Reverse the Blown Perfect Game call: Yes or No?

[RhodyYanksFan]

Why not? The fact that this is such a rare thing is a perfect opportunity for this exception. Then make sure it never happens again by implementing replay.

I don't see why some of you insist on expanding this situation.

Well said. It took 130+ years for something like this to happen. There's over 2,000 games a year. The odds of another perfect game being blown on the 27th out by a horrible umpire call are unfathomably low. Bud should do the right thing, invoke some commissioner power and do a one time exemption. The f'n Supreme Court has made non-precedent setting rulings before. Give this kid the perfect game he deserves.

[Hitman23]

Greg, I don't think what you guys understand, or what you're trying to ignore, is that it will not be limited to reversing a perfect game. You cannot be ignorant of the tendencies of the entire world, baseball included. Yes, it would be great if the intended purpose of this being overturned would be the only thing that comes out of this. But don't play stupid, because I know you aren't. This will not be the end of it, something else will be challenged and this will be cited.

I'm not trying to change your opinion on what should be done, but you are ignoring something that is IMO almost guaranteed to happen.

I voted yes, because I'd like it to be just because perfect games are awesome. But I know it can't be, it won't be, and we need to move on. Sentimental vote is all.

[yanknbama]

Here're my $.02 on why the call cannot be reversed.

I hate to use the word of the moment, but there is absolutely no way that a reversal of the call could not create a new precedent. For one, a perfect game is no bigger than the game itself. If the play is reversed, it allows a an instance (regardless of circumstances) to supersede the rules and integrity of the game, not to mention the integrity of competition.
One of the most common compliments on the game of baseball is that even the most diehard of fans can watch every game, everyday and still see things you've never seen and may never see again on a regular basis. There WILL be future instances where this one occurrence (if overturned) would be brought into consideration. "Well it was done then and that was just an individual accomplishment in a meaningless regular season game". It does not matter if it's an individual or team accomplishment. The rules are preset and absolutely do not allow exceptions based on judgement. Never has it happened. Again, it goes to the heart of the game's integrity.

As for Jim Joyce, overturning the call will in no way get him off the hook, nor bring him vindication. If anything, I think it does the opposite. He'd be remembered as being the first umpire to get a freebie, which does nothing but dishonor him. He's handled this will as much sincerity and class as anyone could imagine and that will, as much as anything, bring him redemption and back into the public's good graces.

I completely understand why some people are so adamant about changing the call. The guy deserved it. He earned it. And to top it off, his reaction to the botched call and in the 24 hours following only further fueled the debate.

However, I stand by my earlier post in saying that he will be remembered more for this than he ever would have had the correct call been made. It's like that movie "Tin Cup" (I know, just a movie). When he drowns like 8 balls being stubborn instead of playing it safe only to finish by holing a 400 footer. Aside from your name being in the record books, noone really remembers. You get your moment of fame and then you're tossed into the group with the rest and are just a name in a book with a lot of other names. But Armando Galarraga will forever be remembered as tossing the greatest 1-hitter in baseball history. His name is written into baseball's folklore on a level higher than a single accomplishment, regardless of it's magnitude.

Bottom line, instant replay is an issue that needs serious consideration. Maybe this moment is what will initiate serious discussion.
Human error does not necessarily have to play a part in baseball when we have measures to counter it. However, changes cannot be made retroactively. Use it and move forward.

[BronxYanks45]

whats done is done, move on dont bring more replay into the game

[pleasepassthesoup]

Greg, I don't think what you guys understand, or what you're trying to ignore, is that it will not be limited to reversing a perfect game. You cannot be ignorant of the tendencies of the entire world, baseball included. Yes, it would be great if the intended purpose of this being overturned would be the only thing that comes out of this. But don't play stupid, because I know you aren't. This will not be the end of it, something else will be challenged and this will be cited.

I'm not trying to change your opinion on what should be done, but you are ignoring something that is IMO almost guaranteed to happen.

I voted yes, because I'd like it to be just because perfect games are awesome. But I know it can't be, it won't be, and we need to move on. Sentimental vote is all.

If you install full replay like they should, it will be limited to reversing a perfect game because situations like this won't arise in the future.

[Hitman23]

If you install full replay like they should, it will be limited to reversing a perfect game because situations like this won't arise in the future.

And I am fully supportive of instant replay. It doesn't mean that from now until the time it is adopted, if ever, that there won't be another time someone wants something overturned.

