To be honest, I'm not sure how valid the argument is that, as of the Top of the 6th inning, the umpire was already "searching for something" that would allow for a no-hitter bid to look a bit more promising. Even if you ignore the fact that most cries of conspiracy in sports make the source of them sound insanely stupid, base path violations - in and of themselves - seem like the most judicious of judgement calls. Therefore, that might not be the hill I'd personally die on when calling into question the integrity of those that officiate me on a day-to-day and pitch-by-pitch basis. However, in the interest of putting myself in Andrew Benitendi's saliva-soaked shoes, let's assume for just one second that the umpire was guilty of letting his desire to be present for an accomplishment that, while impressive, has become slightly less historical given it's frequency influence his decision making. Even if that were the case, I think you've got to do a bit better than artfully dipping a tag on a two-out, dinky dribbler down the first base line to claim your fate was infringed upon by biased officiating. I don't know, maybe it's just me, but I don't think I would have cashed in my "the fix is in!" card following a game that I would have lost regardless. After doing a quick run of the numbers and calculating how many games remain, I've come to the conclusion that Andrew Benintendi will, undoubtedly, find himself in a better position to argue a worse call that has a more detrimental impact on his team before the season reaches its conclusion. He's probably going to want to have a semblance of credibility when he does so, and, in my opinion, he just lost that by being an overreactive infant after being denied a meaningless, unearned in-field single in April instead of tipping his cap to an opposing pitcher for an otherwise brilliant performance.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Categories
All
Archives
January 2020
|