11/17/24
October 07, 2014
SportsFilter: The Tuesday Huddle:
A place to discuss the sports stories that aren't making news, share links that aren't quite front-page material, and diagram plays on your hand. Remember to count to five Mississippi before commenting in anger.
I watched that game. Courtois was removed immediately after his bleeding ear was noticed and taken to the hospital. The issue is that he was clearly and quite obviously knocked out 13 minutes before that and Chelsea didn't take enough time to properly assess whether he was concussed.
I wish the EPL allowed a temporary substitute when a serious head injury is suspected. Take Courtois aside, put Cech in and give the examination of Courtois all the time necessary to assure safety.
posted by rcade at 12:10 PM on October 07, 2014
Mourinho knew he was in the wrong on that and so was uncharacteristically silent about it during the post-game presser.
+1 for temp subs. I saw that Twellman piece this morning and wondered WTF the physio didn't insist on removing Courtois.
posted by billsaysthis at 12:22 PM on October 07, 2014
"During this incident, a fan wearing a Frank Gore shirt punched a man wearing a Colin Kaepernick jersey, knocking the man to the ground. The fan in the Gore shirt and a fan in an Aldon Smith jersey then landed several punches on a fan in a NaVorro Bowman jersey." -- SI
posted by rcade at 12:47 PM on October 07, 2014
Courtois was removed immediately after his bleeding ear was noticed and taken to the hospital. The issue is that he was clearly and quite obviously knocked out 13 minutes before that
It seems to be much the same cultural issue the NFL had. The Guardian minute-by-minute report on the game informed everyone Courtois was taken to the hospital purely for "precautionary reasons". If I were stabbed and bleeding, you could say I was taken to the hospital purely as a precaution that I might continue to bleed.
+1 for temp subs
Couple problems with this: it is in direct opposition to the spirit of the game and it's open to abuse. To his credit, Twellman (who is a bit of a nut but a very good advocate on this subject on ESPN FC) points out the flaws in each solution while rightly dumping responsibility back in the lap of FIFA/ national FAs. My solution would be a simple, effective and totally unpopular one: if there's the possibility of a concussion* the player is removed and that's that. The decision should be made by an independent medical professional. If it takes 7 minutes to decide and that's too long for play to stop, then the player comes off and he doesn't come back next week unless he's been cleared. There's no way to game it (short of intentionally knocking an opponent out) and the rule (unfortunately) favors larger teams (who can afford deeper benches) so it would have a chance of passing with FAs.
I'd be ok with it not counting against the team's substitutions but that opens it up to gamesmanship and this is people's brains and remaining lifetimes we're talking about so let's avoid any opening for screwing around. The history of concussions in US sports shows neither players nor coaches can be trusted to do the right thing (not even team doctors!) so take it completely out of their hands.
* Obviously this is a giant grey area itself but let's ignore it for a second.
posted by yerfatma at 01:06 PM on October 07, 2014
The spirit of the game also takes a hit under your proposal, since injured players making a heroic effort to return -- particularly when no substitutions remain -- is part of soccer lore.
posted by rcade at 01:16 PM on October 07, 2014
Warming to the subject, while my weasel phrase "possibility of a concussion" takes some of the bite out of my idea, this is the second time in a year a keeper has suffered a YGKFO*-class cranial event so even if we limit the "possibility of a concussion" to "lost consciousness" we'd still be making progress. I'm ok with FIFA and FAs not wanting video replay (I would like to have a limited form of it) but they should require the stadia to play replays of any possible head injury from all available TV angles so the refs, the medical staff, coaches and, most importantly, the fans can see. I don't know if I was even a teenager when I learned to "diagnose" knockouts in football and boxing (admittedly back then it was because we thought they were "radical!" and "wicked!"); they're pretty easy to spot. So if you see your favorite player hit the deck without bothering to put his arms out in front of him and the manager of your team starts talking to him like "Do you wanna stay in and be a Real Man", boo the shit out of him until the culture changes.
See technical description here, NSFW audio.
posted by yerfatma at 01:19 PM on October 07, 2014
The spirit of the game also takes a hit under your proposal, since injured players making a heroic effort to return -- particularly when no substitutions remain -- is part of soccer lore.
