Baseball @ Long Beach

jetz · February 23, 2013, 10:39:39 AM

Well, for the locals it was freezing out here last night, but the Valpo travelers loved the weather compared to Nashville last week. Today looks like 70 and sunny. LB has a beautiful park in Blair Field. The outfield is big--348 down both lines. Cribbs' double last night would have easily been out of EGB. I couldn't believe it stayed in the park here--he smoked it.

If you saw the Regional last year, you saw the defensive game last night. Elliott Martin threw a ball away on a tough play at third but otherwise played well. Loeffler missed a couple of balls at first that should have been outs. Vavra uncharacteristically made two errors. The ump made a bad call in the fifth that would have had us out of the inning and saved us two runs. Bad outing for the Crusaders all around.

Coach Woodson emphasized the need for mental toughness (in different vocabulary) after the game. We need hard-nosed ballplayers to show up right now, not stat watchers. The team needs to believe more, play harder, get dirtier. There may be a feeling that we played well last year with basically the same team, and we seem to be waiting for good things to happen rather than going out and getting the job done. So far, we are soft. I think last night should serve as a wakeup for this team.

GO VALPO!

jetz · February 23, 2013, 10:48:56 AM

Also, for any displaced Valpo fans out in SoCal, there will be a fan/family gathering tonight (Saturday) at BJ's Restaurant on Beach Blvd. in Huntington Beach. The team and coaches are also eating there tonight. Show time is 7p Pacific. We call these gatherings the Round Table, and do one per trip for the parents/families/fans. The address: 16060 Beach Blvd., Huntington Beach, CA 92647. Feel free to stop in if you can. We did have pitcher from the '80s show up with family at the game last night. Can't remember his last name, but it was something like Hertke (??). Said he was part of the era when they wore all brown unis...

valpotx · February 23, 2013, 11:19:14 AM

Ah yes, those amazing brown unis that our JV wore. Ugliest....things....ever

Valposter · February 23, 2013, 01:13:08 PM

Too many good, proven hitters not hitting right now. It's early, though. Our offense and defense is putting too much pressure on our pitching staff. Playing from behind and not able to leverage Karch at the end of games. Big start for Cole today..........we need him to be a stopper.

vuweathernerd · February 23, 2013, 02:08:06 PM

Quote from: jetz on February 23, 2013, 10:48:56 AM
Also, for any displaced Valpo fans out in SoCal, there will be a fan/family gathering tonight (Saturday) at BJ's Restaurant on Beach Blvd. in Huntington Beach. The team and coaches are also eating there tonight. Show time is 7p Pacific. We call these gatherings the Round Table, and do one per trip for the parents/families/fans. The address: 16060 Beach Blvd., Huntington Beach, CA 92647. Feel free to stop in if you can. We did have pitcher from the '80s show up with family at the game last night. Can't remember his last name, but it was something like Hertke (??). Said he was part of the era when they wore all brown unis...

this is only a couple years late. i was up in the santa barbara area two years ago for tech training. alas, i'm a long ways away now.

jetz · February 23, 2013, 07:54:44 PM

Lost 3-2 after giving up all three runs in the first. We stranded five (!) runners in the first two innings. Webb settled in and only gave up two hits after the first inning. He went 7 and took the loss. Walsh pitched a scoreless eighth, and Karch once again was never a factor. We have got to find a way to get him involved. Bynum has to be the DH. He doubled and hit a solo HR today. Didn't even square the ball up and it went out over the 360 mark in left. We got a tough break in the fifth when, with two on and nobody out, both guys ran on a hit and run. The pitcher turned and got Vavra in a rundown from second to third. They outguessed us there and it cost us. Also, did anyone listen to the radio feed? How did they explain how we got a double play on an infield fly rule call? I never did get the explanation there. We were better today, but two runs is not enough. Mahoney had his first two hits of the year, so hopefully he's back. LB switched up their pitching rotation, so tomorrow we get their ace. Need to win one here...

valpotx · February 23, 2013, 10:18:39 PM

Hopefully we get that win tomorrow. A win against LBSU would be such a confidence booster for our guys. It would be like when we beat Arkansas last year.

valporun · February 24, 2013, 03:18:03 PM

jetz, from the LBSU recap of the game:

The momentum from that play carried into the bottom of the sixth, as the Dirtbags immediately threatened as Ino Patron walked and Richard Prigatano singled to put two runners on base for Long Beach State. Pinch hitter Zach Belanger sent a liner just foul, but then hit a shallow fly ball that would end up clearing the pitchers' head in the infield and landing just in front of second base.
With both runners advancing on a ball that did drop into play, a late infield fly call led to an easy double play for Valparaiso, ending the inning on the out for the infield fly given to Belanger and a second out on Prigatano added later in the play without a tag and credited to the Crusader shortstop.

I'm guessing Prigatano didn't tag up, even with the ball dropping in the infield on the fly rule? If it was a late call though, how was the runner going to know he should tag up, other than instinct, or "just tag up anyway"?

KL31NY · February 24, 2013, 05:52:06 PM

I'm confused. If the rules say that tagging up is not necessary (see below), this 2nd out wasn't on a tag (fielding tag?), and to the best of my knowledge there would be no force at 2nd base on such a play, what happened?

