Yesterday's baseball game San Diego Padres vs Colorado Rockies was the most best game i have ever seen. I am neither a fan of Padres nor Rockies but was Matt Holliday safe or not on 13th inning?
I thought he was out. what do u guys think?
2007-10-02 07:16:31 · 18 answers · asked by Anonymous in Sports ➔ Baseball
then at 7th inning, was it a homerun or not? It was ruled a double but i believe it was a homerun.
so if 7th inning was actually a homerun, then Rockies would've won anyways; there wouldnt be an extra inning.
2007-10-02 07:44:33 · update #1
He was definitely.....OUT and he knew it, he just couldn't get up after eating dirt.
2007-10-02 07:20:51 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 4⤋
Sull's answer re: obstruction is correct. Although Holliday didn't touch the plate, the correct call was "obstruction," since Barrett was blocking Holliday from touching the plate, when Barrett clearly didn't have control of the ball.
The umpire made a mistake by not indicating obstruction, as the rule requires. (Umpires almost never call obstruction on catchers, but that's a different discussion for a different question)
Ultimately, Holliday would have been safe as a result of an obstruction call, so the net result is the same.
2007-10-03 10:25:39 · answer #2 · answered by LibertyDefender 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Regardless of what we think the safe call was made by the ump and therefore he is safe. I watched the game and there is no way he touched home plate. However, if the ump was screened out by the catcher he cannot call him out. I think Holliday sold it to the ump by not trying to scramble back to touch the plate. Had he done so and the catcher tagged him prior to him touching home I think the ump calls him out. Holliday made no such attempt, thus the ump figures he didn't see him NOT touch home and if the runner isn't trying to get back to the plate he gives him the benefit of the doubt. It certainly didn't help that the ump made a delayed call.
2007-10-02 07:28:25 · answer #3 · answered by K C 1 · 3⤊ 0⤋
He was safe, regardless of whether or not Holliday touched homeplate when he slid in (he did not) the catcher is not able to block the plate unless he is in possession of the ball. If a runner's advancement is obstructed by a player without the ball, then the runner is awarded the base regardless of whether he would have been safe or out. MLB Rule 7.06:
When obstruction occurs, the umpire shall call or signal "Obstruction."
If a play is being made on the obstructed runner, or if the batterrunner is obstructed before he touches first base, the ball is dead and all runners shall advance, without liability to be put out, to the bases they would have reached, in the umpire’s judgment, if there had been no obstruction. The obstructed runner shall be awarded at least one base beyond the base he had last legally touched before the obstruction. Any preceding runners, forced to advance by the award of bases as the penalty for obstruction, shall advance without liability to be put out.
2007-10-02 07:57:17 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Safe - the ump said safe. BTW - was Atkins shot a homerun or not? Homerun - so we got ripped on that call - evens out
2007-10-02 11:00:06 · answer #5 · answered by M E 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
he was out because all u people say that he dropped the ball big woop if the catcher did matt holliday still didnt touch home plate and the catcher went back and tagged him to make sure
2007-10-02 13:46:58 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
It appeared he did not touch the plate, and was tagged by Barrett when he was on the ground behind the plate. So I think he was out.
However it was a homer in the 7th inning so it evened out anyway.
2007-10-02 07:24:25 · answer #7 · answered by bencas9900 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
He never crossed the plate. The umpire blew it and MLB doesn't have the desire or the intestinal fortitude to even address the topic, at least publicly. Shame on MLB for allowing the umpiring to become what it has in the past few years.
2007-10-02 07:23:11 · answer #8 · answered by soonerinvancouver 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
He was out, its very clear on the replays, but the umpire said he's safe, so thats what he is, safe. Umps use their best judgement, and in this case, it was a bad call.
2007-10-03 12:49:56 · answer #9 · answered by Eric 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
ok here it is - For one the catchers foot was on the plate, Holiday slide in, his hand slide under the catchers foot - there you go. You can't see his hand under the catcher's foot so it's either obvious that it's there or if anything it's inconclusive. We all know what happens when a call is inconclusive - you go with what the ump rules.
For two you simply can't block the plate WITHOUT THE BALL.
2007-10-02 07:44:08 · answer #10 · answered by eddiekgb 1 · 3⤊ 1⤋
He never came close to the plate! OUT! worst call i have ever seen..it didnt matter too much though because with how that pitcher was pitching, the rockies would have gotten the run sooner or later
see you in philly on wednesday :)
2007-10-02 07:44:26 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 3⤋