Uncommon play in Los Angeles last night.
In the sixth inning, with a runner on first and one out, Andre Ethier hit a line drive to Angels shortstop Erick Aybar. Aybar dropped the ball, but had the presence of mind to pick it up, step on second base and throw it to first for the double play. Or so he wanted everyone to believe.
Second-base umpire Sam Holbrook ruled that Aybar intentionally dropped the ball in order to start the double play. He called Ethier out but baserunner Juan Rivera back to first base. It got a little dicey after that as C.J. Wilson walked the next two batters, but then James Loney flied out to end the inning.
This, by the way, is not the infield fly rule. That doesn’t apply simply when a runner is at first, there has to be runners at first and second or the bases have to be loaded. Rather, this is Rule 6.05 which defines when a batter is out. Specifically, subsection (l) says a batter is out when…
An infielder intentionally drops a fair fly ball or line drive, with first, first and second, first and third, or first, second and third base occupied before two are out. The ball is dead and runner or runners shall return to their original base or bases.
Good call by Holbrook. I can’t remember this happening very often, and I’d be skeptical if it does, in fact, come up very often. Given all the flak we give umpires these days, it’s probably worth remembering from time to time that they have a LOT of things to think about in a game.
It’s can’t be easy being a Mets fan. Your team plays in the biggest city in America and should, theoretically, have big payrolls and always be in contention. They aren’t, however, partially because of horrendous luck and ill-timed injuries, partially because of poor baseball decisions and partially because the team’s ownership got taken down by a Ponzi scheme that, one would think anyway, sophisticated businessmen would recognize as a Ponzi scheme. We’ll leave that go, though.
What Mets fans are left with are (a) occasional windows of contention, such as we saw in 2014-16; (b) times of frustrating austerity on the part of ownership when, one would hope anyway, some money would be spent; (c) an inordinate focus on tabloidy and scandalous nonsense which just always seems to surround the club; and (c) a lot of disappointment.
You can file this latest bit under any of or many of the above categories, but it is uniquely Mets.
Team president Jeff Wilpon spoke to the press this afternoon about team payroll. In talking about payroll, David Wright‘s salary was included despite the fact that he may never play again and despite the fact that insurance is picking up most of the tab. Wilpon’s comment:
I’m guessing every team has a line item, someplace, about the costs of insurance. They’re businesses after all, and all businesses have to deal with that. They do not talk about it as a barrier to spending more money on players to the press, however, as they likely know that fans want to be told a story of hope and baseball-driven decisions heading into a new season and do not want to hear about all of the reasons the club will not spend any money despite sitting in a huge market.
This doesn’t change a thing about what the Mets were going to do or not do, but it does have the added bonus of making Mets fans roll their eyes and ask themselves what they did to deserve these owners. And that, more than almost anything, is the essence of Mets fandom these days.