Amazin' Avenue: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Sports blogs for fans, by fans.
New Blog: World Soccer Digest for Soccer Fans!

Phillies 3, Mets 2, or: WTF?!?

It's hard to imagine the last three games going more poorly than they have, as the Mets deftly sweep their once-sizable division lead under the rug and breathe new life into their closest rivals. For the third game in a row the Mets' offense failed to answer the bell. For the third straight contest the Mets' supposedly-potent bats managed just a couple of runs against one of the worst pitching staffs in the National League. And for the third consecutive day the Mets lost a ballgame to the Phillies, watching their advantage shrivel up like Jose Canseco's grapes on a hot August night.

The Mets were again stymied by a mediocre starting pitcher, this time undone by the aging and largely unimpressive Jamie Moyer. The Mets did manage to scrape together eight hits and a couple of walks against Moyer but they stranded seven baserunners and lost a Jose Reyes twice on the basepaths. Reyes was 0-for-9 in the series coming into tonight's game. A quick glance at the boxscore would have you believe that he put together a decent night at the plate: a single and a walk in four trips to the plate. However, despite his gaudy stolen base total for the season (71) he has now been erased seventeen times. Tonight he was picked off by Moyer and J.C. Romero, thrown out both times going from first to second. The first pickoff likely cost the Mets a run as David Wright smacked one out of Citizen's Bank Park shortly thereafter.

Oliver Perez did a decent job of keeping the Mets in the ballgame while their offense was sputtering about. Perez struck out ten Phillies in six innings, but he also walked five and allowed six hits, ultimately getting saddled with the loss. The winning run was scored by Moyer, who reached base on one of Perez's five walks and eventually scuttled home on a sacrifice fly by Pat Burrell.

I guess I would be remiss if I didn't talk about the game's final play. If you missed the action I will clumsily set the stage for you. With the Mets trailing 3-2 in the top of the ninth, Carlos Delgado led off the inning by flailing away uselessly at several Brett Myers breaking balls. Paul Lo Duca followed with an opposite-field single and was promptly removed in lieu of pinch runner Endy Chavez. Marlon Anderson pinch hit for Lastings Milledge and knocked a single to center that chased Endy to third. Shawn Green pinch hit for Jorge Sosa and, after almost swinging at a couple of two-strike pitches, hit a slow-roller to shortstop. Jimmy Rollins flipped the ball to Tad Iguchi at second who was taken out by Anderson. Iguchi bounced the return throw to first and Green was safe, seemingly scoring Endy with the tying run. Only the tying run didn't actually score because second base umpire C.B. Bucknor called Anderson out for what crew chief Joe West described as "[going] after the second baseman to break up the double play and did not, and could not reach the base".

Fine. Except there are a few problems. The biggest problem is that Joe West is absolutely incorrect in his assertion that Anderson didn't, nay, "couldn't" reach second base. Need proof? Click to enlarge.

A little grainy, but it seems pretty clear to me that Anderson could reach second, and if you watch the video it becomes even clearer that Anderson *did* touch the base. So, if West and Bucknor are contending that Anderson should be called out because he couldn't reach the base then they are mistaken and Anderson should have been called safe on the play.

If they had made the argument that Anderson went out of his way to knock into Iguchi and that he used excessive force (whatever that is), then I can at least buy that argument. Replays show that Anderson did kind of shove Iguchi out of the way and Rule 7.08(b) of the MLB Official Rules vaguely states:

Any runner is out when --

(a) (1) He runs more than three feet away from his baseline to avoid being tagged unless his action is to avoid interference with a fielder fielding a batted ball. A runner's baseline is established when the tag attempt occurs and is a straight line from the runner to the base he is attempting to reach safely; or (2) after touching first base, he leaves the baseline, obviously abandoning his effort to touch the next base;

[snip]

(b) He intentionally interferes with a thrown ball; or hinders a fielder attempting to make a play on a batted ball; Rule 7.08(b) Comment: A runner who is adjudged to have hindered a fielder who is attempting to make a play on a batted ball is out whether it was intentional or not. If, however, the runner has contact with a legally occupied base when he hinders the fielder, he shall not be called out unless, in the umpire's judgment, such hindrance, whether it occurs on fair or foul territory, is intentional. If the umpire declares the hindrance intentional, the following penalty shall apply: With less than two out, the umpire shall declare both the runner and batter out. With two out, the umpire shall declare the batter out.

As I interpret it, Anderson would have been cleared of (a) but likely violated (b) by intentionally hindering Iguchi's efforts to throw to first. Of course, that's not the call that Bucknor or West made, but it's tough to cry foul on this one since it looked to me like Anderson was a little too pushy. The kicker is that Green probably would have been safe at first had Anderson slid like a baseball player and not a UFC grappler.