[tdel23]

no let the call stand, but use replay more.

[pleasepassthesoup]

And I am fully supportive of instant replay. It doesn't mean that from now until the time it is adopted, if ever, that there won't be another time someone wants something overturned.

And unless they have the last out of a perfect game ruined by a terrible call, there wouldn't be any precedent for them to get it overturned. Particularly if what they want overturned had some bearing on the outcome of the game.

[Saxmania]

If you install full replay like they should, it will be limited to reversing a perfect game because situations like this won't arise in the future.

Exactly what I was going to say.

I'm not decided one way or the other - it's a really interesting, and therefore difficult question - but I think some of the opponents of overturning the call (not all) are ignoring this.

If you overturn this call, you must also - in my opinion - put in place the mechanisms to ensure that overturning calls is not necessary in the future. While you probably can't do it for balls and strikes, you could give each manager 1 appeal per game for other calls, replenished if the appeal is successful.

I agree that overturning this call without instituting that change makes little sense, but you can do both.

Be seeing you,

Saxmania

[effdamets]

And unless they have the last out of a perfect game ruined by a terrible call, there wouldn't be any precedent for them to get it overturned. Particularly if what they want overturned had some bearing on the outcome of the game.

Not no... HELL no.

And for the record, I'm quite certain that there was another perfect game ruined by an umpire's poor call...
I wanna say Mike Mussina against th Red Sox in 2001. I believe he had Everett struck out before he got the hit but the borderline pitch was called a ball....
I could be wrong but I hope you get the picture.

[Hitman23]

And unless they have the last out of a perfect game ruined by a terrible call, there wouldn't be any precedent for them to get it overturned. Particularly if what they want overturned had some bearing on the outcome of the game.

This specific instance may not be THE precedent but it opens a door for one to be set.

I really am in awe of the amount of people ignoring this fact. I'm with you guys, it should be a perfect game, and if it gets changed to one, wonderful. He deserves it. But how anyone is denying that this doesn't open a door, or at least unlock one a little is bamboozling.

[CoyoteYankee]

It's done. It sucks. It was a blown call at the worst time in a perfect game. I don't agree that it should be reversed just because it was the 27th out instead of the 3rd or something. I feel for the guy but I just don't believe it should be reversed. I can understand those who do and I wouldn't be upset if they did reverse it. My feelings are to just let it stand though.

[RhodyYanksFan]

The Supreme Court picked the President of the United States in 2000 and their opinion was non-precedent forming. The only time in history that a case did not set precedent. I think MLB can do the same thing here.

[yankeebot]

The Supreme Court picked the President of the United States in 2000 and their opinion was non-precedent forming. The only time in history that a case did not set precedent. I think MLB can do the same thing here.

Thank you. I made the same analogy a few pages back. And this is not a court of law. It is only precedent if MLB allows it to be. Selig would be completely within his rights to say this is a one time thing and that it has no bearing on future calls.

[RhodyYanksFan]

Thank you. I made the same analogy a few pages back. And this is not a court of law. It is only precedent if MLB allows it to be. Selig would be completely within his rights to say this is a one time thing and that it has no bearing on future calls.

Plus every other famous disputed call was not on the last play of the game. This is the perfect storm of an opportunity to do something like this. It has zero bearing on the outcome of the game or season, there's no unknowns like there would be if this was the 26th out, and everyone in America knows that the guy was out.

[PirateChief]

The Supreme Court picked the President of the United States in 2000 and their opinion was non-precedent forming. The only time in history that a case did not set precedent. I think MLB can do the same thing here.

The Supreme Court was so embarrassed by its intervention in Bush v. Gore that they signed the opinion per curiam. Typically per curiam decisions are used for cases where the court is unanimous. The court is full of scholars and they knew exactly what they were doing. They didn't want their names attached to the decision. Stare decisis is absolutely the foundation of modern Western law. It governs all court decision making and is binding in every case where material facts are the same. In my opinion, the Court signing an opinion per curiam and then saying it does not set precedent was very dangerous.

So, the reason why I make this post, and why I feel that Bud Selig needs to step in: he's not bound by stare decisis. Intelligent people are not tripped up by the Camel's Nose; it's fallacious and illogical. The contrast between what the Court did and what Selig should have done is grave. That he's not doing it is, in my opinion, a mockery of discretion.

