Do we still think coaches arguing with umps...

[CochiseCowbell]

...doesn't affect the game?

Gordon didn't get a close strike, if not a strike at all, called after that exchange between Van Horn & the umpire.

ETA: Of the check swings & close plays at first how many went our way?

We lost the game because of walks. I'm not blaming the umps on that. But, VH's argument clearly had an impact.

 

[CochiseCowbell]

Bump

 

[Crazy Cotton]

Probably more to do with the **** he's getting from the fans. Arkansas's coach does that at our place and the effect would be quite different I would expect.

 

[Phil Wenneck.sixpack]

Don’t bother. Lemonis has somehow someway developed a cult following when it comes to how he does or doesn’t force an issue with the umps. You’re exactly correct in what you’re saying though.

 

[Shamoan]

When we lose, everyone lashes out in different ways. Some criticize coaching, others players, while others criticize fellow fans. Kinda a weird dynamic, but you speak the truth.

 

[patdog]

So, you're premise is the umpires screwed us because they were afraid Van Horn might argue a call if it didn't go his way. Do you realize how ridiculous that even is? I guess not.

 

[DesotoCountyDawg]

When State loses 95 percent of the people on here lose all rational thought.

 

[HamSammich]

The umpires strike zone most definitely changed AFTER the confrontation. If you couldn’t see that then you might be ridiculous

 

[CochiseCowbell]

No. That wasn't my premise at all. I have no leg to stand on in arguments of plays/calls, especially balls & strikes, for I mostly listen rather than watch.

My point was that even without watching there was an obvious difference between before & after the player ejection & Van Horn's confrontation. It was a statement on the validity of coaches arguing having an impact.

It had nothing to do with the loss. I said that in the OP.

 

[Lowdog]

I would like to here from

coaches, former or now coaches on this subject. I don’t think umps are ever scared of coaches or fans yelling at them. But I do think some umps have in their mind after a coach argues with them that they may have missed a call (ball or strike). Therefore however minute the thought is of the ump I firmly believe it helps the team arguing a bad call. Just a couple of bad calls can dramatically change the outcome of a game.

 

[bddawg]

...doesn't affect the game?

Gordon didn't get a close strike, if not a strike at all, called after that exchange between Van Horn & the umpire.

ETA: Of the check swings & close plays at first how many went our way?

We lost the game because of walks. I'm not blaming the umps on that. But, VH's argument clearly had an impact.

Non it didn't. It was t even an argument. He went to defend his player. He said, "why did you throw him out?" Multiple Times: then said it was a delayed call. He never got on him much it was more for theatrics than anything. We sucked on the mound. It wasn't Bc of van horn or Lemonis arguing or not. We just sucked. Period.

 

[bddawg]

The umpires strike zone most definitely changed AFTER the confrontation. If you couldn’t see that then you might be ridiculous

I'm ridiculous. We couldn't throw a damn strike before and couldn't after. Nothing changed. There is nobody to blame except ourselves. Crappy pitching. Crappy defense. Crappy hitting. Not one decent group in the bunch last night. Today is a new day.

 

[paindonthurt_]

I mean it is patdog.

 

[11thEagleFan]

I used to umpire high school games. It NEVER helped a coach to argue balls and strikes. At least not with me.