Holliday Never Touched the Plate

Tony Kornheiser did something yesterday that Tim McClelland should have done in the 13th inning the night of Oct 1st. He called Matt Holliday out. While many in the media, including ESPN’s own Sportscenter, have described the replays as being “inconclusive,” Kornheiser has been adamant from day one that Holliday missed home plate. On PTI, the show he co-hosts with Michael Wilbon, Kornheiser asked an increasingly sheepish Matt Holliday point blank about the issue during a segment of “Five good Minutes.” Watch the video below and see how Holliday handles the question at the 3:20 mark.

Holliday trots out, among other things, the now familiar circular argument that “if he (McClelland) says I was safe, I was safe.” The net effect of this video is that Holliday’s non-committal responses and nervous laughter make it seem as if he is almost acknowledging that he missed the plate. A little wink here, a little grin there, and an admission that “that call went our way.’ To his credit Holliday never does say that he touched the plate.

Had the Rockies not swept the Phillies and D-Backs, this interview, and others like it would never have taken place and the disputed call may have been relegated to a historical footnote. But, as much as the Rockies and their fans might wish this topic would go away, it seems as if the scrutiny of Holliday’s slide is only increasing as the World Series draws closer. And more and more as the light of day is being shone upon the play, the message is coming back “Holliday never touched the plate.”

Tags: ESPN by admin
4 Comments »

Just how did the replays of Matt Holliday’s slide come to be described as “inconclusive?” On October 2nd, the day after the game, two major media outlets, one in print, and one in video, went with the “inconclusive” description. One of those outlets was ESPN whose coverage changed markedly from the TBS’ announcers call of the play. The other outlet was the Associated Press who went with a story that contained the description of inconclusive within the following sentence “Replays were inconclusive on whether Holliday touched the plate with his left hand or was blocked by Barrett’s left foot.” Together these two assessments carried the message to America that there were in fact no replays that showed the play clearly.

While its hard to create a chronology of how the description of “inconclusive” came into being with 100% accuracy, I’ll try to outline what I feel are the major points in the days right after the game.

1. Oct. 1st - The TBS broadcast: When the play was reviewed live on air during the TBS broadcast of the game, the key comment was: “the hand never got home plate.” If you click the “Carroll drives in Holliday” link on this page under the More Coverage related links section you will hear the comments PLUS you will see the only still frame I have been able to locate from the “reverse angle replay” first base camera.
2. Oct. 1st -ESPN post game Sportscenter: It was during this broadcast that the word “inconclusive” first appeared. When showing the replay in slow motion the key comment was, “More importantly Michael Barrett sticks out his left foot blocking Holliday from touching home plate. Did he touch home? Yeah ,Ump says yes but we look at it again, and inconclusive to maybe no.” While the word “inconclusive” is used, its clear from the context that ESPN thought it was highly possible, or at least more likely, that Holliday missed the plate.
3. Oct. 2nd - AP story by Arnie Stapleton: The AP story by reporter Arnie Stapleton contained the fateful phrase “replays were inconclusive on whether Holliday touched the plate with his left hand or was blocked by Barrett’s left foot.” What we don’t know is if Mr. Stapleton ever saw the reverse angle replay from the first base cameras. This story is widely featured in online and print media and represents the dominant assesment of the replays at the time.
4. Oct. 2nd - Bud Selig weighs in on the play: On ESPN’s Pardon The Interruption, Tony Kornheiser notably railed against the call deriding it as a blown call. Significantly however, later in the program (here is ESPN’s podcast link) Bud Selig offered his opinion on if Holliday touched the plate, ” I really believe he did, but if I supose somebody said they were inconclusive that would not be a bad answer.” So here you have the commissioner of baseball stating for the record that he feels a description of “inconclusive” would not be a bad way to describe the replays. It’s impossible to know if this pronouncement colored ESPN’s view of the play but that can’t be ruled out.
5. Oct. 2nd - ESPN next day Sportscenter: The following day, when many were tuning in to see the play for the first time, ESPN changed its assessment of the play. In this clip Steve Levy, Orel Hershiser, and Tim Kurkjian debate the slide before Kurkjian offers the final pronouncement of “I don’t think he got to the plate either, but its inconclusive.” You’ll notice that ESPN uses a heavily cropped set of replays this time, even cutting out the plate in some spots. The message sent on Oct 2nd by ESPN was that you could have an opinion about the slide but that the replays would be inconclusive. Sadly I don’t know the taping times of these two shows but if PTI were taped first, it is possible that Selig’s comments helped shape Kurkjian’s opinion.
6. Oct. 3rd - AP story by Jim Litke: This story by Jim Litke covered commissioner Selig’s appearance on PTI and was widely syndicated in print and online media. The pertinent excerpt from the article is ” ‘But if somebody said it was inconclusive,’ Selig said during an ESPN interview, his consensus building side peeking through again, ‘that would not be a bad answer.’ ” Litke seems to insinuate that Selig’s message is designed in part to lay down MLB’s official position on the play, that the replays were inconclusive.

From there the word “inconclusive” was cited by multiple sources and represented the dominant opinion in media accounts of the replays. Of course the use of the word “inconclusive” to describe replays of Holliday’s slide has other potential root sources. The word could have been borrowed from the vernacular of NFL replays. since no lexicography has yet been defined for the evaluation of baseball replays, it seems that the terms of Football’s replays may have been called in to pinch hit. There is also the possibility that the replays are in fact inconclusive. But before we assume that, we’d have to know what happened to the missing “reverse angle” first base camera video. And even without that missing footage, we have to explore the possibility that, while no single replay angle shows the whole play, we can in fact combine various camera angles to obtain conclusive proof that Holliday missed the plate. That is one of the things I have tried to do on this site, and despite the handicap of not having access to original footage, I feel that goal has been accomplished. Why none of the major media outlets have undertaken similar steps to prove the matter either way is debatable.

