not overcome all obstacles.
The Tigers did overcome all obstacles and retired all 27 hitters, including the last hitter.
Joyce didn't see the retirement of the last hitter but there is no doubt that it was done.
To artificially add Galarraga to this list would cheapen what was achieved before by the other pitchers.
Galarraga and the Tigers did what the other perfect game pitchers and their teammates did. Galarraga and the Tigers didn't fail to do anything the other perfect game pitchers did.
June 6th, 2010 at 12:37 pm
Ironically, as I watched the last play in the Roy Halladay perfect game unfold, I wondered how close the play would be at first, and I wondered if the umpire would call it correctly. Little did I know that less than a week later, this situation would actually arise in another game (although the throw would be coming from a different direction).
June 6th, 2010 at 12:46 pm
While I feel immensely for Galarraga, I'm glad that Selig didn't overturn this call. For one thing, it would mean that Selig actually did something, and I'm happier when I can get on his case for not doing anything.
Jim Joyce is a good umpire who made a terrible call. So what does everyone want? For him to get fired? For him to be publicly reprimanded? Neither are in the best interests of baseball on any level. He should be reprimanded privately, in some sort of umpire grading system that supposedly exists but I doubt actually does. That's the travesty of this situation, that there is no way of knowing how MLB grades its umpires, and what it does to improve umpiring overall. If anything comes out of this situation, it needs to be an overhaul of the umpiring system, in which it is known how umpires are graded, and that bad calls have an obvious impact on said grades.
I will keep saying that Miguel Cabrera deserves some of the blame for this situation. He overreacted, being that it was the potential last out of a perfect game. He made a routine play much harder, and if you don't think so, please go watch the replay again. The ball was headed right for Guillen, who could have taken a step or two forward, and made an easy throw to Cabrera for the out. The result? GALARRAGA HAS HIS PERFECT GAME AND THERE'S NO CONTROVERSY!
Now can we please move on from this and start complaining about the All Star game voting?
June 6th, 2010 at 1:16 pm
Andy, this is not up to your usual standards.
You say that in a perfect game we know that the umpires were perfect. That statement is absurd. All we can properly infer is that any relevant umpire errors were in favor of the pitching team. It is possible that there never has been a legitimate perfect game. That they all depended upon umpire errors in their favor.
Don Larsen's perfecto in the 1956 World Series ended on a called strike. The reaction at that time was that the final pitch was not in the strike zone as defined by the rule book.
June 6th, 2010 at 1:25 pm
All of this is well and fine, in fact Armando Galarraga will forever be remembered (in Detroit at least) as being robbed of a perfect game. You do have to wonder however, what if it had been Roy Halladay's perfect game or Andy Pettit on the mound. Would the runner has been safe in the first place? 26 outs into a perfect game, would Joyce have had the nerve to call to call him safe in the 1st place? Somehow I have a hard time believing he would have.
June 6th, 2010 at 1:26 pm
Kds, yeah I knew when I wrote that it wasn't strictly right, but I was using it as shorthand to make my point. It is true that exising perfect games may have been affected by favorable errors in umpirig but this only furthers my point. Nobody ever calls for elimination of a feat due to an error in umpiring, such as Hernandez's LCS performance, so why are people calling for changing the record when the call happens to go the other way.
I appreciate you saying that this post is not up to my usual standards, implying that there must be some quality in my usual posts 🙂
June 6th, 2010 at 1:38 pm
Neil, I disagree that not using replay because it "would supposedly slow the game down" is not a reasonable excuse. If each play, each pitch, could be studied by computer models and multiple camera angles to absolutely ensure 100% accuracy of every call, but each game as a result took 12 hours to complete, the cost is not worth it. The game is meant to be entertainment, after all. Of course my example is an extreme one, and there would be quicker ways to review only selected plays which would not take nearly that much time. But we have to weigh the costs. If changes were implemented which would add just another half-hour to the average time of a game, are they worth it? I don't think so. So it depends what changes are to be made and how intrusive and accurate they are. I am sure that notable improvements can be made which have only a minimal time-impact on very few games. I hope Seligula and his minions are capable of identifying and adding them. I'll withhold judgement until then.
