**UPDATE** Because just about everyone who was rooting for the Astros has remarked that Hampton was getting squeezed, I went through and took some screen shots from Game Day to see if that was a fair criticism to make. Photos after the jump.
*****************
It was a frustrating game from the get go. Hampton seemed to be getting squeezed and stretched out his pitch count by alternating between loooooong innings and ridiculously short innings.
Our inability to blank the Cards in the frame following one of our runs was just simply maddening.
9th inning heroics seemed to be in the works, but alas, they were all for naught.
On the plus side, Pujols was pretty much neutralized (except for Hampton lobbing the ball to first)? If only Ludwick and Schumaker could have been as well. Oh, and Carlos Lee had a good game too.
See you tomorrow afternoon for round two.
Box Score and commentary from the Red Birds here.
So this won't be proof positive of anything because I didn't compare anything to Pinero and we don't know if this is an abnormal result, but there are a few pretty clear examples of Hampton getting hosed by home plate ump Ed Hickox (plus a few pitches that could have gone either way, I think).
Pitches four and eight are close.
But pitch 2 here is just absurd.
Wait, how is pitch 5 not a strike?
The view is about to change because as I took the screen shots, my mouse kept moving it and then I just started messing around with the view.
2 and 3 please.
He was painting the corners, for sure, but at least one of these please.
Like I said, not the most scientific, or proof definitive because I didn't go through every at bat, but some examples of a goofy zone, I think.
0 recs | 6 comments
Good work on the strike zone stuff, DQ
I seriously doubt that the ump had a bias or anything. Why ascribe to malice what is more easily ascribed to being blinder than Hellen Keller. JD and Bill Brown made mention (in that “hey, we’re not saying anything” way of good commentators) as early as Berkman’s first AB that some clear strikes were not being called.
Ultimately, I think it hurt the Astros a lot more because they just weren’t working the count until late.
Only_A_Lad - April 11, 2009
I don't think that there was a bias
Just a ridiculous zone that made it hard, for Hampton especially, who lives on the black, to find a rhythm.
Stephen Higdon - April 11, 2009
ditto on the good stuff
I only saw a bit of the game so I can’t give an opinion. How was the umpiring for Piniero?
Also, like me, you move the gameday presentation to directly behind the plate rather than askew. Why is askew the default or even one of the three choices? Could it be that it is with the notion that the umpires head would be there?
ol Pete - April 11, 2009
I don't know either
But it bugs me too.
Stephen Higdon - April 11, 2009
I can’t really comment on last night’s strike zone, but I heard an interview on NPR (click Listen Now) this week with Bruce Weber, a guy who recently released a book about umpiring. It was a very interesting interview and I actually learned a lot about what goes on in umpiring a game.
One thing I didn’t realize was that the strike zone is defined “in time” as just when the batter is about to take his stride. I also didn’t realize that umpires have to change their positions for viewing the pitch depending on whether a player is crowding the plate.
AstroAndy - April 11, 2009
Robot Umpires
In your heart, you know it’s right.
Midwestside - April 13, 2009
You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of The Crawfish Boxes to post a comment.