7.11.q.AR2 If a declared infield fly is dropped intentionally or allowed to fall untouched, the batter is out, the ball is live and in play, and the runners may advance at their own risk. They do not need to retouch their bases.

jetz · February 25, 2013, 05:38:56 PM

That was a weird play. The ball was not a line drive, and not a pop-up. It was a little bloop over the pitcher's head that landed just short of second base. The umps didn't call infield fly right away, and Mahoney got a late start to the ball. The runners saw the ball was going to drop, and started running for the next base. After they took off, the ump called infield fly. Now the runners were "advancing at their own risk," as is allowed by the rule. Mahoney picked the ball up very near second base and stepped on second. He did not throw to first (?) and did not tag anybody. I stopped paying attention to the runners as everybody just kind of slowed down and quit on the play...Next thing I knew, the umps called a double play and the Crusaders were in the dugout. No one could figure it out, and the LB coach got tossed arguing the call.

After the game, I asked Tracy Woodson what was called. The umps said infield fly retired the batter, and the runner from first to second never touched second base and headed into the dugout. Mahoney's touch of second base apparently created the out there. The LB coach had a gripe IMO--the late infield fly call caused baserunning confusion, and the runners were hung out to dry. Should have been a force at second with LB runners at first and third, two outs in the inning.

KL31NY · February 25, 2013, 05:54:02 PM

If anyone can find video, that would be great.

Mahoney touching the base cannot create an out if that's all he touched. If it's a live ball that falls to the ground, even if it's an infield fly, neither runner on this play can be put out if all he did was touch second since there's no force (batter's out) or tag up (the ball dropped). If the runner did in fact fail to touch the base and head to the dugout, he would be considered out for leaving the play and the out would go to a player close to the play (i.e. Mahoney). That at least would make sense. Why he would leave the basepaths, though? The batter's out was only the 2nd of the inning.

Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong or add more. I love debating these cases as a former umpire (HS and lower), and it makes me a better broadcaster should a similar spot pop up

jetz · February 25, 2013, 07:27:14 PM

I think the runner going from first to second didn't know the INF fly rule was called, saw Mahoney step on second, assumed he was forced out, then went around second base and proceeded to the dugout, but not sure he made it that far. He may have come back to second at some point, but by then I think he was way out of the basepath. Again, a weak INF fly call from the ump was the problem IMO.

KL31NY · February 25, 2013, 07:37:33 PM

Thanks for putting it together, jetz. I'd agree with the opinion on the call and its impact to the play. If the call is made as late as you say, he's now the play. Can't let that happen as an umpire.

valpotx · February 26, 2013, 03:16:09 AM

The most ridiculous application of the infield rule I have seen in person occurred last year in a Rangers game down the stretch run. Kinsler hit a flyball that dropped and would have scored a few runs (with 2 outs), and the 1B umpire immediately signaled infield fly off the bat...the only thing was that the ball ended up halfway through the OF to where the RF would normally play if he wasn't playing at the track, and it wasn't wind-aided. You will never hear so many boos in a game

vuweathernerd · February 26, 2013, 09:55:12 AM

Quote from: valpotx on February 26, 2013, 03:16:09 AM
The most ridiculous application of the infield rule I have seen in person occurred last year in a Rangers game down the stretch run. Kinsler hit a flyball that dropped and would have scored a few runs (with 2 outs), and the 1B umpire immediately signaled infield fly off the bat...the only thing was that the ball ended up halfway through the OF to where the RF would normally play if he wasn't playing at the track, and it wasn't wind-aided. You will never hear so many boos in a game

Braves fans might take exception to your last comment

valporun · February 26, 2013, 09:56:57 AM

The problem with the infield fly rule I had as an umpire is that it left the "infield" up to interpretation. I honestly feel that if you're in the grass that becomes the outfield, you're honestly no longer in the infield. I'll always lose that argument because "it isn't how we interpret things".

KL31NY · February 26, 2013, 10:30:39 AM

The problem is that the infield fly rule is really "the infielder fly" rule. They judge whether an infielder can make a catch under ordinary effort, and because it's a judgment call, you'll never get anywhere arguing it. Even LBSU's coach got tossed when he had a legitimate gripe during our game with them.

valporun · February 26, 2013, 10:32:54 AM

KL, I understand the rule, just don't like that the judgment of where the infield ends is up to the umpire to decide. Regardless of "ordinary effort", there should be a point where the infield definitely isn't the infield anymore.

valpotx · February 26, 2013, 12:05:52 PM

Quote from: KL31NY on February 26, 2013, 10:30:39 AM
The problem is that the infield fly rule is really "the infielder fly" rule. They judge whether an infielder can make a catch under ordinary effort, and because it's a judgment call, you'll never get anywhere arguing it. Even LBSU's coach got tossed when he had a legitimate gripe during our game with them.

This was the reasoning given during the post-game show. The second basemen for whoever we were playing ended up being closest to the ball and almost making the play, even though it was mid-OF where the RF should have been playing (Kinsler is pretty much a dead pull hitter). If the ball is that far in the OF, it should NEVER be an infield fly.

bbtds · February 26, 2013, 02:50:15 PM

Quote from: valporun on February 26, 2013, 09:56:57 AM
The problem with the infield fly rule I had as an umpire is that it left the "infield" up to interpretation. I honestly feel that if you're in the grass that becomes the outfield, you're honestly no longer in the infield. I'll always lose that argument because "it isn't how we interpret things".

If you actually look at the rule it has nothing to do with the ball being in the infield. The actual name of the rule is misleading. An infield fly can land anywhere up to and including the warning track in the outfield. As long as a base runner can be fooled into a double play by a high pop up if the fielder were to drop it on purpose and the throw to the baserunners next base is within reason of getting the baserunner out then an infield fly should be called for any ball hit in the infield or outfield. As are many baseball rules it's open to interpretation of the umpire.