Yes, the Giants choked a game away they should have won, but it should have at least gone to extra innings. That was one of the worst calls I have ever seen.

If you weren't watching, the game was tied at 4, there were 2 outs and the bases were loaded. Jasn Phillips of LA had 2 strikes on him when Tyler Walker threw a ball, and Phillips checked his swing (check swung?), and the first base ump said no swing. He clearly went way beyond what would even be called a check swing.

yeah it was a bad call

at what point does it become a swing?

Beyond perpendicular/90 degrees.

really? I always though it had something to do with teh plate

perpendicular to what, and why do you believe this?

CHECK SWING RULE
"He broke his wrists", "The bat went past the front of the plate."
Many people believe those two statements are written in the rules or are written as official interpretations of a strike.
THEY ARE NOT.

A strike by definition is "a pitch that is struck at by the batter and is missed." It is purely a judgment made by the umpire as to whether the batter "struck at" the pitch. Breaking the wrists or the bat moving beyond the front of the plate or the batter's body, are factors that the umpire may use to make the judgment. Factors is all they are; not definitions.

It is not automatically a strike when a batter holds the bat over the plate preparing to bunt and does not pull it back when the pitch goes by. The same judgment applies. Did the batter "strike at" the pitch?

It is not automatically a strike when a batter is ducking an inside pitch and he spins around and the bat crosses the plate. The umpire must judge if he was avoiding the pitch or striking at it.

hey, i was seeing how many different answers i could get!

i will add though that some organizations have clear rules that involve placement of the bat, etc. the high school federation here has gone as far as to say any motion made towards the ball shall be construed to be a swing. the ncaa defines it as "A checked swing shall be called a strike if the barrelhead of the bat crosses the front edge of home plate or the batter's front hip. This does not apply to a bunt attempt when the batter pulls the bat back."

the thing is, if you ask ten different umpires what they call swings and what they don't you'll get ten different answers, and a bunch of details. i didn't see the dodger call so i can't comment on it, but i think people should know how ambiguous the rule is before they bitch about a call.

This is exactly why I like BASEBALL. different scenarios, different umps, different players, human error is definitely part of the game.

The Baseball Rulebook is almost just an outline of how the baseball game shall be ran, but there is no time limit, there is age in which you can't play, etc. etc. etc.

i like the wrist rule......it seems the most fool proof

i read a great analogy in response to the no time limit thing, i think in the book "the numbers game."

the time limit is 27, or 18, or 21, however many innings a team is playing. but the outs are the limiting factor, which is why their preservation is the most important thing to an offense. anyway, it's not a literal interpretation of the game, but it shows a clear distinction between baseball and other sports. while a football team or a basketball team is playing against a clock, they don't have a set amount of opportunities to score like baseball teams do. so, what i'm saying is that while not having a set time limit, baseball's format makes the game more urgent in terms of strategy.

but it's not a rule, it's just something people make up, like tie goes to the runner, etc.

There's just as much room for error on that one... maybe 1/3 of all check swings I see are guys who keep their arms straight and just move their bodies through the pitch, therefore bringing the bat with them... if you just judge by whether or not their wrists broke, you'd be issuing a lot of guys walks who should be rung up.

I have that book sitting on my desk right now but I haven't read it all... I bought it with King and Nan's 'Faithful' book, but after I finished that one and Moneyball back-to-back I didn't have the testicular fortitude to tackle Schwartz's book. The first part started boring me (the stats in the 1800's part) so I just quit on it. Does it get better?

good point, seeing as how you dont really roll over until contact

umps have too much control over outcomes as far as strike zones, check swings, bang bangs, ejections...purest say its good, but i dunno if i like it

Look on the bright side... it's better than the NBA

thats not saying much, id enjoy seeing bang bangs reviewed and a solid line on ejections and check swings....this way it wont slow the game down...i think skip bayless suggested it (others obviously also but i heard him) hes a douche, but it made sense. Having the umps with an ear piece....and bang bangs and check swings could be done in a matter of seconds

so what's your solutions for your thinking that the umps have too much control over the stike zone? hitters call their own balls?

yep, you guessed it you fucking asshole