Did he or Didn't he????????

Did Blake Burke Swing or Not Swing at the controversial pitch?

  • Blake held back the swing and right call was made

    Votes: 142 33.1%

  • Yes, his bat crossed home plate and it should have been a strike, game over

    Votes: 28 6.5%

  • I would like to take the fifth on this one your honor

    Votes: 45 10.5%

  • Vols WIN 12-11. Who Cares?

    Votes: 194 45.2%

  • ESPN Loves Us!!

    Votes: 1 0.2%

  • Like Sergeant Schultz famously said "I see nuthing"

    Votes: 19 4.4%
  • Total voters
    429
  • Poll closed .
#76
#76
vol94 said:
Me too. I thought Blue was consistent with the strike zone for both team.

I don’t think people appreciate how difficult it is to call a game behind the plate. Plus, every strike or ball is scrutinized with replay.
Click to expand...
Go back and view the second strike on BB AND the first ball on DD. Feel free to look at the rest of the game. Nearly identical Breaking pitches that rode the river till beyond the plate, that catchers pulled back in were NOT consistent.
 
#77
#77
Bigvalley84 said:
Number 1 the only opinion that mattered was the third base ump and he said no swing , number 2 we had several of their guys struck out that walked and came around to score and 3 they had a base runner miss 3rd base with the ball still in the outfield so let em whine
Click to expand...
Absolutely every one complaining on fsu yall got beat get over it
 
  • Like
Reactions: vol94
#79
#79
GUNTERSVOL said:
Go back and view the second strike on BB AND the first ball on DD. Feel free to look at the rest of the game. Nearly identical Breaking pitches that rode the river till beyond the plate, that catchers pulled back in were NOT consistent.
Click to expand...
Agree to disagree, then.
 
#80
#80
vol94 said:
Agree to disagree, then.
Click to expand...
The strike zone vs calls is something that can be measured after the fact against an umpires calls. Factually this umpire was both inconsistent and inaccurate. There’s nothing to agree or disagree about when it’s something that can be empirically measured.
 
  • Like
Reactions: chuckiepoo
#81
#81
volplaya8 said:
Option 2 is wrong and should be worded differently…the rule reads as this…

NCAA 2-39 Half Swing​

Half Swing

SECTION 39. An attempt by the batter to stop the forward motion of the bat while swinging, which puts the batter in jeopardy of a strike being called. The half swing shall be called a strike if the barrel head of the bat passes the batter’s front hip. This does not apply to a bunt attempt when the batter pulls the bat back.


Crossing home plate has nothing to do with anything…where do you guys get this nonsense from…lol
Click to expand...
Thanks for posting this. I always thought the barrel’s location with respect to the hands was the determining factor.
 
#82
#82
Stoerner Fumbles said:
The strike zone vs calls is something that can be measured after the fact against an umpires calls. Factually this umpire was both inconsistent and inaccurate. There’s nothing to agree or disagree about when it’s something that can be empirically measured.
Click to expand...
Once again, we can agree to disagree. There are too many that think we are victims to every call in every sport.
 
#84
#84
vols 30 said:
Either way would've been the right call. That was as close as you can get without getting a strike call. If the ump had called a strike, I would've been ok with the call.


The game wasn't decided by that one play
Click to expand...
Would anyone be talking about the check swing if it had happened in the 3rd inning? Free Shoes U. cost themselves 1 run with careless base running and were beneficiaries of many strikes called balls and a phantom balk call.
 
  • Like
Reactions: chuckiepoo
#85
#85
vol94 said:
Once again, we can agree to disagree. There are too many that think we are victims to every call in every sport.
Click to expand...
I didn’t say anything about being victims. I said that home plate umpires are objectively judged by real data. That ump called a bad game. That’s an objective fact. There’s nothing to agree to disagree about. I didn’t say we one or lost based on the umpires. I said he was objectively bad at calling balls and strikes. That’s not debatable. Once again.
 
  • Like
Reactions: chuckiepoo
#87
#87
Mccage said:
Why do we have a post about this? The Ump said no! Dam, enjoy the win if your a Vol fan if not gtfo!
Click to expand...
Dude. Medicine time. (FYI: "dam" is what holds water back. Damn is used when you are very upset)
 
#93
#93
The bat crossing the -lat has nothing to do with the call.The call is, did he break his wrists on his check swing. There is no question in my mind that he did check his swing and the 3rd base Ump made the correct call.
 
  • Like
Reactions: chuckiepoo
#94
#94
Stoerner Fumbles said:
I didn’t say anything about being victims. I said that home plate umpires are objectively judged by real data. That ump called a bad game. That’s an objective fact. There’s nothing to agree to disagree about. I didn’t say we one or lost based on the umpires. I said he was objectively bad at calling balls and strikes. That’s not debatable. Once again.
Click to expand...
I’m not going to argue with you but again, agree to disagree. And yes, it’s debatable if he called a good or bad game.
 
#95
#95
volplaya8 said:
Option 2 is wrong and should be worded differently…the rule reads as this…

NCAA 2-39 Half Swing​

Half Swing

SECTION 39. An attempt by the batter to stop the forward motion of the bat while swinging, which puts the batter in jeopardy of a strike being called. The half swing shall be called a strike if the barrel head of the bat passes the batter’s front hip. This does not apply to a bunt attempt when the batter pulls the bat back.


Crossing home plate has nothing to do with anything…where do you guys get this nonsense from…lol
Click to expand...
So clearly a strike?
 
#96
#96
vol66 said:
I can’t believe this is still a discussion.
Click to expand...
I think the OP was raising the question since it was controversial.

But I won’t apologize that the call went our way. It was 50-50, imo. FL State had numerous opportunities with two outs and two strikes to put the game away

Tears (triple), Peebles (walk), Cal (sac fly), C Mo (double) and Burke (two run single) all had two strikes but had ice in their veins.

I don’t recall the count for Billy and DD but they were clutch, too.
 
#99
#99
Who cares. Vols won, period. I’m not getting into the what if scenarios. If a frog had wings……….Vol won, FSU lost and that’s all that matters to me.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top