Angel Hernandez-Good Riddance!!
- Thread starter unassuming
- Start date
Phil Esposito said it was a war out there and he was prepared to kill someone to win or something to those words. Clarke took those words to heart. Henderson is outside the moment now....At that time he like the team was in kill or be killed mode..He'd be best to remember that.Maybe he could understand his silence at the time.
That was never in doubt.
Evidently not for Roger, though. (I couldn't pass that one up. It was just sitting there for me.) I hated the Big Bad Bruins almost as much as the Broad Street Bullies a few years later. I don't give up my grudges easily, as you can see. LOL. However, I did like Rick McLeish a lot.
That has still got to be the greatest series ever, just for the roller coaster of emotions. Will it ever be matched?
So we've gone from Angel Hernandez to the summit series of '72 to Eddie Shore and Ace Bailey. LOL
Ironically, years later Espo's daughter would marry a Russian. The horror.
These pitches, (post #7), were all strikes, and correctly called. Each time the ball was in the strike zone when it crossed home plate. The fact that it was out of the strike zone when the catcher caught it is irrelevant.
After watching today's game, I believe that this assertion may be incorrect.
They made a comment today that when they ask an ump if the catcher's framing ability ever makes a difference. The umps always say never because he makes his call as the ball crosses the plate.
I know that they don't show the location of the pitch until the catcher catches it, but I'm pretty sure that location is not representative of where the catcher catches it, but where it crosses the plate. There may be about 1/4 second delay.
Sometimes when they want to assess a pitch more closely they use that graphic of an enlarged strike zone with 9 sectors in it.
The first view is from the side to assess the vertical position. If you note, that enlarged strike zone is situated directly over home plate. They then rotate the view of the strike zone 90 degrees so you see it head on and it is still situated directly over home plate. The box itself has not changed position. As such the position of the strike zone as the ball crosses is when the ball is still over home plate. As well, if you can catch it, the position of the ball in the blown up view is exactly the same as when they have the smaller box that they show in real real but you only see it after the catches has caught it.
Next time you watch a game, see if you can see what I have just described. They are trying to show what the umpire is looking at. Apples to apples.
Last edited:
What's incorrect about my assertion?
1/4 of a second? maybe... it the ball was thrown at NINE MILES PER HOUR!!!!!
The part where you assert that:
onomatopoeia said:
These pitches, (post #7), were all strikes, and correctly called. Each time the ball was in the strike zone when it crossed home plate.
The pitch tracker shows the balls are outside of the strike zone. The final position that the pitch tracker displays is when the ball is crossing over home plate. All of them are balls and Angel missed the calls. The announcers understand how the pitch tracker works and all of them were shocked at Angel's call.
Are you watching tomorrow's game?
Look at the video in post #7 again. All three pitches crossed the plate, in the strike zone. Look at the ball, not the superimposed pitch tracker box. J.P. France had great horizontal movement in that sequence.
IMO, the enlarged graphic of the strike zone during the game gives us much better depth perception. It shows exactly where the ball is in relation to the plate as it crosses. The small strike zone box they show in real time does not give us good depth perception.
TBH, I'm not looking for a protracted back and forth debate with you. Just check out the enlarged graphic strike zone on TV. It is guaranteed 100% directly over the plate and shows where the ball is as it is crossing.
@shack: Re: the video in post #7: That white rectangle is not a pitch tracker. It's just a video overlay, for the benefit of casual fans who might not otherwise know the location of the strike zone. It never moves, and it's present before, during and after each pitch. The players, the umpire and fans in attendance don't see it, because it's just a TV tool, not unlike the FoxTrax
'halo' around the puck and the blue and red streaks for passes and shots, from when FOX broadcast hockey in the mid 1990's.
If you look at the BALL, it passes through the rectangle when it crosses the plate on each of the three pitches. That's the only information that matters, when determining if the pitch is a ball or a strike, in the absence of contact between ball and bat.
Angel Hernandez made a lot of bad ball/strike decisions in life, and specifically in most of the videos posted in this thread, but the three pitches in the video from post #7, (Houston vs Texas; Langford batting against France), are all strikes, and correctly called. In this case, it's the commentator who is wrong. His assessments are based on where the catcher caught the balls, relative to the overlay.
'halo' around the puck and the blue and red streaks for passes and shots, from when FOX broadcast hockey in the mid 1990's.
