MLB reportedly issued a memo to teams regarding hit-by-pitch situations, stating that umpires will now confer to determine whether a HBP was intentional or not. Does this undermine home plate umpire authority? Article: The answer is likely "no," given how this new guideline came into existence. Commissioner Rob Manfred stated that MLB's impetus was 2019's extended Reds-Pirates bean ball war over several months that culminated in a massive benches-clearing brawl (and not anything Astros-related), and given the circumstances of the Cincinnati-Pittsburgh fight, we can draw some likely conclusions from that supposed purpose of the memo.
In short, the home plate umpire wields a great deal of game management responsibility, especially during charged HBP situations. During such plays, the plate umpire's immediate response in warning, ejecting the pitcher (and/or manager) or doing nothing greatly influences the offensive team's reaction to a potentially intentional bean ball.
For instance, HP Umpire Tim Timmons put on a clinic in Atlanta during Cubs pitcher Carlos Zambrano's intentional HBP of Braves batter Chipper Jones by immediately ejecting the pitcher before controlling the dugout and perhaps preventing a bench-clearing situation or fight.
For that reason, I would surmise the memo and new guidelines have very little to do with the plate umpire's immediate reaction; plate umpires should still be permitted to do their jobs. Instead, if the plate umpire doesn't warn or eject after a HBP, this reads like a situation that will be added to the "Crew Consultation and Getting the Play Right" list in that crews can get together after the fact to determine whether a no-call should be upgraded to a warning/ejection, or whether a warning should be upgraded to an ejection. Under no circumstances, however, would I anticipate that the purpose of the conference is to downgrade a warning or ejection to a lesser measure of discipline, or lack thereof.
0 Yorumlar