June 6th, 2010 at 1:38 pm
1. The Royals-Cardinals '85 World Series bad call didn't come after 2 outs or in the final game. The Cardinals STILL were in good position to accomplish their goal and after failing, still had another game to play to accomplish the goal. Whereas with Galarraga, he can't just go out the next day and try again to accomplish his goal of throwing a perfect game on June 2. The bad call in Galarraga's case also didn't affect the win-loss situation in any way. It's not the same really.
2. The umpire in Galarraga game publically admitted he'd made the wrong call. Whereas I don't believe Dekinger in '85 admitted such after that game, and if he did, then they'd have to mess with the win-loss situation of a World Series and possibly remove the celebration from the Cardinals team... which wouldn't have been so nice for anyone. Again, the Cards still had another game to play, so it wasn't such a big deal... until they failed.
3. If MLB doesn't want to change history, then why did they change the pine tar game? Brett was out according to the rules & the umpire, and then MLB said "no, he's not out", directly against their own rules. If they can do that for George Brett, then they should do this for Galarraga....as there's an even stronger case for it in the Galarraga game than in the pine tar game. Explain why they can't or won't? (Note: pine tar rule was invoked for an out in the 1st inning of the 7/19/1975 Twins-Yankees game, and the rule was held & nullified a run in a 2-1 Yankees loss)
4. I don't believe it's possible for a pitcher to overcome a bad call AND still throw a perfect game, just like it's not possible for a pitcher to overcome an error in a perfect game. Give an example?
June 6th, 2010 at 2:29 pm
He could have struck out the batter, disallowing the possibility of an umpire error. When Bouton talked about overcoming, he didn't mean recovering after an error. He meant inducing a play such that the odds of the umpire making an error were even more reduced. The odds of Joyce or any ump making a mistake there were probably one in 10 thousand in a normal sitiuation but one in 100 as the last out of a perfect game.
June 6th, 2010 at 3:06 pm
It wasn't overruling an umpire's decision, but Ban Johnson (AL president) overruled a judgment call by an official scorer in 1922. Ty Cobb had a game in May of that year where he reached on an error--according to the official scorer. But the AP writer (who had left the press box momentarily) scored it a hit in his book. Big deal, right? At the end of the year, it was the difference between Cobb batting .401 and .3992. Saying that the official box score had errors, Johnson overruled the official scorer's entire box score (from 4+ months previous) and went with the AP writer's box score--which gave Cobb a hit. It was a big deal at the time: the official scorer was president of the BBWAA, who said they would never recognize Cobb's .401.
Anyway, like I said, it wasn't overruling what actually happened on the field, but it's still a commissioner/president overruling a judgment call that would supposedly open a can of worms. As far as I know, the world didn't implode because of Johnson's decision.
In fact, Johnson's decision could be seen as worse than overruling Jim Joyce because there's no evidence that the official scorer was verifiably "wrong" to give Cobb a ROE rather than a hit, plus the official scorer was not happy that he was being overruled--I doubt that Jim Joyce would have a problem being overruled.
June 6th, 2010 at 3:11 pm
...but I agree that Miguel Cabrera should've let the second baseman handle it. If he'd done that (or if he'd thrown the ball to first base, rather than 4 feet up the line), I think we would've seen a 3rd "legit" perfect game of the year. Let's not forget that none of this would have been an issue if Austin Jackson hadn't made the amazing catch as the 25th out.
Also, the fact that a commish has never overruled an umpire is practically useless as "precedent." It hasn't been that many years where we've had enough cameras (with high video capability) where we can watch a batter get thrown out from 20 different angles. If we'd had HD cameras for the last 135 years of baseball, surely we would've seen some calls reversed at some point--the early presidents and commissioners tended to be willing to break the rules more than Selig seems to.
June 6th, 2010 at 3:17 pm
Only one thing I am certain of; due to these circumstances, the Perfect Game That Wasn't will NOT be relegated to the anonymity of your standard one-hitters. What I am afraid of is that Joyce will be remembered for the one screw up rather than his usually good work. Mickey Owens and Fred Merkle come to mind when I think about the overall effects of this situation.
