Who's calling the shots at Sportsnet? This afternoon, they showed one game on a regional channel. Now that the AL game has begun, why couldn't they switch to it on one of their many channels?

Lilly gave up a leadoff double and a walk, then struck out the side. Scoreless after one.

The A's have made three errors in the first two innings. One of them was charged to Eric Chavez on the botched rundown that led to an interference call and the game's only run.

Derek Lowe's sinker is really sinking; he has struck out two and retired seven on ground balls. He's thrown 38 pitches (27 for strikes) in three innings.

What a bizarre top of the 6th for the Athletics. I'm patiently awaiting Craig's analysis of the obstruction/non-obstruction call against Mueller on Tejada.

Joe Morgan says that the catcher has the right to block the plate if he is reaching for the ball. Bill James discussed the blocking the plate issue in his first Historical Abstract, basically concluding that the modern method catchers use is illegal. By current practice, it was clearly not illegal and Varitek made a great block on Byrnes, who then failed to go back and touch the plate (he was in pain, but that's no excuse).

John Miller made the point that Byrnes' shoving of Varitek after the latter was retrieving the ball should have constituted obstruction and the ball should have been ruled dead (perhaps necessitating the runners returning to 1st and 2nd).

Lots to discuss here.

Oakland did tie it 1-1.

If you only get, say, Sportsnet Pacific where you live, and Sportsnet switched it to the Fenway game, fans watching the Cubs game would have a legitimate beef (unless they also got Fox, though the analog Fox channel 36 on Rogers in Ottawa was blank when I checked it at 4pm today, so apparently it's not reliable (digital Fox 234 worked in Ottawa)).

I was impressed that Sportsnet did carry both 1pm games (viewers who only get the local version didn't have a choice of which, but they got to see the whole game that they started with).

I think the real problem is that it is illegal to get ESPN and ESPN2 on cable in Canada. I believe Americans have been able to see every inning of every playoff game on either ESPN, ESPN2 or Fox. (And they also get to see Baseball Tonight broadcasts on ESPN, which we don't get to see.)

Weird stuff in this one. Eric Byrnes should have scored, but was flipped by a great block of the plate by Varitek. While the ball rolled to the backstop, a limping Byrnes was more interested in shoving the catcher than touching the plate, and the ump, correctly, made no call until Varitek finally tagged him out. That was mild, compared to what happened next.

Miguel Tejada, rounding third to count the second Oakland run when an easy bouncer went under Nomar's glove, bumped into Bill Mueller and assumed he would be awarded home. No such luck; he was tagged out while strolling to the plate and imploring the ump to make the call. So it remains 1-1 despite two additional Oakland runners who were pretty sure they had scored.

Robert's prediction was absolutely right -- the A's are playing aggressive small-ball, they just haven't completed the plays.

What a gritty performance by Ted Lilly. Seven innings of 2-hitter, one unearned run. After 106 pitches, he's done for the night, and Chad Bradford takes over. Immediately, there's another controversy. Nomar was apparently retired 5-3, but they ruled "no pitch" because Bradford didn't come to a full stop. Given a second life, Garciaparra reached on an infield hit.

Meanwhile, warming up in the Boston bullpen is one Pedro Martinez.

Steve Palermo was interviewed. His analysis:

The 3B ump correctly called obstruction on Mueller, but since a play was not being made on Tejada, the play continued. Tejada apparently under the impression that on such a play the ball is dead and he is awarded the next base, SLOWED UP and was tagged out about 15 feet shy of the plate.

My take:

The umps confered and decided that Tejada would not have scored. I think this is the correct call. There's no doubt that Tejada would have scored HAD HE NOT SLOWED DOWN. But he did slow down and that was his own fault, since the ball was live. The umps can give him an extra yard or two because of his brief loss of momentum as Mueller collided with him, but he gets nothing for slowing down on his own.

Had he run full out, I'm sure the home plate ump would have called him safe.

Brain cramp number 2 in that inning, and the third one since the third inning (Hernandez muffed a popup that Chavez should have called him off on). They also made lots of errors in the 2nd, but I didn't see those happen (the Cubs game was concluding).

How the mighty have fallen. They pitched to Manny Ramirez, now 1-for-12 after flailing at three inside fastballs, with first base open. Then they put David Ortiz on, to get to Kevin Millar, who met the same fate as Manny. Bradford doesn't throw hard on the radar gun, but his underhand stuff baffles some pretty good hitters. Makes you wonder why more pitchers don't try coming from down under.

Two dandy innings of work by Mike Timlin, who helped himself with a couple of fine fielding plays. This game hasn't been "textbook," but it's sure been exciting.

Varitek led off with a bloop single, and this time Grady remembered he should pinch-run, but Gabe Kapler, after two pitiful bunt attempts, hit into a 5-4-3 double play. They should have tried the steal; Bradford has that long, funky windup and Brown has good wheels.

I fully support announcers shutting up and letting the crowd do the talking, but I was out of the room - who hit that?

Okay, it was Nixon.

Sox win 3-1 in the bottom of the 11th on a two-run dinger by Trot Nixon. Great game!

Pinch-hitter Trot Nixon. Rich Harden isn't the best guy to bring into a situation like that. I wonder if Foulke was unavailable due to fatigue, or was being saved for when the Athletics took the lead. I suspect the latter and I don't think it's a good idea.

I was wondering about bringing in Harden there too. Why does Macha seem to only want to bring Rich in when it's in extra innings?