What isn’t debatable is that the initial impression of the TBS broadcast crew that had access to all of the replays including, presumably, the “reverse angle,” was that Holliday’s hand “never got home plate.” Somehow along the way, this original source assessment was discarded in favor of the term “inconclusive” and it remains to be seen if the descriptive pendulum will once again swing the other way.

Tags: Conspiracy?, ESPN, MLB, TBS by admin
1 Comment »

Key footage of Matt Holliday’s slide has gone missing. The image below is a screen cap from MLB.com’s video of Carroll driving in Matt Holliday. ( You can find a link to it on this page under the related links section to the right of the text.) In MLB.com’s video this image appears a static picture. It looks to be the greatest potential proof from a single camera angle that Holliday missed the plate, yet its just spliced into the footage like a slide in a montage at your cousin’s wedding reception. Given its angle, its resolution, and its appearance on MLB.com it is likely that this image is a freeze frame from a TV camera.

Pardon me for shouting but, WHERE THE HELL DID THIS COME FROM AND WHERE IS THE VIDEO FROM THIS CAMERA? In the days following the game, ESPN and other media outlets kept repeating that “the replays were inconclusive” like a bunch of parrots. However, when ESPN was addressing the question they never used this shot or any of the video from this angle. All the video they used from behind home was either heavily cropped to remove the plate, or had Holliday’s body obscuring the plate. Did ESPN bother to try and track down the video from this camera? Who knows? Perhaps Bud Selig, taking a page from NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell’s playbook on how to deal with a video tape scandal, has already ordered the footage destroyed. This “grassy knoll” cameraman has a perfect clear view of Holliday as he attempts to touch the plate and yet the video has never surfaced to settle the controversy.

In reality I think the possibility that some incredible conspiracy has made this footage disapper is practically nil. But I do think that officials at MLB hinting to ESPN not to show the video is within the realm of possibility, however remote. But, even if this video isn’t missing as the result of conspiracy or unilateral action, the question still remains, where is it? If this video turns out to be “inconclusive” why keep it from view as it can’t hurt anything to show it? If the video were to prove that Holliday was safe, why is it being hidden when it could settle the argument? Should we assume that producers keep forgetting to show the best angle of the slide seen to date and that its omission is just an accident?

The best rational explanation for the continued absence of this live shot from all replays is that it proves that Holliday never touched the plate or otherwise brings McClelland’s call into serious question. The continued withholding of this key footage could be yet another sign that MLB is actively trying to shape the story around McClelland’s call. If MLB has nothing to hide, why is this footage still missing?

Tags: Conspiracy?, ESPN, MLB, McClelland by admin
3 Comments »

ESPN’s Sportscenter used at least two different sets of highlights when replaying Colorado’s Matt Holliday’s slide into home vs. the Padres. On the Sportscenter show that aired following the game the footage used was from the TBS feed. They showed replays from four cameras, one down each foul line, and three different views from behind home plate. The views of the slide were good, one shot even shows home plate umpire Tim McClelland still moving into position as Holliday attempts to touch the plate.

The next day another Sportscenter show aired that again used the TBS footage, but with only two angles shown, and more importantly with the framing altered so that less of the slide could be seen. Compare the shots contained in the image below.

What makes the change in framing of the replay shots curious is that they were used in a segment where the three ESPN analysts were specifically addressing the question of whether or not Matt Holliday touched the plate. You can’t see Tim McClelland still moving as the play was happening. You can’t see see the on deck hitter Brad Hawpe’s lack of celebration as he watches the play. You can’t see how far Holliday’s body moves away from the third base line as he tries do dive around the tag. After the abbreviated and altered shots were shown, Tim Kurkjian dismissed the issue by saying, “I don’t think he touched the plate either, but its inconclusive.” Really? Well it seems to me that if you are going to address the question of if Matt Holliday touched the plate, that it might be a good idea to use the best replays possible. If you’re ESPN and you’re going to tell your viewers that the replays are “inconclusive” it just doesn’t make sense to use fewer replay angles and then alter the framing of the replays you do show so much that you actually cut out the plate during the tag. In fact, I would argue that that you should make an extra effort to find the best replays and perform your best analysis possible, not to just throw some inferior clips out there and then label them “inconclusive.”

It is an indisputable fact ESPN altered the replay clips of Holliday’s slide so that they showed less detail the day after the game than they did post game. The real question is why did they do it? Here are the best possible answers that I can come up with,

1. They felt the new shots were actually better than the first set and showed the play more clearly.
2. They wanted to get rid of the MLB/TBS logo.
3. They were trying to purposely shape the story so that the replays would be considered inconclusive.
4. ?

If it was choice #1, ESPN was sadly mistaken and did not exercise due journalistic diligence. If it was choice #2, ESPN is guilty of making a choice that resulted in the footage not being attributed to MLB/TBS. If it was choice #3, however, well that’s just plain bad and opens up a whole host of shady issues. Issues like, Why are they changing the clips? Who told them to change the clips? etc. I threw in #4 because there could be other reasons so you can lump them all in here.

Just so you can see the original ESPN clips, I’ve placed links to them below as well as an embedded YouTube link to where I have extracted just the replays from both Sportscenters and compare them directly.

Post game ESPN Sportscenter clip

Next day ESPN Sportscenter clip

Tags: Conspiracy?, ESPN, HNTTP's Videos, MLB, TBS, Video posts by admin
4 Comments »