By the way, did I miss it, or has no one reported what Galarraga thinks about all of this?
June 6th, 2010 at 3:25 pm
How about the 1977 NLCS? Davey Lopes was called safe on a groundball with two outs in the ninth. Replays showed he was out, it would have been the third out and an out call would have meant a Phillies win in a pivitol game. If you start turning the results of plays retroactively, why not that one?
June 6th, 2010 at 3:28 pm
@Frank: I read that Galarraga said he would definitely approve of Selig overruling the call, but I get the impression he won't lose sleep over it. As for Joyce, he said that he had an opinion on this--but wouldn't state it publically.
June 6th, 2010 at 4:26 pm
"Players make far more mistakes than umpires"
I've seen this argument a lot and I'm quite sick of it. Yes, players make mistakes AND THEY'RE RECORDED AS ERRORS. An umpire makes a mistake? It's "part of the game." There is nothing in the box score that says Donald reached on an umpire's error. It just says a hit.
Here's the far more important thing: the play was even that close. He COMPLETELY blew. That, almost as much as preserving the perfect game, is a great reason to change it. What if he was out by 5 feet? Do you just say "oh well, umpire's judgment"?
"To artificially add Galarraga to this list would cheapen what was achieved before by the other pitchers."
He actually got MORE outs than the other pitchers who threw perfect games. This column is a joke.
"I will keep saying that Miguel Cabrera deserves some of the blame for this situation. He overreacted, being that it was the potential last out of a perfect game. He made a routine play much harder, and if you don't think so, please go watch the replay again. The ball was headed right for Guillen, who could have taken a step or two forward, and made an easy throw to Cabrera for the out. The result? GALARRAGA HAS HIS PERFECT GAME AND THERE'S NO CONTROVERSY!"
I can't believe this type of reasoning. HE MADE THE FREAKING PLAY. How on Earth is it his FAULT? What's his fault? Getting the damn out? Maybe he should have been psychic enough to know the ump would blow the call.
June 6th, 2010 at 4:39 pm
"I can't believe this type of reasoning. HE MADE THE FREAKING PLAY. How on Earth is it his FAULT? What's his fault? Getting the damn out? Maybe he should have been psychic enough to know the ump would blow the call."
No, I'm not saying Cabrera should have forseen Joyce blowing the call. I'm saying Cabrera should be blamed, and it as fault, for trying to make a play HE HAS NO BUSINESS MAKING! That is the second baseman's ball all the way. When I played first base, if I came that far off the bag to field a ball, I wouldn't have been at first base the next inning. Simple as that. Cabrera is not a very good defensive first baseman with poor instincts, as evidenced by that play. I said that he got caught up in the moment and overreacted.
My point is simply that for all this nonsense about overturning the call, it would have been a moot point if Cabrera knew how to properly play first base.
June 6th, 2010 at 5:04 pm
Players make many more mistakes than those recorded as errors. They include missing the cutoff man, bad defensive positioning, failure to take the extra base, poor pitch selection or execution, and many such others.
I find it amazing how staunchly some of you believe things that are clearly wrong.
Also, if you want to disagree with me, by all means please do and state your argument. But to call my writing "a joke" goes beyond the realm of decency.
June 6th, 2010 at 5:21 pm
The decision which was made is the only decision which could have been made. Are those arguing for an overturn saying that every single called strike in the game before that deserved to be a strike? That every called ball deserved to be a ball? That every other call in the game was absolutely correct? For BOTH teams? If any one thing had changed, regardless of whether it seemed positive or not, regardless of who was batting, the players' mindsets, if nothing else, would have been different, and it's impossible to say what would have happen. Based on this argument (assuming that you aren't absurdly saying 'yes' to all of my above questions), the only argument you can make is for changing the very last play of the game OR any play which if called differently would have been the last play of the game. This COULD work, but there are two big problems. First, there doesn't seem to be a great reason to privelege the end of a game like this over any other call in the game (for one thing it gives the home team a HUGE advantage). Second, and much more important, when are these calls put under scrutiny? Who makes that decision? The league? This would lead to calls of favoritism, as there's no way to ensure this is implemented fairly. When the team or manager requests it? I'd request it on EVERY pitch (for maximum advantage) that occurs in a close game with two outs in the bottom of the ninth or any extra inning, or in the top of the ninth if the home team has a lead, or in tie games etc. I'd say my player homered. Fine me for excessive use? That's favoritism again. There just isn't a clean way to do it. It sucks for Galarraga, but it just can't be done.