[Yankee Fan in Boston]

Thank you. I made the same analogy a few pages back. And this is not a court of law. It is only precedent if MLB allows it to be. Selig would be completely within his rights to say this is a one time thing and that it has no bearing on future calls.

He can say what he wants, but what do you do if the Red Sox win the wildcard in the last game of the season on a blown call in the bottom of the ninth, and the Yankees don't make the playoffs? You don't think someone is going to bring this up, and talk about favoritism?

[yankeebot]

He can say what he wants, but what do you do if the Red Sox win the wildcard in the last game of the season on a blown call in the bottom of the ninth, and the Yankees don't make the playoffs? You don't think someone is going to bring this up, and talk about favoritism?

I honestly don't care. If another situation arises that warrants the same attention, it's up to Selig to decide how to handle it. If the owners or the unions have a problem with it, they can push for replay or they can push Selig out. None of that changes doing the right thing in this instance.

[BobbytheMurcer]

Yesterday I would have said YES...today I voted ..NO...

Everyone knows he pitched a 28 out perfect game...perhaps because of that, the most perfect game ever. And because of the call, Garraraga will be remembered for it

FOREVER...

what else could he have wanted?

all involved were real gentleman about it...I mean no spitting...

they will talk about this until the end of time..but the perfecto last week..is already forgotten...

[Yankee Fan in Boston]

I honestly don't care. If another situation arises that warrants the same attention, it's up to Selig to decide how to handle it. If the owners or the unions have a problem with it, they can push for replay or they can push Selig out. None of that changes doing the right thing in this instance.

Calls are blown all the time, and sometimes they have significant consequences. I am all for changing the rules to allow more video review, but you have to change the rules -- you can't just decide to change course when you have a situation that happens to draw a lot of attention. That level of subjectivity will bring into question the integrity of the game more than an individual bad call will.

[yankeebot]

Calls are blown all the time, and sometimes they have significant consequences. I am all for changing the rules to allow more video review, but you have to change the rules -- you can't just decide to change course when you have a situation that happens to draw a lot of attention. That level of subjectivity will bring into question the integrity of the game more than an individual bad call will.

Again, I don't care about other calls. The integrity of the game is already in question in more ways than one. I don't think that baseball is nearly as sacred as some of you all do. Sometimes it's okay to just do what's right when you're dealing with special circumstances and I believe that people as a group are much more able to understand that this was a special circumstance than you're giving them credit for.

[NYYRules#1]

First off, I have no problem with setting a precedent if it is a precedent that states blown calls that do not affect the outcome of a game that would not rely on a predetermined outcome to seal a certain achievement can be overturned after the fact.

But if the Commissioner's Office has the right endgoal in overturning this call, it won't be a necessary precedent, since they would also institute league-wide instant replay at some point in the near future. The institution of a system where this situation is no longer really possible should be the goal, and if it is, there is no danger with setting a precedent to deal with situation like this.

[Yankee Fan in Boston]

Again, I don't care about other calls. The integrity of the game is already in question in more ways than one. I don't think that baseball is nearly as sacred as some of you all do. Sometimes it's okay to just do what's right when you're dealing with special circumstances and I believe that people as a group are much more able to understand that this was a special circumstance than you're giving them credit for.

I think people would understand, but it would open a Pandora's box for next time. Where do you draw the line?

Generally, this is a problem with baseball. Whether its steroids, instant replay, umpiring -- Bud puts his head in the sand and doesn't actually do anything until everything blows up and his hand is forced. I mean, MLB puts the pitch f/x stuff right on their website during games -- making it incredibly easy to see how subjective ball/strike calls are. Baseball needs a real commissioner, not a former owner with a huge incentive to maintain the status quo.

[yankeebot]

I think people would understand, but it would open a Pandora's box for next time. Where do you draw the line?

Generally, this is a problem with baseball. Whether its steroids, instant replay, umpiring -- Bud puts his head in the sand and doesn't actually do anything until everything blows up and his hand is forced. I mean, MLB puts the pitch f/x stuff right on their website during games -- making it incredibly easy to see how subjective ball/strike calls are. Baseball needs a real commissioner, not a former owner with a huge incentive to maintain the status quo.

This we can agree on.

[DiMaggio5CF]

I honestly don't care. If another situation arises that warrants the same attention, it's up to Selig to decide how to handle it. If the owners or the unions have a problem with it, they can push for replay or they can push Selig out. None of that changes doing the right thing in this instance.

