The Doug Eddings Flap

Do we need evidence to support my contention that we need more talk, not less, from officials when the situation warrants it?

Take the controversy surrounding Doug Eddings' call of a trapped third strike in tonight's White Sox/Angels game two.

My take on the call? Too hard to tell. I thought it was caught for the first several replays, but then Fox showed us a major close-up that certainly made it appear that the ball bounced up into Josh Paul's glove at the last possible nanosecond. Since the "strike three" mechanic and the "out" mechanic are identical, the Angels blew it by thinking a strike was an out.

But that's not why I'm writing. I'm writing because sportswriters showed they need a refereeing specialist on hand in the studio.

First off, Harold Reynolds, Karl Ravech, Tim McCarver, and Joe Buck all indicated at least once that "It sure looks like Eddings is calling him out." If only there had been a retired umpire on staff--even just sitting at home for them to call and put his voice on the air--to point out that a raised fist is also the strike three mechanic. All four of those commentators clouded rather than clarified the issue.

But several of the questions in the press conference with Eddings, crew chief Jerry Crawford, and umpire supervisor Rich Rieker had to deal with in their press conference were astonishingly stupid.

First, even after being corrected, more than one questioner insisted that the umpires said that Paul "dropped" the third strike. Nobody ever said that. The ruling was a "trap." That's a critical distinction.

Second, let me quote this question verbatim. It shows that you don't have to know the rules of baseball to be a baseball writer.

"Pierzynski after he swung, it seemed like he went to the other batter's box, and took at least a split-second delay. If a batter delays running to first base, is he normally called out in those situations? Or do they have a delay time where they can run? Because he didn't seem to run immediately after he finished his swing. It seemed like there was a pause. Is there a rule where if you don't run immediately you're out, and did that come into play here at all?"

My instinct is to call this a stupid question and to call this writer names. And I did--I yelled profanities at my screen. But on reflection, I need to learn from Eddings, Crawford, and Rieker here and not yell at him. We don't attack the ignorant, we educate them. That's what Rieker did--he told him the rule, which is that a batter is not out--and has the right to run--until he gets to the top step of the dugout.

So, winners and losers from this:

Media winner: John Kruk. He was tempered in the immediate aftermath, saying that "We don't have the verbal call, so we don't know if Eddings called the batter out." Excellent. It doesn't make up for the many others who, like Mike Scoscia, incorrectly said "Look at the fist! He called him out!" But he was the only commentator tonight who demonstrated more than a fan's grasp on umpires, what they do, and how they work.

But the big winners were the umpires for their grace and equanimity in the press conference. I can't tell whether they got their call right or wrong. It's really a matter of millimeters, and depends on the angle--my instinct remains that the ball didn't hit the ground, but I'm not sure. But even when you factor in my biased perspective, it is obvious that these guys are outstanding professionals who were able to explain a bizarre situation to a mostly-clueless media. Eddings was completely unflappable in what will surely be the most difficult night of his career. I've already seen Karl Ravech compare him to Don Denkinger (ridiculous) and ESPN has put his biography on the screen. In spite of this firestorm, he remained calm--way calmer than I would have been. And his crew chief and his supervisor had his back with calm, rules-based explanations.

In short, they were an advertisement to put more ex-officials on sports television staffs...or at the very least, on call.