That only applies in England. Johnny Foreigner has never braved even a hangnail.
posted by yerfatma at 01:20 PM on October 07, 2014
The best .gif combo to explain why some batters/pitchers get real mad at umpires:
And the article about this situation.
posted by grum@work at 05:20 PM on October 07, 2014
From the link: "The pitches had very slightly different movements, but Dale Scott wasn't perceiving that."
I don't see why we can assume that he doesn't perceive those differences.
PITCHf/x measures the ball as it crosses the plate. Two balls hitting the same spot on the plate could still have motion to the glove that makes one look more like a strike than the other.
(However, they look like the same pitch to me in all respects. Weird.)
posted by rcade at 05:53 PM on October 07, 2014
So Don Mattingly sits his best hitter of the regular season, and someone who hit a triple the game before, and when his team needs a hit the most, he puts him in as a fucking pinch-runner?!
I think there is a 60% chance Don Mattingly is not the manager of the Los Angeles Dodgers come May 1st 2015.
posted by grum@work at 09:20 PM on October 07, 2014
Why do two nearly identical pitches produce different results? The answer might lie in the umpire's precise position on each of the pitches. After a pitch, the umpire will almost always straighten up to make the call. He then will place his feet into position to assume his stance, bend and crouch slightly as the pitcher begins his stretch or windup, and only when the pitcher is almost at the release point will the umpire go into his full crouch. We are taught certain visual clues to get us to proper positioning, but most of them depend on the batter's size and stance, and batters move a bit too. I know quite well that as hard as I might try, my head position and foot position are just a little different each time. It is not a great difference, perhaps an inch or two, give or take some fractions, but it is different. Thus the view of each pitch is very slightly different. When 2 pitches are as close to identical as the two in this case, the umpire's head and foot position can easily make one a strike and the other a ball. The .gifs aren't displaying on my laptop for some reason, but can anyone look closely enough at Dale Scott's head and determine if it is in exactly the same spot on both pitches? I don't think it is, nor can anyone determine so. If anything it will be in a slightly different spot on each pitch. The preceding is theory, but it is an entirely plausible explanation for the difference in calls.
posted by Howard_T at 09:30 PM on October 07, 2014
posted by rocketman at 10:40 PM on October 07, 2014
Mattingly carried 12 pitchers for a short series in which he likely knew he would only go with three starters. If you're not going to use Puig as a starter, surely he has to get an at bat. Might have been helpful to have a few more position players on the bench, even if just to use as pinch runners. Hell, seems like the Royals have multiple guys who serve no purpose but to come in as pinch runners and steal bases.
posted by holden at 10:52 PM on October 07, 2014
Spending top dollar on your roster and having Mattingly as a manager makes no sense at all.
posted by cixelsyd at 01:18 AM on October 08, 2014
Howard_T: Looking at the gifs (which are also visible on the article link I included), there really isn't any discernible difference in how the umpire is set up or follows the ball into the glove. The only thing that MIGHT be even slightly different is that Molina moves the glove towards the middle after catching the ball an inch less when he catches the "strike" in the second pitch. Even that, I'm pretty sure is a case of me looking for any tiny difference and trying to find one that might not be there.
In all honesty, they look like the exact same pitch with the pitcher, catcher, hitter, and umpire moving exactly the same way. The only reason you know they ARE different is that the umpire and Kemp react differently immediately afterwards.
posted by grum@work at 09:01 AM on October 08, 2014
In all honesty, they look like the exact same pitch with the pitcher, catcher, hitter, and umpire moving exactly the same way.
I definitely see more human element in the second gif.
posted by tron7 at 11:20 AM on October 08, 2014
I definitely see more human element in the second gif.
Huh? I'm not sure what you mean by "more human element".
posted by grum@work at 11:32 AM on October 08, 2014
I tried to find a difference in the pitches and the placement of the catcher and ump, but failed.
Isn't there some psychology in baseball that the strike zone expands a little after two strikes? I always felt like I had to swing at anything close on strike three, and taught kids that in Little League.
posted by rcade at 11:39 AM on October 08, 2014
Could it also be a result of Molina's gift for pitch framing? Gives me a good excuse to link this article about the Red Sox' Christian Vazquez from a little while ago. The Yankee in the third GIF should have hit the ump with his bat. The Yankee in the final GIF, well, I don't know, hit the ump multiple times I guess.
posted by yerfatma at 01:21 PM on October 08, 2014
Could it also be a result of Molina's gift for pitch framing?
