Big Papi Gets The Benefit Of The Doubt
Saturday, August 06, 2011
With the Boston Red Sox and New York Yankees opening an important weekend series at Fenway Park Friday night, much of the talk around the ballpark was about what happened the night before following Boston's loss to Cleveland.
Let’s get this on the record. David Ortiz was wrong. Under no circumstances should he have barged into his manager’s press conference and said, “I am (expletive delted) pissed.” He should have waited to talk to Terry Francona about his feelings behind closed doors.
What was Ortiz “pissed” about? On Wednesday night against Cleveland with 2 out and runners on 2nd and 3rd, Big Papi hit a single to left field which scored both runners. He was credited with a base hit and 2 RBI.
One day later, official scorer Charlie Scoggins changed the scoring on the play taking 1 of the 2 RBI away from Ortiz claiming that the runner on second (Kevin Youkilis) would not have scored had Indians’ left fielder Austin Kearns not bobbled the ball.
Scoggins went on WEEI in Boston Friday morning to explain why he changed the ruling. “The Cleveland PR guy came over and told me their pitching coach had called him and told him that (Tim) Bogar had put up the stop sign on Youkilis. I told him I didn’t see the stop sign and I had looked immediately to see what the (third base) coach was doing and he waved him home. He said, ‘well, it’s on tape somewhere.’”
Scoggins continued, “so I went back and reviewed the NESN tape. On their replay, sure enough, you could see Bogar throw up his hands to stop Youkilis until the ball was bobbled by Kearns, and then he waved him home. It was only an instant. He never really got his hands up all the way. But, clearly, his intent was to stop Youkilis, even though there were two outs, until he saw the bobble. At that, I felt I could not give Ortiz two RBI’s on that when the intent was to stop Youkilis at third.”
Before you go continue reading this piece, watch the replay here:http://mlb.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_id=17615033
The best part of the replay is the last few seconds which shows the wide angle of the play. For the life of me, I don’t know what Scoggins was referring to when he said that he, “could see Bogar throw up his hands to stop Youkilis.”
It’s also important to note that, with 2 outs, a third base coach rarely holds a runner at third trying to score from second on a base hit. Furthermore, Youkilis never appeared to hesitate rounding third. It appeared that his intent was to try to score on the play regardless of what Bogar signaled.
For these reasons, Charlie Scoggins dropped the ball!
He had every right to go back and consult replay if he thought that he may have made a mistake. But there was no conclusive evidence for him to overturn his original call.
Furthermore, why would an official scorer in Boston give the benefit of the doubt to the opposing team and not his own? It doesn’t make sense because that never happens.
The other interesting part of this debate is the lack of media and fan criticism leveled at Ortiz for how he handled the situation and his perceived selfishness over one lousy run batted in.
Make no mistake about it, if there were a less-liked player such as the overpaid and underachieving JD Drew who did the same thing, he would have been lambasted by the media and fans alike in Boston. Ditto for a guy like John Lackey if he were arguing over an earned or unearned run. He would have been destroyed in the court of public opinion.
So why not Big Papi? If the crime committed is the same, shouldn’t HE be held to the same standard by both the media and the fans? The simple answer would be, “yes,” but it’s not that black and white.
You see, Ortiz has built up so much good will in Boston amongst the media that covers him and the fans who cheer for him, that they are most definitely more willing to let an incident like this slide.
Like it or not, it is human nature to give some leniency to someone who is well-liked because of how he or she has carried themselves throughout their lives. Just as it is human nature to throw the book at someone who has lived a virtuous life.
This happens in everyday life in our judicial system. Someone who commits a crime, however minor or major, may receive some leniency in his or her sentencing if they are a first time offender. Likewise, a repeat offender will likely serve the maximum penalty for whatever crime he or she committed.
This is why David Ortiz is getting the benefit of the doubt.
And for those of you who have a problem with that, let it be a lesson to you that if you spend a majority of your life treating people well and with respect, you, too, will get the benefit of the doubt during troubled times.
Follow us on Pinterest Google + Facebook Twitter See It Read It