June 6th, 2010 at 5:44 pm
"No, I'm not saying Cabrera should have forseen Joyce blowing the call. I'm saying Cabrera should be blamed, and it as fault, for trying to make a play HE HAS NO BUSINESS MAKING! That is the second baseman's ball all the way. When I played first base, if I came that far off the bag to field a ball, I wouldn't have been at first base the next inning. Simple as that. Cabrera is not a very good defensive first baseman with poor instincts, as evidenced by that play. I said that he got caught up in the moment and overreacted.
My point is simply that for all this nonsense about overturning the call, it would have been a moot point if Cabrera knew how to properly play first base."
Please. Invoking the "when I played" argument is useless. I bet you didn't hit like him.
He made the play. It doesn't matter if he should have let the 2nd baseman make it. He got caught in the moment and still got the out. Joyce got caught in the moment and blew it. Yet you say it's Cabrera's fault, and that I find unbelievable.
June 6th, 2010 at 5:58 pm
"He made the play. It doesn't matter if he should have let the 2nd baseman make it." If the ball bounces straight to the first baseman, a foot off the bag, who holds still with the ball until the batter is close enough to make it a bang-bang play, does it not make a difference?
I don't think anyone would try to say that it was entirely Cabrera's fault. I think that the argument is, rather, that Cabrera made the situation worse, played poorly enough to make it mistake-able, created the hint of a problem where there shouldn't have been one, etc. Obviously Joyce made the wrong call.
June 6th, 2010 at 6:01 pm
"Please. Invoking the "when I played" argument is useless. I bet you didn't hit like him.
He made the play. It doesn't matter if he should have let the 2nd baseman make it. He got caught in the moment and still got the out. Joyce got caught in the moment and blew it. Yet you say it's Cabrera's fault, and that I find unbelievable."
Of course I didn't hit like him. If I did, maybe I'd play baseball professionally. But I don't and never have. That is my point. Positioning on a play like that is a fundamental of playing the position and something that children are taught. But he isn't a child, he's a professional and therefore should know his position. Saying it's his "fault" is a poor word choice on my part. My opinion and position is that if Cabrera goes to the base and lets Guillen field the ball, the perfect game happens.
Look, I don't feel like arguing about this. Yes, he made the play. He made the play much more difficult than it needed to be. Yes, Joyce blew it. Umpires blow calls every game! The call had an obvious impact on an individual performance, but didn't affect the outcome of the game, when plenty of blown calls do. It sucks that Galarraga lost a perfect game this way, but what happened is what happened. He'll be remembered more for losing a perfect game because of something completely beyond his control than if he had actually thrown it, where he'd just be a list of 21 names. There is just no point arguing this game any longer. Nothing will change.
June 6th, 2010 at 6:03 pm
"I don't think anyone would try to say that it was entirely Cabrera's fault. I think that the argument is, rather, that Cabrera made the situation worse, played poorly enough to make it mistake-able, created the hint of a problem where there shouldn't have been one, etc. Obviously Joyce made the wrong call."
This is my point. Thank you for summarizing it better than I did.
June 6th, 2010 at 6:20 pm
Well there wouldn't have been an argument if you hadn't said it was his fault.
My only point is you're blaming a guy who did nothing more than make the play slightly closer. Cabrera's name shouldn't even be in the discussion.