I really don't see it.
As for those Vazquez gifs...it's almost perfectly robotic how he pulls the ball back towards the strike zone.
posted by grum@work at 02:00 PM on October 08, 2014
Huh? I'm not sure what you mean by "more human element".
Oh... damn, I thought it was a pretty good joke. They always get better when you have to explain them, right? Selig once said in reference to instant replay, "I think the human element is vital to baseball." I, for one, can not wait until baseball is umpired by robots.
posted by tron7 at 02:31 PM on October 08, 2014
I, for one, can not wait until baseball is umpired by robots.
I totally understand this impulse, but it would sap a certain joy from the game: watch those Vazquez gifs - they make me cackle with glee.
Just thinking about them has me giggling. How can you be against that?
posted by rocketman at 08:15 PM on October 08, 2014
Just thinking about them has me giggling. How can you be against that?
I've played my whole life and I've been that batter too many times. There's no joy for me in missed calls, just the memory residue of how I felt after a thousand lost at bats. There's not many feelings better than squaring up a baseball and not many worse than getting the rug yanked from under you by an umpire.
posted by tron7 at 01:04 AM on October 09, 2014
The .gifs aren't displaying on my laptop for some reason, but can anyone look closely enough at Dale Scott's head and determine if it is in exactly the same spot on both pitches?
It's hard to tell because his head is moving the whole time, but comparing where it is when it finishes with reference to the "S" in Stadium behind him, I would say that he is slightly to the right in the second one--making it all the more noteworthy that he called the pitch a strike, since it was slightly further away.
posted by bender at 08:09 AM on October 09, 2014
not many worse than getting the rug yanked from under you by an umpire
I'd argue it's the catcher yanking the rug from under you, in said examples.
posted by rocketman at 09:40 AM on October 11, 2014
What makes pitch framing joy-inducing while flopping/diving in other sports is roundly criticized? In both cases the player resorts to trying to fool the official instead of trying to win the play in honest competition. I think the sport would be better if there weren't important strategies revolving around trying to get calls you don't deserve.
posted by tron7 at 10:35 AM on October 14, 2014
Subtlety.
posted by rcade at 11:56 AM on October 14, 2014
Subtlety, yes, but the framing of the pitch must be done very nicely. As an umpire, if I see the catchers glove move after the catch is made, I will usually make a ball call. The only way I won't is if the pitch is obviously a strike or the catcher was crossed up by the pitcher (expecting a pitch outside and getting one inside, etc.). A really accomplished catcher (Molina is the best at the craft) will start moving the glove before he makes the catch, and then continues the motion into the strike zone. When a pitch is just off the corner, it is really hard to tell whether the glove first contacted the ball in or out of the strike zone. The difference might be two or three calls per game, but in a close game that can make a real difference. A catcher who does it well is an artist, all the others are journeymen.
posted by Howard_T at 11:08 PM on October 14, 2014
trying to get calls you don't deserve
That assumes perfect umpiring, which we do not have. Given the strike zone is defined by the current home plate umpire's perception of it, there is a gray area between balls and strikes-- why wouldn't the players involved try to make that gray area theirs?
posted by yerfatma at 08:10 AM on October 15, 2014
That assumes perfect umpiring, which we do not have.
Oh, I'm well aware of that truth. Robot umps, man. Can't wait.
posted by tron7 at 06:24 PM on October 15, 2014
That assumes perfect umpiring, which we do not have.
Robot umps, man. Can't wait.
We do not have perfect players either. Nor do we have perfect men (or women) in anything mankind does. This is the beauty of competitive sports. Because they are played and officiated by imperfect people, the result of the contest is unpredictable. Has there ever been a poll of professional baseball players that asks their preference for human (imperfect) umpires or robot (allegedly perfect) judging machines? I wold bet that the players not only prefer the human element, but would rather have some imperfection to the calling of a game. If you really want perfection, let's go all the way. Develop robot players, robot judges, and the contest will become one among the engineers and software developers to build the better robots. Just wait until general managers look to trade a faster processor for a field programmable gate array.
posted by Howard_T at 10:21 PM on October 15, 2014
The EPL is still taking concussions as seriously as ever. If fluid leaking from a guy's ear isn't enough to get him removed, let's just pack it in.