NC State HC career ends with a pitch clock
- Thread starter CochiseCowbell
- Start date
mixed feelings here, sucks for him and the player, but what happens if the umpire doesn't call it and NC State rallies to win?
They were 4 down, nobody on, and he had two strikes, and was playing games with the pitcher. STRIKE 3.
All orchestrated to ensure that Ole Miss didn't get the Super
Therefore, it’s not 17n horse$h!+ after all.
so, if that was State rather than Auburn, you would feel the same way?
If it’s a rule, then it should be enforced. The pitch clock isn’t a brand new rule. It’s been around for a few years now. When the other team points out the violation, what’s the ump supposed to say? “Sorry catcher, I know it’s a violation and should be a strike, but I’m just not going to call it here.” That would obviously be inappropriate. Ump has to make that call, especially when the catcher pointed it out.
I’d be mad as heck.
But being mad doesn’t change anything.
The right call is for the ump to call time and reset the pitch clock. Many, most umps would have done that. You avoid ending a game like that.
I don't thing the right call is to knowingly ignore an established rule that seriously penalizes one team and gives another team a huge advantage.
That's exactly what resetting the pitch clock without penalty would do.
So the right call is to ignore the rule? I don’t think it says in the rule book that rules don’t exist in the 9th inning. I hate that line of thinking. Same as “don’t call fouls in the last few seconds of a basketball game.” If it’s a foul, it’s a foul. If it’s a rule violation, it’s a rule violation.
Morgan William against Notre Dame comes to mind here, a no call cost us a National Championship
I despise having a clock in baseball. That said, an ump is there to enforce the rules. He has to make the call.
Good lord man. These games are lasting 4 hours even with the clock. And you want to get rid of it? Need to put a limit on throws to first (or second) too.
No. The right call is to call the strike if the batter takes too long. It's not the umpire's fault the game ended this way.
Last edited:
It's the right call by the book, but you are reading the wrong book.
The unwritten rule book amongst umps and refs is to never end game play on a call. It is why you do not see moderate pass interference called at the end of a football game, or a moderate foul called at the end of a basketball game.
How many games have we seen called for a game winning basketball foul shot that took longer than 10 seconds to shoot? Zero.
The pitch clock was added to move games along, not to be used to end games on a technicality. You warn the idiot batter once (yes even if a warning was already given prior in the game) reset the pitch clock and THEN you can call it.
This game was already over and honestly, to have a coach's THIRTY YEAR career end on that call, that ump should never call another playoff game.
I just think baseball has never been about a clock, just play to the last out. I understand why they did it, I just don't like that it had to be done to speed things up.
If players would play at a reasonable tempo & coaches would waste time over coaching that might work. Pitch clock wasn’t needed 40 years ago. It’s absolutely necessary today.
I am glad that they have it now. Got sick of watching batters step out after every pitch, and regripping their gloves. Every da*n pitch.
I’ve seen plenty of moderate pass interference and moderate fouls called at the end of games. See the Super Bowl between the Eagles and Chiefs, or the Final Four game where Auburn got called for a foul with 0.5 seconds left. Or the national championship game all those years ago between Ohio State and Miami on the PI call in overtime on fourth down which would’ve given Miami the national title. But those were judgement calls. The pitch clock is a black and white rule. And it was an egregious violation. The batter wasn’t even ready at 7 seconds. If the umpire doesn’t enforce that rule just because it’s the 9th inning, then he wouldn’t be getting more playoff games because his boss would see that he makes up his own rules depending on the game situation.
I disagree. A strike is a strike, regardless of the situation. Umpires who follow "unwritten rules" might get some leeway from spectators, but they will get raked over the coals by their supervisors. The fastest way to never call another playoff game is to ignore the rulebook.
Just because it was the right rule doesn't mean we have to like it.
Even when they didn't swing!
Constant pick offs is problematic as well, but limiting the number creates other issues. Not sure what the ideal solution is for that.
I haven't watched enough MLB since the three batter minimum rule, but I like it in theory.
I get that. The flip side is that an umpire still has to enforce the rule even if he doesn't like it.
I might be way off on that one. I believe there's a minimum batters faced for all pitchers, barring an injury or ejection. I think it's 3.
I googled it and you’re right. 3 batter minimum. Pitcher can come out early if it’s at the end of the inning. But if faces 1 batter, end of inning, and comes out for the next inning he has to face 2 batters. Good rule.
call
Because after every pitch, the batter steps out, loosens and re-tightens his gloves, adjusts his junk, looks at the the 3rd base couch, taps his bat on his cleats, adjusts his helmet, steps back in the box, holds his hand up for time, touches the plate several times, worms around to get ready, then looks up and gets ready.