Yay Mets! Now onto the Cubbies!

Go Mets!

Cubs-Mets- That was the match-up I was hoping to see.   Murphy looks like he's on a mission, and that Mets pitching staff is gutty as all get out.

 

Collins with yet another great, yet humble, post-game interview. His last winning season as a MLB manager was in 1998.   Never a major league player, he toiled for years in the Dodger farm system. Now you've got the aw schucks, dry-witted Collins vs. MLB's acknowledged resident genius- Maddon- gonna be fun

Edited October 16, 201511 yr by jokin

Sweetest revenge there is: winning.

I've adopted the Mets as my "other hometown team," so I'm psyched. One thing was curious to me about last night's game, though - a rule thing that it's possible I never understood or noticed before. Maybe one or more of you savants can shed light on this: the play where Murphy scored to tie the game on D'Arnaud's fly out.

So, on a fly out, regardless of whether it's caught in foul territory, a runner is free to tag and advance? I guess I'm surprised that I don't remember seeing that kind of "sac fly in foul territory" play before, but it seemed to be taken for granted in last night's game.

What if Ethier had let the ball drop in foul territory - wouldn't it be a dead ball and wouldn't that have kept the runner from advancing? Is it then a stupid play to catch the ball, or is the outfielder so busy tracking the ball that he can't pay attention to where he's catching it?

Very happy with how this post-season has gone: both Texas teams, outski, Dodgers out.

 

I like all 4 teams still playing, which almost never happens.

 

I've adopted the Mets as my "other hometown team," so I'm psyched. One thing was curious to me about last night's game, though - a rule thing that it's possible I never understood or noticed before. Maybe one or more of you savants can shed light on this: the play where Murphy scored to tie the game on D'Arnaud's fly out.

So, on a fly out, regardless of whether it's caught in foul territory, a runner is free to tag and advance? I guess I'm surprised that I don't remember seeing that kind of "sac fly in foul territory" play before, but it seemed to be taken for granted in last night's game.

What if Ethier had let the ball drop in foul territory - wouldn't it be a dead ball and wouldn't that have kept the runner from advancing? Is it then a stupid play to catch the ball, or is the outfielder so busy tracking the ball that he can't pay attention to where he's catching it?

Yes, the runner is free to tag and advance on any ball in play, whether fair or foul.

 

In my opinion, Ethier absolutely should have let the ball drop foul.  With Greinke on the mound, there was also 1 out and a runner on 1st too (meaning a DP was still in order), and the batter would have had an 0-2 count after that foul.  The ball was deep enough that there was no chance to throw out the runner at the plate, and while Ethier probably didn't know it was going to be foul as he was chasing it, he clearly should have realized by the time he made the catch as he was very near the wall (and it was his home ballpark too).

 

http://m.mlb.com/video/topic/94951848/v523351583/nymlad-gm5-darnaud-lifts-sacrifice-fly-to-tie-game/

 

Murphy gets all the attention that inning for his "steal" of third base, but that was a sub-optimal decision by Ethier too.

Edited October 16, 201511 yr by spycake

How often do we see an OF let a ball drop on purpose though? I agree, he should have, but does it happen often?

 

How often do we see an OF let a ball drop on purpose though? I agree, he should have, but does it happen often?

Not often, but it does happen:

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g4QlrAmA8fg

 

The parameters make it a rare opportunity.  A runner on third with less than two outs is common enough, but there is often very little foul territory deep down the line in MLB parks, so it's only an issue when there is a fly hit into that narrow space, high enough to be reachable by the fielder.

 

And of course the game state has to make that run more important than the out -- that's probably where Ethier and the Dodgers disagreed with me, as it was the 4th inning, but it was setting up to be a very low scoring game.  Greinke is fully capable of stranding that runner at third, especially with an 0-2 count on the batter and a potential DP situation too.

I'm still pretty annoyed that the Mets and the Wilpons got off with only monetary penalties for the whole Bernie Madoff scam.  Then I was further annoyed that the players union and the MLB didn't put up much of a fight when the Mets tanked their payroll to pay for those monetary penalties.  I figured if Selig wasn't so tight with the Wilpons, they would have been forced to sell the team due to the scam.

 

And yet, I still say go Mets! Their con ran much shorter than the con the Cubs ownership(s) have been running the last 100 years or so.

Mets and Cubs - as usual, just as the "experts" predicted at the beginning of the season.

 

I've adopted the Mets as my "other hometown team," so I'm psyched. One thing was curious to me about last night's game, though - a rule thing that it's possible I never understood or noticed before. Maybe one or more of you savants can shed light on this: the play where Murphy scored to tie the game on D'Arnaud's fly out.

So, on a fly out, regardless of whether it's caught in foul territory, a runner is free to tag and advance? I guess I'm surprised that I don't remember seeing that kind of "sac fly in foul territory" play before, but it seemed to be taken for granted in last night's game.

What if Ethier had let the ball drop in foul territory - wouldn't it be a dead ball and wouldn't that have kept the runner from advancing? Is it then a stupid play to catch the ball, or is the outfielder so busy tracking the ball that he can't pay attention to where he's catching it?

The distinction you're looking for is live ball vs. dead ball. The ball is live unless/until its ruled foul, and that ruling isn't made unless/until the ball lands in foul ground. If its caught, the ball remains live.

The ESPN radio announcers said Ethier was unloading on Mattingly in the dugout. I assume it was related to this decision. Was that shown on the TV broadcast too?

 

The ESPN radio announcers said Ethier was unloading on Mattingly in the dugout. I assume it was related to this decision. Was that shown on the TV broadcast too?

I think it was caught on TV too, but I heard their argument came slightly earlier, in the third inning?  Related to an Ethier at-bat that inning?  I don't think anyone has much mentioned the foul sac fly at all, I guess it would have been a bit unusual in the 4th inning, but I would have let it go.

 

EDIT: Yeah, the dugout confrontation was in the third inning:

http://nypost.com/2015/10/15/mattingly-ethier-stage-screaming-match-in-dodgers-dugout/

Edited October 16, 201511 yr by spycake

Go, Cubs, go!

 

It is against my Braves fan nature to cheer for the Mets.

I'd be rooting for the Mets this post-season.   Wanted a Mets-Astros series, but Mets-Toronto might be alright...   (Hate the Cubs - too much WGN and Harry Caray homerism back in the day, and shall never root for a team in the Twins' division.) 

Not often, but it does happen:

I was surprised there wasn't discussion by the broadcast team (though I was in and out, and maybe missed it).

 

As the play was developing I was mostly expecting him to let it drop. Early inning or not, with a stud on the mound I thought it would be the percentage play.

Go, Cubs, go!

 

It is against my Braves fan nature to cheer for the Mets.

Also, didn't Back To The Future 2 predict a 2015 Cubs world series sweep?

 

/ over Miami, which is pretty long-odds at this point.

 

_{^{/ or at any point, come to think of it}}