Let’s be clear about something at the outset: this is not the bizarro Armando Galarraga/Jim Joyce play. This is not an egregiously bad call that should have anyone renting one’s garments nor gnashing one’s teeth. But it is inescapable: Johan Santana caught a lucky break on a missed call in the sixth inning of last night’s no hitter that, if called correctly, would have ended it right there.
For those who missed it, in the top of the sixth, Carlos Beltran hit a would-be double down the third base line. Umpire Adrian Johnson called the ball foul. Beltran continued the at-bat and eventually grounded out. Video of it can be seen here. Here’s a closeup GIF of the play. Worth noting: (a) the ball kicks up chalk; and
(b) even though that is not the key inquiry of fair/foul — where it crossed the bag is — there is no way in the physics of this Earth that the ball could have crossed the bag in foul territory and then landed where it did, with its trajectory. It was clearly a fair ball. UPDATE: Sorry: The ball was a line drive, not a grounder so it didn’t matter where it crossed the bag. Hitting the chalk is what mattered. Either way: fair ball.
That said, let’s take the play in its entirety and realize something: it was a fast-moving, bang-bang play in real time, the likes of which are called several times a week. It was not rank incompetence that caused Johnson to miss that call. It was simply one of those calls that happen when you rely on humans to make them. I am not going to pile on Johnson for the call because it was a hard one that I bet even the best human umpires would miss fairly often.
Likewise, I am not going to say that Santana’s no-hitter was “tainted” or otherwise illegitimate. There have been 275 no-hitters thrown in major league history, and I guarantee you that a healthy number of them have had calls such as this one to aid them. It’s just that now we have high-def television and unlimited replays to show us when they are bad. Within the context of history, there is no reason to believe that Santana got any more assistance in his accomplishment than any other number of pitchers got in any other number of no hitters. At least until someone can provide me with high-def video of Johnny Vander Meer’s games or whatever.
But facts are facts: Beltran’s foul ball really was a hit. If we had replay or tennis-style robots for fair-foul calls, it would have been ruled as such. And even if I am not inclined to take a thing away from Santana’s accomplishment because it occurred in the game as it is currently constructed, baseball can do better with these things. And because we as fans all have the ability to see when such calls are missed as soon as they are, baseball should try to do better with these things.
You’ll recall the little controversy last month when Ichiro Suzuki passed Pete Rose’s hit total. Specifically, when Ichiro’s Japanese and American hit total reached Rose’s American total of 4,256 and a lot of people talked about Ichiro being the new “Hit King.” You’ll also recall that Rose himself got snippy about it, wondering if people would now think of him as “the Hit Queen,” which he took to be disrespect.
There’s a profile of Ichiro over at ESPN the Magazine and reporter Marly Rivera asked Ichiro about that. Ichiro’s comments were interesting and quite insightful about how ego and public perception work in the United States:
I was actually happy to see the Hit King get defensive. I kind of felt I was accepted. I heard that about five years ago Pete Rose did an interview, and he said that he wished that I could break that record. Obviously, this time around it was a different vibe. In the 16 years that I have been here, what I’ve noticed is that in America, when people feel like a person is below them, not just in numbers but in general, they will kind of talk you up. But then when you get up to the same level or maybe even higher, they get in attack mode; they are maybe not as supportive. I kind of felt that this time.
There’s a hell of a lot of truth to that. Whatever professional environment you’re in, you’ll see this play out. If you want to know how you’re doing, look at who your enemies and critics are. If they’re senior to you or better-established in your field, you’re probably doing something right. And they’re probably pretty insecure and maybe even a little afraid of you.
The rest of the article is well worth your time. Ichiro seems like a fascinating, insightful and intelligent dude.
In 2012 Curt Schilling’s video game company, 38 Studios, delivered the fantasy role-playing game it had spent millions of dollars and countless man hours trying to deliver. And then the company folded, leaving both its employees and Rhode Island taxpayers, who underwrote much of the company’s operations via $75 million in loans, holding the bag.
The fallout to 38 Studios’ demise was more than what you see in your average business debacle. Rhode Island accused Schilling and his company of acts tantamount to fraud, claiming that it accepted tax dollars while withholding information about the true state of the company’s finances. Former employees, meanwhile, claimed — quite credibly, according to reports of the matter — that they too were lured to Rhode Island believing that their jobs were far more secure than they were. Many found themselves in extreme states of crisis when Schilling abruptly closed the company’s doors. For his part, Schilling has assailed Rhode Island politicians for using him as a scapegoat and a political punching bag in order to distract the public from their own misdeeds. There seems to be truth to everyone’s claims to some degree.
As a result of all of this, there have been several investigations and lawsuits into 38 Studios’ collapse. In 2012 the feds investigated the company and declined to bring charges. There is currently a civil lawsuit afoot and, alongside it, the State of Rhode Island has investigated for four years to see if anyone could be charged with a crime. Today there was an unexpected press conference in which it was revealed that, no, no one associated with 38 Studios will be charged with anything:
An eight-page explanation of the decision concluded by saying that “the quantity and qualify of the evidence of any criminal activity fell short of what would be necessary to prove any allegation beyond a reasonable doubt and as such the Rules of Professional Conduct precluded even offering a criminal charge for grand jury consideration.”
Schilling will likely crow about this on his various social media platforms, claiming it totally vindicates him. But, as he is a close watcher of any and all events related to Hillary Clinton, he no doubt knows that a long investigation resulting in a declination to file charges due to lack of evidence is not the same thing as a vindication. Bad judgment and poor management are still bad things, even if they’re not criminal matters.
Someone let me know if Schilling’s head explodes if and when someone points that out to him.