Of course if baseball wasn't in the stone age in terms of replay reviews, we wouldn't be talking about this at all. :/
June 6th, 2010 at 7:33 pm
Stating weather Galarraga or the second baseman should have been covering the bag seems irrelevant. Galarraga did make the play. Had he been late to the bag or dropped the ball, then it's Galarraga fault and he has nobody but himself to blame. But taking an extra 1/10th of a second to make the play doesn't really matter because the runner still should have been called out, the replay confirms that.
One of the points that hasn't been brought up yet (& if I missed it than I apologize) but you would think that the official scorer could have at least thrown Galarraga a bone & given him an error on the play (siting bad foot work & missing the base, which is feasible) instead of giving the batter a hit. At least Galarraga would have come away with a no-hitter rather than a one hit shut out.
June 6th, 2010 at 7:40 pm
There was no error on the play. Righting a wrong by creating another wrong is not a solution.
June 6th, 2010 at 7:41 pm
Oh, and my point had nothing to do with who was covering the base, but who fielded the ball in the first place. Might want to re-read a little.
June 6th, 2010 at 8:15 pm
Of course itt was a really, really bad call - and everyone agrees. And the discussion that has followed has been extremely interesting for several reasons. It is, frankly, difficult to tell if the outrage for "Selig to make it right" is REALLY a desire to get the call correct, or is the desire to make sure the pitcher gets a Perfect Game (albeit, one that he deserved)? I think the question also is valid in the discussion of whether or not to increase the use of instant replay.
Let's say there is a game with conditions exactly like the Galarraga/Joyce game, the batter hits a ball which is fielded by the first-baseman, who flips to the pitcher covering 1st. "Out!" calls the ump, and the celebration begins - a Perfect Game and the pitcher is carried off the field! Then someone looks at a replay which clearly shows that the runner was safe at first, and anyway, even though the pitcher had the ball in his glove, he never stepped on the bag.
Would there be a public outcry to change the call and get it correct? And take away a Perfect Game after the celebration? If not, why not? If the goal is to get it CORRECT - and not to achieve a desired outcome - what is the difference in these two games? Do we want to get it correct only when the result is favorable.
What if the above-described game were the last game of the season, and the 27th batter was still in the game because he needed a hit to win the batting title or to hit .400? (I know, he wouldn't be batting 9th - maybe he had sat out the game and was pinch-hitting). Would he not deserve the same review? Isn't it more important to get the play CORRECT, than to review/change it with the hopes of getting a desired outcome?
I don't think the results of the Galarraga/Joyce game can be changed, nor can instant replay be expanded, unless we're also ready to accept that sometimes the results might not be what we had hoped for.
The day after the Galarraga I spoke with Braves' GM Frank Wren, who saw the game on TV. As he put it, "There were obviously no other runners on base, the batter was either safe at first (and not trying to go to second), or he was out (game over). Joyce made the call, but as soon as Leyland came out to question it, all that needed to be done was for the umpires to confer and come up with a definite answer. They could have taken all the time they wanted. They didn't do that, and Joyce gets all the blame. All this could have been avoided if the umps had just talked to each other, but they didn't. What a shame."
Derryl Cousins is the Crew Chief of that umpire crew, and I haven't heard his name mentioned once.
June 6th, 2010 at 8:26 pm
Andy-
I thought more about this.
The facts are as follows:
1.) Cabrera fielded the ball and threw to Gallaraga.
2.) Gallaraga touched 1st with the ball in his position before McDonald touched 1st.
3.) Jim Joyce called him safe.
Was McDonald safe? No. The facts state he was not. Joyce's interpretation of the event declared him safe. That is a fact. But that doesn't make it true. So, we are looking at facts and interpretations of events. Which are VERY different things. The ball beat McDonald to the bag. That is fact. Joyce called him safe. That is fact. Joyce was wrong. That is fact. There is no objective fact in which McDonald was actually safe.
Now, does this mean it should be overturned? Again, I still don't know. But to argue facts as you try to and to declare Joyce's interpretation as facts as a fact is simply wrong.
