Home› Sports Talk

Controversy over interference call at Yankees game

MichiganMichigan Posts: 4,942 ✭
in Sports Talk
Refs ruled in favor of the Yankees in fan interference call on a home run.

If you didn't see it live it will be all over ESPN the rest of the day, what did you think of the call?

Comments

  • VitoCo1972VitoCo1972 Posts: 6,128 ✭✭✭


    << <i>Refs ruled in favor of the Yankees in fan interference call on a home run.

    If you didn't see it live it will be all over ESPN the rest of the day, what did you think of the call? >>



    I think they have refs in basketball and umpires in baseball...


    sorry, I'm a jerk image
    My Autograph Projects

    My Podcast - Now FEATURED on iTunes
  • MichiganMichigan Posts: 4,942 ✭
    Refs, umps...uh whatever they are.

    Lets call them "those decision making guys". image
  • alnavmanalnavman Posts: 4,129 ✭✭✭
    decision making guys are supposed to rule fan interference when fan reaches into player attempting to make a catch. Or I thought that was the rule....but to be honest did baseball really want to see the Yankees fall flat on their faces for this opening series???
  • softparadesoftparade Posts: 9,276 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Glove was over the wall. When the glove is over the wall it is fans domain, should have taken the glove too. image OF was not making that catch anyway. It was OBVIOUS.
    Umps made the right call.

    ISO 1978 Topps Baseball in NM-MT High Grade Raw 3, 100, 103, 302, 347, 376, 416, 466, 481, 487, 509, 534, 540, 554, 579, 580, 622, 642, 673, 724__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ISO 1978 O-Pee-Chee in NM-MT High Grade Raw12, 21, 29, 38, 49, 65, 69, 73, 74, 81, 95, 100, 104, 110, 115, 122, 132, 133, 135, 140, 142, 151, 153, 155, 160, 161, 167, 168, 172, 179, 181, 196, 200, 204, 210, 224, 231, 240

  • edmundfitzgeraldedmundfitzgerald Posts: 4,306 ✭✭
    No, the glove was not over the wall. The video replay clearly showed that as the outfielder was attempting to get his glove to the ball,
    the fan leaned OVER the wall with his glove and made contact with the outfielders glove in the field of play.

    The ball probably would have landed an inch or two over the wall. The outfielder never had a chance at the ball, because the fans
    glove collided with his in fair territory.

  • Jeff85fanJeff85fan Posts: 90
    Sounds like Jeff Maier all over again.


  • mommam17mommam17 Posts: 971 ✭✭✭
    No, it was not Jeffery Maier again. It was clearly a homerun and would of hit fan in chest if other fan did not reach in front of him.
  • softparadesoftparade Posts: 9,276 ✭✭✭✭✭
    The replay clearly showed that the ball AND glove were clearly over the wall AND that the OF glove was not in the right spot to catch it regardless.
    Please guys, blind people should refrain from breaking down video tape. Lets keep this real huh?

    ISO 1978 Topps Baseball in NM-MT High Grade Raw 3, 100, 103, 302, 347, 376, 416, 466, 481, 487, 509, 534, 540, 554, 579, 580, 622, 642, 673, 724__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ISO 1978 O-Pee-Chee in NM-MT High Grade Raw12, 21, 29, 38, 49, 65, 69, 73, 74, 81, 95, 100, 104, 110, 115, 122, 132, 133, 135, 140, 142, 151, 153, 155, 160, 161, 167, 168, 172, 179, 181, 196, 200, 204, 210, 224, 231, 240

  • DavidPuddyDavidPuddy Posts: 3,485 ✭✭✭


    << <i>No, it was not Jeffery Maier again. It was clearly a homerun and would of hit fan in chest if other fan did not reach in front of him. >>



    Yes, the ball was going to clear the wall. I'd give that player a 60/40 chance of catching the ball, but this is not the point.
    The point is, if any part of the fan touched the player while the player was in the field of play, it is Fan Interference.

    Interesting that MLB has instant replay mostly for HR calls, but doesn't have cameras along the fence to actually see if a ball clears the wall.

    "The Sipe market is ridiculous right now"
    CDsNuts, 1/9/15
  • joestalinjoestalin Posts: 12,473 ✭✭
    Chien Ming Wang just called and said that 14 run 2nd inning was one big fan interference.

    JS
  • softparadesoftparade Posts: 9,276 ✭✭✭✭✭


    << <i>

    << <i>No, it was not Jeffery Maier again. It was clearly a homerun and would of hit fan in chest if other fan did not reach in front of him. >>



    Yes, the ball was going to be a HR, not the point.
    The point is, if any part of the fan touched the player while the player was in the field of play, it is Fan Interference.

    Interesting that MLB has instant replay mostly for HR calls, but doesn't have cameras along the fence to actually see if a ball clears the wall. >>



    there was a great angle from the center field camera. Ball was a good FOOT over the wall.
    There is not a Sox fan or a Yankee hater in this world that will search out that vid though. So whats the point. just another excuse for the throng to yell about.

    ISO 1978 Topps Baseball in NM-MT High Grade Raw 3, 100, 103, 302, 347, 376, 416, 466, 481, 487, 509, 534, 540, 554, 579, 580, 622, 642, 673, 724__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ISO 1978 O-Pee-Chee in NM-MT High Grade Raw12, 21, 29, 38, 49, 65, 69, 73, 74, 81, 95, 100, 104, 110, 115, 122, 132, 133, 135, 140, 142, 151, 153, 155, 160, 161, 167, 168, 172, 179, 181, 196, 200, 204, 210, 224, 231, 240

  • stevekstevek Posts: 29,039 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Didn't matter - After being totally embarrassed yesterday, no way the Yankees were going to lose today.
  • ConnecticoinConnecticoin Posts: 12,868 ✭✭✭✭✭


    << <i>No, it was not Jeffery Maier again. It was clearly a homerun and would of hit fan in chest if other fan did not reach in front of him. >>



    The Orioles still have not recovered from the Jeffrey Maier incident!
    *For Sale on BST* *For Sale on Ebay*
  • mommam17mommam17 Posts: 971 ✭✭✭
    That`s why Tex said No Thanks!!!!!!!!!!!!
  • edmundfitzgeraldedmundfitzgerald Posts: 4,306 ✭✭


    << <i>
    The point is, if any part of the fan touched the player while the player was in the field of play, it is Fan Interference.

    >>



    Bingo. Batter should have been called out. It was clearly fan interference.
  • mommam17mommam17 Posts: 971 ✭✭✭
    Yea right. The umpires, with the aid of replay, CLEARLY made the right call.
  • RonBurgundyRonBurgundy Posts: 5,491 ✭✭✭
    They got it wrong.

    I'm not surprised.

    Ron Burgundy

    Buying Vintage, all sports.
    Buying Woody Hayes, Les Horvath, Vic Janowicz, and Jesse Owens autographed items
  • keetskeets Posts: 25,351 ✭✭✭✭✭
    haha, late to this thread but the fan sure looked like he obstructed the Player. whether or not the ball could or would have been caught is really the MOOT point since the fan prevented that reality from being observed.

    after the Saturday ass-whoopin' given to the Bombed Bronxers it was probably a pity cal!!!image

    anyone so misgiven as to believe the New York team has any chance at a playoff run this year needs to wake up. it'll be a long year, maybe you should root for another team.
  • edmundfitzgeraldedmundfitzgerald Posts: 4,306 ✭✭
    Hi keets.

    Welcome to the conversation image
Sign In or Register to comment.