No need to wait. Grab someone you aren't fond of...give him a stick and take him outside. Stand about 60 feet away from him; then throw a baseball as hard as you can at his shoulders. Have a buddy film it. It's gonna look something like that.
The umps never should have reviewed Martin's throw, and the run had to be scored.
Haven't seen anything like that since the Bartman game. I'm not sure that even matches what we saw last night.
As I wrote earlier (but for some reason people deliberately skew it) the ump had to go see how far the runner was down the line.
He called it a dead play and the Blue Jay was seen to point to him instead of making the throw.
So, if it's a judgement call that can't be reviewed, the initial judgement was interference.
The refs reversed the initial judgement upon conferring.
BUT, having called it a dead play, they then had to take into account that the player hadn't crossed the plate when it was called dead.
So they went to review it. He was about 2/3rds of the way down the line when it was called dead. So they gave him the base (as they sometimes do when deciding ground rule doubles, etc.)
This is why I made the comparison to football earlier.
By allowing the umps this much freedom, you're causing all sorts of mayhem and confusion.
1. The initial judgement is dead play
2. Everyone stops but the runner.
3. The judgement is reversed.
4. But since judgement calls are not reviewable, the umps don't know how far long the runner was.
5. So they must review it.
Essentially, the rules of the game never anticipated this might happen. Why? Because baseball doesn't have a rule that says a play is dead once the ump calls it dead. Like football does.
The announcers never really talked about whether the fact that he was halfway to home is what gave him the run.