Isn't that what he's done here?

[yankeebot]

Isn't that what he's done here?

Yes. But that was in support of my vote to reverse the call which is the thread topic. I think he made a wrong decision and I suspect one of the reasons was an irrational fear of setting some sort of precedent which I don't believe had to be the case.

[Hitman23]

To be fair to Selig here, whcih I'd rather not do but I will, some of the issues he's had to deal with are not issues you sit in your office and think will happen. We see things in baseball all the time that have just never happened before. This in particular. Selig counts on the umps to make the right call, what are the chances of the 27th out being so bad? It's not something he could have ever foreseen so to think this could have been is silly.

Instant replay would make this null and void, I understand, but sometimes people pick on Selig's inability to see into the future and many times it's just not fair.

[robb01]

I have to vote no, his name and the way he handled the situation will go down in history even more so than if it was recorded as a perfect game.

[JL25and3]

I don't think that baseball is nearly as sacred as some of you all do.

I'd put it exactly the opposite. I don't think a perfect game is so sacred that extraordinary measures are called for. It's a blown call that didn't affect the outcome of the game in the least.

[Nome]

The majority of baseball fans, to my mind, are simply too stat and record minded. We want some records to be set and some to be broken.

When Maris hit his 61st a cry of protest from fans went prompting the Commissioner (was it Ford Frick?) to insert an asterisk (*) next to the record to signify that it was made in 162 games and not the 154 game season Ruth played in.

I am not a fan or instant replays for reasons I won't get into here. I also believe in our umpire system. When the ump makes a call it shouild stand unless immediately overturned by another umpire. I am not in favor of overturning the call after the game is over. I wonder why one or more of the otheumpires didn't come over to Joyce and review the call with him before the next batter came to the plate.
Reversing the call would open Pandora's box.

The late great legendary umpire. Bill Klem once stated, "if I call him out he's out", and that's the way it should be.

I am sure we wouldn't have this magniture of opinions if there had been a walk or an error before the play so that a Perfect Game wouldn't have been in the balance, only a no hitter. I am positive there would be none of these protests if Austin Jackson didn't make his spectacular play on the first batter in the ninth. There would have been one hit at that time then. So what we have is a situational protest to protect a record setting performance. I don't feel we should cheapen records like we are asking to be done.

Go back to Larsen's Perfect Game in the 1956 World Series against the Dodgers. Look at the replay. The Last strike to Dale Mitchel was high and should have been called a ball. The fans didn't protest because, hell, here was a one in a lifetime event. The Dodgers protested but not a lot. They weree losing badly.

No replays, no reversal of an umpires call after the game

Andy

[JL25and3]

As far as baseball immortality goes, Galarraga just hit the jackpot, far more than if he'd pitched a mere perfect game. After all, who's better known today, Len Barker or Harvey Haddix?

[NerfBall55]

who's better known today, Len Barker or Harvey Haddix?

Neither.

[allybear]

My heart would like to see it overturned, but my head says no. And I know you don't like to hear about slippery slopes, but let's just say that expanded instant replay doesn't happen (eventually it will, but let's just say it's not this year). Overturning this call would open the door for other overturnings, or worse yet, for clubs petitioning the Commissioner's office for overturnings and the whole thing dragging on and on.

Bad luck happens and this definitely was awful for Galarraga, but it's done. He won't be the first or the last guy to have something great happen due to something out of his control.

They should have full instant replay sooner rather than later and hopefully they will, but this situation is at this point as done as the 1985 World Series and that's not getting overturned either.

[roblyo33]

He has the distinction of throwing the only 28 out perfect game.

[delv]

^I'm doubting that's even true. Probably the only 28-out-and-the-last-out-is-a-bad-call pitcher, though.

[JL25and3]

He has the distinction of throwing the only 28 out perfect game.

Haddix. 38 outs.

[roblyo33]

Haddix. 38 outs.

but, it wasn't a perfect game.

[RhodyYanksFan]

To be fair to Selig here, whcih I'd rather not do but I will, some of the issues he's had to deal with are not issues you sit in your office and think will happen. We see things in baseball all the time that have just never happened before. This in particular. Selig counts on the umps to make the right call, what are the chances of the 27th out being so bad? It's not something he could have ever foreseen so to think this could have been is silly.