June 6th, 2010 at 8:55 pm
"The day after the Galarraga I spoke with Braves' GM Frank Wren, who saw the game on TV. As he put it, "There were obviously no other runners on base, the batter was either safe at first (and not trying to go to second), or he was out (game over). Joyce made the call, but as soon as Leyland came out to question it, all that needed to be done was for the umpires to confer and come up with a definite answer. They could have taken all the time they wanted. They didn't do that, and Joyce gets all the blame. All this could have been avoided if the umps had just talked to each other, but they didn't. What a shame."
Derryl Cousins is the Crew Chief of that umpire crew, and I haven't heard his name mentioned once."
To be honest, this is what bothered me the most about the play. They never even talked about it. For God's sake, it was a perfect game. Take a second to ask someone else "Hey, did I miss that one?"
June 6th, 2010 at 9:17 pm
Amen to Rich. I was at the game and at no time did the umps convene as
I thought they should.
June 6th, 2010 at 10:20 pm
Drew - I think that over time, Galarraga will acheive more recognition in baseball history for his non-perfect game than if he had thrown a perfect game. 100 years from now, no one will remember Dallas Braden, but they will remember Harvey Haddix and his non-perfect game. Maybe Galarraga will fair like Haddix because he did something even more remarkable than throwing 9 perfect innings - he retired 28 straight batters (if you go to the videotape).
June 7th, 2010 at 3:10 am
Rich and Marty,
That's absolutely right, about the Crew Chief having the right to call a conference. The second base ump might have also said something to Cousins, had he thought it was a mistake on Joyce's part. Neither said a word.
That implies enough doubt, right there. They couldn't think they were protecting Joyce by not questioning his call, if they thought there was the slightest chance it was wrong.
I wrote something in the Griffey/Galarraga thread that I think bears repeating.
"Think of how many times we might have raged against an umpire for making a call almost by rote.
"'Ball beat runner; runner out' is proven often enough to be wrong, by benefit of a bobble, a great slide to actually avoid a tag...whatever.
"Joyce was not on autopilot. He actually must have felt he saw a base hit, or else he could never have gone so strongly against the momentum that was building, and made the call that he did."
Not only did he make the call, he made it emphatically. It may have been the wrong call, for any number of reasons. When I look at the super slo-mo replay, I could swear the ball is dancing around in the glove for a split-second. By the time I make up my mind, the runner has crossed the bag.
Yes, umpires are paid to make that call. And they are not always right. Every one of us has, at one time or another, screamed at the TV that the ump missed a call. It's not automatic.
Any doubt whatsoever that entered Joyce's mind has to be considered.
I, for one, will stand up and salute Jim Joyce, for being a man of conviction. The very rareness of a perfect game demands that an umpire give it everything he has, as well. No freebies. If Joyce truly believed in his heart that the runner was safe, he was duty-bound to call it that way. And he did just that.
I don't know if that matters to anyone else, but it does to me. That Joyce was so devastated and owned up immediately upon discovering his error is enough for me.
Joyce and Galarraga have responded with such professionalism that it elevates this moment to a whole new level. I got choked-up when I saw the highlights of the lineup card exchange the next day. There is no doubt in mind that, on a purely human level, this has been a great moment for the game.
If the call was wrong, sadly, that's the way it goes. Anyone remember how far off the plate the strike zone was the night Fernando Valenzuela threw his no-hitter against St. Louis?
If this one gets changed, then what? Everyone who feels they got jobbed, files a protest with the Commish? Change this one -- and just this one -- because it's special?
AlvaroEspinoza,
Galarraga has already gotten something for his professionalism. I didn't see Halladay or Braden get a Corvette after their perfectos.
June 7th, 2010 at 3:40 am
I think that one of the first acts of the new commissioner who will come after Selig will be the reinstatement of Galarraga's perfect game.
However, I doubt Galarraga would still be in the majors at that point of time.
June 7th, 2010 at 3:55 am
>AlvaroEspinoza,
>Galarraga has already gotten something for his professionalism. I didn't see Halladay or Braden get a Corvette after their perfectos.
Nobody buys a frigging Corvette nowdays.
Halladay already has his multimillion dollar contract, and Braden's salary for 2011 would reflect his perfecto. Braden's increased salary because of the perfecto will buy at least 20 Corvettes, although I think he would prefer a brand-new SUV.