Man... October has been fun

http://economics.about.com
Man, today was a blast! I watched the game with a bunch of friends and my Dad. I can't remember the last time there was a day when I saw so many weird/unusual baseball plays.

The umps got the Tejada call *exactly* right. Fortunately one of the guests I had over has umpired even more games than I have, so it was fun to have somebody to talk to about it. We pretty much agreed instantly that the umps got it right. I have a feeling the umps knew they did too and were just conversing to pat each other on the back.

Rule 7.06(b) makes it pretty clear:

7.06(b) If no play is being made on the obstructed runner, the play shall proceed until no further action is possible. The umpire shall then call "Time" and impose such penalties, if any, as in his judgment will nullify the act of obstruction. Under 7.06 (b) when the ball is not dead on obstruction and an obstructed runner advances beyond the base which, in the umpire's judgment, he would have been awarded because of being obstructed, he does so at his own peril and may be tagged out. This is a judgment call.

On a play like that with other runners you DO NOT KILL THE PLAY. You did exactly what the 3rd base ump did. You raise one hand to signal obstruction, wait for the play to stop, then move runner(s) around as necessary. Why on earth Tejada stopped running is beyond me.

There's also an unwritten rule of umpiring that on a close judgement call you never give the call to the team who just made the boneheaded play. There was no way the umps were going to say that Tejada would have otherwise scored after he quit running halfway through.

Before I start kissing too much butt, there is one rule that I've seen butchered this year nonstop. It's the rules dealing with hit by pitch. Rule 6.08(b) states:

6.08(b) He is touched by a pitched ball which he is not attempting to hit unless

(1) The ball is in the strike zone when it touches the batter, or

(2) The batter makes no attempt to avoid being touched by the ball;

If the ball is in the strike zone when it touches the batter, it shall be called a strike, whether or not the batter tries to avoid the ball. If the ball is outside the strike zone when it touches the batter, it shall be called a ball if he makes no attempt to avoid being touched.

The two things that are screwed up the most are:

* WHICH HE IS NOT ATTEMPTING TO HIT

I've seen too many plays where the guy swings (and not in avoidance), gets hit, and he gets first.

* THE BALL IS IN THE STRIKE ZONE

There's been quite a few plays this year where a guy gets hit when he's bunting and the pitch is clearly in the strike zone. This one really bugs me.

Oh well.. enough ranting.

Cheers,

Mike

The funny thing about this is that I can almost hear Tejada thinking to himself: "It's obstruction, and I get an extra base, JUST LIKE LAST INNING when Chavez obstructed, and the runner got sent home." Why did the 3b ump immediately stop all play that inning and send the runner home, when he was headed in the opposite direction? And if that play hadn't happened, would Tejada have kept running when he was obstructed, and not assumed he got home automatically?

How many games have obstruction happening three times (if you include Byrnes)?

John

http://economics.about.com
Why did the 3b ump immediately stop all play that inning and send the runner home, when he was headed in the opposite direction?

7.06(b)

"If no play is being made on the obstructed runner, the play shall proceed until no further action is possible."

In the Tejada case, further action *was* possible because there were other baserunners. In the previous case, there were no other baserunners so the ump was allowed to kill the play.

Mike

http://economics.about.com
Also, there's the obvious point that there still was a potential play on Tejada, whereas the BoSox baserunner wasn't going to go anywhere after he was on 3rd.

Cheers,

Mike

But there were other runners on Chavez' play. Remember all those other errors (from CBSSportsline):

Kevin Millar: Ball, Strike looking, Foul, Millar reached on an infield single.
Jason Varitek: Strike looking, Strike looking, Ball, Foul, Varitek safe at first on shortstop Tejada's fielding error, Millar to second.
Gabe Kapler: Ball, Kapler safe at first on 3rd baseman Chavez's throwing error, Millar out at third, Varitek to third.
Damian Jackson: Strike looking, Jackson reached on fielder's choice to third, Varitek scored, Kapler to second on 3rd baseman Chavez's interference error.
Johnny Damon: Strike looking, Damon flied out to left.
Nomar Garciaparra: Strike looking, Foul, Garciaparra popped out to second.
End of Inning (1 Run, 1 Hit, 3 Errors)

And why did the ump send the runner home when he wasn't going to make it there at all, only possibly get back to third at best?

John

While the call may have been "technically " correct , I don't think justice was served. The Bo-sox got away with impeding a runner who would almost surely have scored, thats not right. Still Tejada through his lack of hustle gave the umpires a way out. If I'm Billy Beane I get Pete Rose reinstatedand ,make him my third base coach. These guys need to slide on close tags(Giambi),plow over catchers blocking the plate(Byrnes), and otherwise hustle all the way home.

Wildrose,

Well no. Ask yourself what would have happened if Tejada had tripped and fallen on his way home? Tejada failed to score solely due to his own action (slowing down). Justice was served.

http://economics.about.com
And why did the ump send the runner home when he wasn't going to make it there at all, only possibly get back to third at best?

Because of the first part of rule 7.06(a)

7.06(a) If a play is being made on the obstructed runner, or if the batter runner 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.

(emphasis mine)

In baseball there's essentially two types of obstruction. There's obstruction when a play is being made on the runner 7.06(a), and obstruction when a play is *not* being made on a runner 7.06(b). The two types are treated differently.

I must admit that I forgot that time is always called on a type (a) obstruction. I hope I haven't called that one wrong before, but given that coaches never know the rules, it isn't a big deal. :)

Cheers,

Mike