Instant replay would make this null and void, I understand, but sometimes people pick on Selig's inability to see into the future and many times it's just not fair.

Right, so since it took 135 years and hundreds of thousands of games for it to occur, why can't Selig make it right because the chances of it ever happening again are slimmer than a $300 million powerball ticket. And if by chance it does happen again, there will be replay.

[ryan44]

but, it wasn't a perfect game.

This wasn't a 28 out perfect game either. The game either ended on the 27th out and was perfect, or he got 28 outs and it wasn't perfect. You can't have your cake and eat it too in this scenario. If you're absolutely refusing to agree with the official scoring of the game and want the storybook ending, there was no 28th batter.

[JeterRodriguezSheff]

It was a 28 out perfect game, because he got 28 batters out, even if one was incorrectly called safe by the umpire. The ball beat him to the bag so he was out. Then he got the next dude out too.

[ryan44]

It was a 28 out perfect game, because he got 28 batters out, even if one was incorrectly called safe by the umpire. The ball beat him to the bag so he was out. Then he got the next dude out too.

In the minds of some fans, that may be the case. In reality, it's physically impossible. I'm going by what will actually be recorded in record books, not what a good portion of fans want/think should happen If the call is reversed at some point then Galaragga pitched a 27 out perfect game and the 28th batter never happened, if not, he pitched a 28 out 1-hitter that should have been a 27 out perfect game.

[JL25and3]

but, it wasn't a perfect game.

Neither was Galarraga's.

[philleotardo]

Go back to Larsen's Perfect Game in the 1956 World Series against the Dodgers. Look at the replay. The Last strike to Dale Mitchel was high and should have been called a ball. The fans didn't protest because, hell, here was a one in a lifetime event. The Dodgers protested but not a lot. They weree losing badly.


Andy

The final score was 2-0

[Big_E]

Go back to Larsen's Perfect Game in the 1956 World Series against the Dodgers. Look at the replay. The Last strike to Dale Mitchel was high and should have been called a ball. The fans didn't protest because, hell, here was a one in a lifetime event. The Dodgers protested but not a lot. They weree losing badly.

No replays, no reversal of an umpires call after the game

Andy

I always thought Mitchel swung....hence strike three. the bat moved, crossed part of the plate, check swing, but he went too far.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HdZdfOkfG5U

[C4v]

The guy got screwed but they cant change the call afterwards. I understand its a perfect game and all but it wouldnt be fair if they reversed it. Theres been millions of bad calls over the years. Many of which im sure have directly costed a team a victory. None of those are gonna get reversed. Why would you retroactively reverse a call to give someone a personal achievement but not reverse calls that affected the outcome of games? Galaraga got screwed big time no doubt and at the absolute worst time possible but he cant get special privileges because of it. He wasnt the first guy to ever get screwed over by the umps and he wont be the last. Tough break but he'll just have to live with it

[RYMASTER or Ryan_Yankees]

Go back to Larsen's Perfect Game in the 1956 World Series against the Dodgers. Look at the replay. The Last strike to Dale Mitchel was high and should have been called a ball. The fans didn't protest because, hell, here was a one in a lifetime event. The Dodgers protested but not a lot. They weree losing badly.

The call was most likely on the swing:

[Meecham4ever]

Selig has a degree in political science.
That being said, there's nothinng left to say.

[Nome]

I always thought Mitchel swung....hence strike three. the bat moved, crossed part of the plate, check swing, but he went too far.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HdZdfOkfG5U

I was wrong about the score (it WAS 2-0) but on a count of 1-2 Larsen's next and last pitch was a called third strike. Mitchel made no attempt. Latermany people (including Mickey Mantle after the game) said that the pitch was high and outside. The umpire was Babe Pinelli working the last game of his long career.

Andy

[WashingtonYankee]

I said yes but know it can't be. Very sad to watch this.

[I'm A Wenner!]

I don't understand this obsession with this "slippery slope." Selig wields complete executive authority. If he overturned a call, and then a team manipulated this situation by obtusely pretending to not understand the distinction between this and some future situation, tough. He doesn't have to listen, he doesn't have to read any requests, he can simply say "I'm not overturning that call." There is no concern for precedent, because he's simply not required to be consistent. Sure, people might complain, but it doesn't matter. He's the commissioner. He doesn't have to do anything that he doesn't want to do.