And I'll leave you with this doozy: Coming into tonight's game the Phillie bullpen was 15th in the National League with a 4.58 ERA and dead last in the league with a 1.57 collective WHIP. Through the first three games of this series their 'pen has tossed ten innings. Their combined line:

IP H ER R BB SO
10.0 5 0 0 4 8

The Mets have their best starter on the mound tomorrow as they try to salvage the last game of this series, and perhaps El Duque's arm can overcome the offense's morass of ineptitude.

0 recs  |  Comment 17 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

It was
a terrible way to end the game. It shouldn't have gotten to that point though. Every team hits at that park except the Mets. Then we have this from mlb.com:

"the Mets would have made the entire episode academic had they scored a half-dozen runs, something they have needed three games to accomplish in this series. No team this season, the Phillies included, has scored so few runs in three successive games at this "plays small" park. Indeed, not since the Mets scored only four times in three successive games here last August has one team been so unproductive in three games."

Sure, it's only 3 games, but all I can say is ugh.

by The Irresistable Force on Aug 30, 2007 3:05 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Worst ever
I think that Anderson's play is a candidate for the Worst Ever in Mets History.  Why?  
  • The game was crucial, and may have cost the Mets their season.  
  • The play was completely unnecessary - Green would have been safe.  
  • The play ended the game.  Anderson shoves Iguchi down, Mets lose, good night.
  • Anderson's shove was blatant and obvious.
I admire Anderson's competitive spirit, but this does not change the fact.

Also, let's give some blame to Green for hitting a ball that could have been a double play, which was the only possible way to get Philadelphia off the hook in that situation.  Seriously - put me up instead of Green, and I strike out - which would have been more useful to the Mets.

by elliot on Aug 30, 2007 8:45 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Worse play ever?
That wasn't even the worse play by a Met this season? That goes to the caught popup that scored 2 runs in May. We're also talking about a time that employed Marv Thronesberry and Roger Cedeno. The truly silly part about West argument is that Anderson did touch second clearly on replays. So he couldn't have touched the base, except he did.
Keep Lastings Milledge Free

by DoctorK16 on Aug 30, 2007 9:26 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

West
You are correct in that the explanation by West was ridiculous.  After reading the rule posted above, though, it looked like there could be no argument based on the umpire deeming that Anderson intentionally interfered.

by elliot on Aug 30, 2007 9:32 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

How can you say
that it was the worst play in team history? Sure, there's a 0.1% chance that the Phillies will end up winning the division by a game, but other than that, it has no bearing on the season as a whole. And who can say it was even a correct call? After some of the interference plays we've seen that weren't called, that certainky could have been left alone.
"I'm Tim Teufel, let me begin by saying I was once a Twin/I made the move and it feels just right/I've been Metsmerized and I see the light."

by TheFlushingKings on Aug 30, 2007 1:06 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I think
you're blowing things a bit out of proportion.

by SQUAD on Aug 30, 2007 9:19 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Out of proportion
Maybe I am blowing things out of proportion.  What if I said that it was the worst OFFENSIVE play in the Mets history?  I am not blaming Anderson, or even coming down on him.  I just think that taken in it's totality, I can not think of a worse offensive play that the Mets have ever made, all things considered.

by elliot on Aug 30, 2007 9:30 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

This wasn't really one play...
But one of the worst offensive performances in one game has to be Joe Torre grounding into 4 double plays in one game. But they weren't playing in a crucial game or anything at that point. This discussion just reminded me of that performance.

by The Irresistable Force on Aug 30, 2007 10:39 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

"Intentionally interfered"
What bullshit.  They NEVER call that.  Every single takeout slide that has ever been made into second base is intentionally interfering with the fielder.

by Josh on Aug 30, 2007 10:13 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

I understand being angry
about the call as it cost the Mets the game.  But, that doesn't change the fact that it was a gutsy and a correct call.  Maybe you don't see it as such; maybe you think I'm wrong.

I agree with Eric's points a) and b) and, without question, he moved toward, reached out and pushed Iguchi.  And, yes, it was unnecessary.  But, this is what you get with humans playing a great game like baseball:  decisions to do things in the heat of the moment.  In this case a gutsy and a correct call.

Also, I'd add that wasn't there a similar play with the Padres and Phillies not long ago?  If I'm not mistaken there was and I'd suspect that the umps are also trying to lay down the law against injury prevention.