I wonder whether Galarraga's salary arbitration will reflect the stolen game or not. I hope it is reflected.
June 7th, 2010 at 4:53 am
Andy, you are entitled to your opinion, but to say that it is "unequivocally" correct is no different from the respondents calling it a "joke." The fact that there are so many differing views on this issue make it the absolute antithesis of unequivocal.
I do hope the next commish reinstates Galarraga. Haddix and Shore belong back in the record books, too. The way they were designated (under Perfect Games, with asterisks and brief explanation) was correct, and there was no reason to remove them. Galarraga should go in with an asterisk, as well. The inclusion of this small handful of games does nothing to devalue the other games, and in fact, adds color and interest to the record book (which, incidentally, is the only reason to include Perfect Games in the record book in the first place, since it's a feat, not a record).
June 7th, 2010 at 10:18 am
I must take issue with some points in this post.
First, a perfect game does NOT imply perfect umpiring. I suspect many no hitters and perfect games get a little help towards the end. In short, anything but a clear "safe" is normally called out, especially on the last out (see the film on Anibel Sanchez's no hitter - I've never been certain there). Also, if you note the entire Bouton comment you quoted from, you'll see that Don Larsen may in fact have gotten help from Babe Pinelli on a pitch that was high and outside ("not today it's not.").
There, the statement that "To go back and reverse this call would be akin to tearing up all the box scores and records from the last 140 years" is both hyperbolic and incorrect. We've done this before where we actually DID throw out part of a game (see Brett; George and Tar, Pine).
Next, all of the historical examples offered are different than the "case at bar." In those game, we do not and cannot know how they would have ended but for the missed calls. In this case, we know PRECISELY how it will have ended. There's no mystery, no "unraveling" of anything.
Finally, there's this notion that because of how it ended, Gallaraga is actually BETTER OFF because it was so memorable. This may be true for this generation, but not the next. Without being reflected SOMEHOW in baseball's rule books, his tremendous accomplishment will be rendered as a trivia question. Better to change the books in this case but with a footnote explaining the circumstances.
Finally the reference to Bouton is especially misplaced. The implication is that Bouton agrees with the author of this post. In fact, like Curt Schilling and many others, he believe it should be reversed:
http://bats.blogs.nytimes.com/tag/armando-galarraga/.
June 7th, 2010 at 10:28 am
Alec, good points, please read the comments above as they have been addressed. I've already apologized for my 'perfect umpiring' remark 🙂
June 7th, 2010 at 11:26 am
Thanks Andy. I must admit to reading the original and then just "skimming" the lengthy comments. I must also admit to "cutting and pasting" my comments with only a few modifications.
Still, I don't think your replies addressed all of my points.
Further, I'm surprised that the "Pine Tar" precedent doesn't come up more. Even though superficially different (the ruling wasn't a mistaken call but a rule misinterpretation) the same concerns about undoing history, etc. arise, were heard, and adjudged to be not persuasive by the AL President (when such a thing existed).
To be clear this is a point reasonable people can differ on. I don't think some of the comments in this thread, even those in support of my position, are appropriate.
I think the principal (and not unreasonable) concern that Selig has is that he'll be presented with other, less meritorious calls for reversal, and doesn't want to take the time to explain over and over why the Gallaraga precedent isn't like any that is likely to follow or any that have occurred to date.
June 7th, 2010 at 11:32 am
Alec, I appreciate your thoughtful approach to the discussion.
I don't think the Pine Tar incident and the recent Joyce call are similar at all. In the Pine Tar case, it was ultimately ruled that the umpire incorrectly interpreted and applied a rule. Keep in mind that he introduced an out call into the game not on a play but solely on a rules interpretation. In the Joyce case, this was a blown judgment call similar to many other bad calls made by umpires (although I'll mention for the thousandth time that these calls are in the strict minority.) The umpire didn't interpret any rules, introduce a call on a play that didn't require a call, or anything so unusual. He followed the normal game procedure, just coming out with an incorrect call in the end. There's nothing here more MLB to review.