If you look at the BALL, it passes through the rectangle when it crosses the plate on each of the three pitches. That's the only information that matters, when determining if the pitch is a ball or a strike, in the absence of contact between ball and bat.
Angel Hernandez made a lot of bad ball/strike decisions in life, and specifically in most of the videos posted in this thread, but the three pitches in the video from post #7, (Houston vs Texas; Langford batting against France), are all strikes, and correctly called. In this case, it's the commentator who is wrong. His assessments are based on where the catcher caught the balls, relative to the overlay.
Last edited:
That is where I believe you are mistaken. The projection on the screen appears to be where the catcher catches it, but that is not the case. It actually represents where the ball is as it crosses home plate. That's why I tried describing it in my previous post talking about a delay. I was unsure how to describe it.
The pitch tracker would be the line that tails the ball and the strike zone indicator is the little box over home plate. They work together. I understand what you are saying. So we're basically talking semantics.
My point is that where the catcher catches the ball does not come into play at all. That pitch tracker stops tracking once the ball reaches home plate and not at all after. The announcers know as well that the final position of the little circle, as we see it on TV, is where the ball is at as it crosses the plate and is not where it is, as it enters the catchers mitt.
It's hard to describe verbally. But when you watch a game wait for those few times where they enlarge the box into 9 segments. First they show it from the side and one can see that the box is directly over the plate, it is not where the catcher's mitt is. They then rotate the view 90 degrees and show the ball's position head on as it crosses home plate. So, you have to watch the ball's position relative to the box in real time and then watch again the few times during a game when they show it enlarged. In every case, the ball position in real time is the exact same as when they show it enlarged in the bigger box with the box directly over home plate. If you were correct when you say the ball is in the strike zone as it crosses home plate but looks outside when the catcher catches it, the ball position would look different relative to the strike zone in the enlarged display as it does with the smaller display in real time. I believe that is the point you are trying to make. If you were correct, the enlarged view over home plate would show a different position than it does in the one that you feel is showing the ball in the catcher's glove. The fact that the ball position relative to the strike zone is the exact same in both cases belies your interpretation.
Can you PVR the games so we can both be looking at the same pitches and describing the same things?
@shack: You seem to be having difficulty when I explain this in words. I'll try again, with pictures.
Here is a better resolution video of the same pitch sequence:
In THIS post, I'll show a sequence of screen captures in chronological order of the first pitch from the video in post #7. In the next post, I'll do the same for pitch #'s two and three.
Here is a better resolution video of the same pitch sequence:
In THIS post, I'll show a sequence of screen captures in chronological order of the first pitch from the video in post #7. In the next post, I'll do the same for pitch #'s two and three.
Last edited:
Pitch #3:
The ball is directly in front of the umpire's left wrist.
The ball is in the upper left portion of the strike zone box.
The ball is almost in the catcher's glove.
Now, please explain to me why you think these pitches are not strikes.
I was going to sat the same thing. However, instead of slimeball I was going to call 'Booby' Clark a POS. How he became a part of the Admin team blows my mind.
But glad Angel is gone. Totally changed the outcome of hundreds of games by calling the wrong calls
The ball is almost in the catcher's glove, but the determination of where the ball was at the time it crossed the plate has already been determined by the ump as well as the pitch tracker/graphic strike zone. The position of the catcher's glove is irrelevant. I know it is deceptive but where the catcher's glove is, is after where they have already decided electronically where the ball was as it crossed the plate.
Please watch the game and watch when they magnify the strike zone and compare where the ball is in the real time imaging and where it is with the enlargement. According to you, because the ball has continued to break between the plate and the catcher's mitt those positions should be different. But they never are. they are always the exact same.
I didn't say any of that. I said the location of the ball, when it crosses the plate, is the only thing that matters. The screen captures in post #s 41 and 42 clearly show the ball crossing the plate while in the strike zone for all three pitches. Look at the first 'yellow streak' screen cap for pitches 1 and 2.
No, I will not be watching and saving today's game.
Pitch tracker has nothing whatsoever to do with the white strike zone rectangle in the video from post #'s 7 or 41. I think that's what has you confused. The white strike zone rectangle is static; it never moves. All it does is show the viewer where the strike zone is. I can't dumb it down any more than that; I've already had to resort to pictures, underlines and coloured text.