My real question is why in the heck the Phillies bullpen turns into a host of Bob Gibsons every time the Mets show up?  It's almost like the Mets are intimidated...and, yes, I know that sounds crazy.  But, this is turning into an emotional rollar coaster where the Phillies have the mental edge AND now Atlanta's going to want blood too.

by kmdarcy on Aug 30, 2007 10:34 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Bucknor
I saw a link, I think it was on metsgeek, that someone posted that had a recap of a game where Bucknor made the same exact call to end a game a few years ago.

Here it is: http://www.detroitsports-mcw.com/recaps.php?NewsID=156

by The Irresistable Force on Aug 30, 2007 10:42 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

this play doesn't compare to the
cut block Carlos Ruiz used against Marcus Giles.
Keep Lastings Milledge Free

by DoctorK16 on Aug 30, 2007 11:28 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Another reading on the rule
In a side conversation, my friend pointed out that the rule makes a distinction between a thrown and a batted ball.  The part of the rule that seems to apply is in the comment, talking about a runner intentionally hindering a fielder "who is attempting to make a play on a batted ball".   After re-reading the rule, I think that this does not apply at all, and that the only ground that Mister C. B. Bucknor had was to say that he could not reach the base, which was why West used that in his explanation.

I am changing my position - This was a bad call.

by elliot on Aug 30, 2007 11:31 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Rules
At MetsBlog Matt points out a different section of the rulebook:
Rule 6.05 (m), according to the always-cryptic MLB Rule Book:

"A batter is out when a preceding runner shall, in the umpire's judgment, intentionally interfere with a fielder who is attempting to catch a thrown ball or to throw a ball in an attempt to complete any play...The objective of this rule is to penalize the offensive team for deliberate, unwarranted, unsportsmanlike action by the runner in leaving the baseline for the obvious purpose of crashing the pivot man on a double play, rather than trying to reach the base. Obviously this is an umpire's judgment play."

This one seems to be more specific to a "thrown ball" or "throw[ing] a ball". You can argue that it is a call that umps never make, but it does appear to be within the scope of the official rules.

by Eric Simon on Aug 30, 2007 12:03 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

the way I read it
6.05 and 7.08 go together. 6.05 specifies what happens to batter as Chapter 6 deals with batting rules. 7.08 specify the actions the base runner takes to cause 6.05 to take effect, as Chapter 7 deals with base running. Its a brutal call. I hope Bucknor cuddled and made breakfast for the Mets this morning.
Keep Lastings Milledge Free

by DoctorK16 on Aug 30, 2007 12:29 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

He did not leave the baseline
The rule says:
"deliberate, unwarranted, unsportsmanlike action by the runner in leaving the baseline for the obvious purpose of crashing the pivot man on a double play" (emphasis mine)

I read this as further evidence that it was an awful call - because Anderson did not leave the baseline.  The rule makes it very clear that the violation requires leaving the baseline.  Since Anderson touched second without changing direction, and was even on second (according to the posted pictures) at time of contact, he did not leave the baseline.

Bad, bad call.  C. B. Bucknor took an opportunity away from the Mets bullpen to blow another game.

by elliot on Aug 30, 2007 1:05 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Start posting about the Mets »

Join SB Nation and dive into communities focused on all your favorite teams.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recent FanPosts

Axolotl_small
Ezequial Carrera
Axolotl_small
Jose Valentin
Axolotl_small
Castillo for Snyder?
Small
AAOP - It's Late, But Still Good
Small
AAOP: A new outlook...
Me_go_mets_small
AAOP: Just get Pujols
Small
AAOP: Supplementing the Core
Small
AAOP
The_buddha_by_lord_karsus_small
Grissionometer
Misc_007_small
Madoff, Backman, and an Old Baseball Jacket

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

FanShots

Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.

Recommended FanShots

Marty Noble: Glavine Claims Young Mets Weren't Offended By Losing
WAR analysis of AAOPs

Recent FanShots

Anybody know any good websites to find old video footage of games from...
Sunday Morning Funnies
NY Times Quotes a Metsblog commenter
Mets have inquired about Crawford
Mets expand presence of history at Citi
And you thought the "I'm thankful for Jeff Francoeur" MetsMerized graphic was a bit ridiculous
Metsmerized steals Grission
Sources: Keith Hernandez Returning to SNY
No Matt Holliday or Jason Bay apparently means Adrian Gonzalez
Wallace Matthews says Mets should look to 2011

+ New FanShot All FanShots >

Sponsors


THE BIG GUY

Aa_avatar_small Eric Simon

THE INCREDIBLES

Blackfish2_small Alex Nelson

Cj_small Sam Page

Best_infield_ever_small James Kannengieser

THE NEWS GURU

Wrightfront_small Joe Budd

THE POET LAUREATE

Hamheadshot__1__small Howard Megdal