June 7th, 2010 at 12:08 pm
I'm not really sure why MLB would necessarily treat a blown rules interpretation (which, in the pine tar case the rules specifically said was the umpire's to make, as all gaps in the rules are, to be determined by the umpire on the field) differently from a blown call necessarily.
I only offer it as proof that we've changed not only a couple stats (-1 hit, -1 at bat), but the outcome of an entire game, and lived to tell the tale.
June 7th, 2010 at 2:44 pm
A) At what point did the umpire realize he blew the call, while he was discussing it with the other umps, or after the game was over? If Joyce was thinking "boy, did I blow that one" while the next batter was in the batter's box, the call should have been changed - and still can be. B) This wasn't an appeal play, like George Brett's pine-tar bat, so it doesn't matter if the change is made before or after the next batter. C) Comparisons with Eric Gregg's strike zone are irrelevant because ball/strike calls are off-limits to argument or appeal, while plays on the bases can be reversed. D) A while back, the commissioner of baseball, by fiat, wiped out lots of extra-ining no-hitters, simply by changing the rule after the games were played and in the record books (Harvey Haddix's perfect game is the best example). Selig CAN change this call and he doesn't even have to change the rules.
June 7th, 2010 at 2:48 pm
Joyce said he believed his call was correct until he got to the clubhouse after the game and asked to see the tape.
This is why the umpires didn't review it. Unless Joyce himself asked for help, the other umps weren't going to show him up by calling a review--such a thing is virtually without precedent. When one umpire is very close to a play, no other umpire is going to step in. It's only when no umpire is near the play that an ump might step in--an example is a long fly ball that bounces near the foul line in the outfield. Normally the first or third base ump would make that call but sometimes the home plate ump actually gets a better look and steps in to overrule the other ump. No ump would ever step in and overrule the guy at first calling a play right there at first.
I'm not saying this is right or absolves any of the umps of criticism--just pointing out why it happened the way it did.
June 7th, 2010 at 11:27 pm
In any case, when there is a new commissioner, he will overturn this call just to show that he is not Bud Selig.
Some people might balk, but they did have their way for a few years so at least their wishes were granted for a while.
Not only George Brett; when Fay Vincent took off Maris' Asterisk, the can of worms was opened there.
Even Supreme Court decisions are overturned. By ignoring common sense, Selig succeeded to make Galarraga as famous as Dred Scott; Selig's legacy would parallel that of Roger Taney, who was responsible for the Dred Scott verdict.
June 7th, 2010 at 11:47 pm
The Cabrera point is an interesting one that I hadn't thought about until now. It not only made the play much more difficult, it actually froze Joyce in his position once 1B wasn't covered. If Cabrera had retreated to first, Joyce would have moved three strides to his right to get a clear view of the throw by Guillen to Cabrera. It would have been an easy out. Joyce made the wrong call, but so did Cabrera.
June 8th, 2010 at 2:57 pm
[...] [...]
June 8th, 2010 at 3:39 pm
All right... comparing Galarraga to DRED SCOTT is officially waaaaaaay overblown.
It's a game. Joyce's call didn't force Galarraga to return to the deep South in chains to be worked to death like a mule.
June 9th, 2010 at 12:45 am
Joyce's call relegated Galarraga into the oblivion, which is kind of being sent back to Deep South for a player like him. Selig, kind of the Chief Executive and Chief Justice of MLB combined, excerbated the situation.
The day after Selig steps down, I can guarrantee, Galarraga (probably no longer playing at the Majors by that time) and a few Tigers fans will submit a request to overturn Selig's decision. It will probably be granted by the new commissioner as I have said, just to show that the new guy is not Selig.
June 9th, 2010 at 10:01 pm
"Joyce's call relegated Galarraga into the oblivion"
This is obviously completely untrue.
June 11th, 2010 at 5:40 am
@Johnny
Yes it is true. Few people outside of Detroit and Venezuela remember Galarraga now.
However that might be better for him, since that will give him an incentive to fight to get his perfect game back. In fact I do think that it will be his mission for the life once his major league career ends on about 2013.