On Galarraga's perfect game and other "perfect" policies
Do me a favor. Try to answer the following question, but you’re not allowed to use any of the following responses: it’s just never been done before; it goes against tradition; or, unfortunately, rules are rules, if we make an exception this time, we’d have to make an exception for everyone. Here’s the question - why not retroactively over-rule the umpire who made the lousy call and give Armando Galarraga his perfect game?
Seriously, and now I’m asking you directly, Commissioner and High-Priest-of-Everything-Baseball Bud Selig, why not declare the throw beat Jason Donald - as the replays show it so clearly did - turn his so-called hit into a routine put-out and simply wipe the next batter’s at-bat from the record books as if it never happened?
Tigers' pitcher Armando Galarraga covers first base, appearing to close out the first perfect game in Tigers' history before a controversial call changed everything. (AP photo)
Here’s what happens, Mr. Selig, if you do that: Galarraga gets his perfect game, the first in the 116-year history of the Detroit Tigers, only the twenty-first in the entire history of Major League Baseball and the unprecedented third in a single season. The outcome of the game and the standings are not affected because the Tigers won three-zip anyway.
Really, that’s it. Other than Jason Donald’s batting average dropping a smidge and the dude who grounded out after him raising his an even slighter fraction, and Brandon Inge and Miguel Cabrera getting credit for one fewer play in the field - there are no other consequences.
Here’s what happens, Mr. Selig, if you do nothing and let the result stand as is: Galarraga does not get the perfect game he rightfully earned and he probably - can’t say for sure, but the odds are certainly against him, nobody has ever thrown two perfect games - never throws another one. He, based on his prior record, goes on to have perhaps a respectable but not particularly memorable career and the sympathy everyone feels for him now eventually evaporates and his one great moment is more or less forgotten. His spot in baseball immortality is relegated to the trivia bin - the guy who almost had a perfect game except the umpire screwed it up on the last play. And by the way, the career of that umpire - Jim Joyce - is likely never to be remembered for anything other than blowing the call.
So, Bud, what it’ll it be? Are you willing to step out in the glare and over-turn precedent? Willing to risk public censure in order to mitigate an injustice?
But, but, but…I hear people saying.
Actually, I don’t want to hear any buts. The only thing that happens if Selig has the guts to reverse the call is that a wrong is righted, a mistake is fixed. It’s not too late to do the right thing and all the classy responses by Galarraga and Jim Leyland are not nullified by doing it. They’re not the ones demanding the call be over-turned, I am. Nor is a precedent set where every bad call gets over-turned after the game is over. This particular set of circumstances, a blown call on the last play of a perfect game, is unique in the history of the sport. If somebody wants to claim that over-turning the call means that anyone else in the future who also loses a perfect game because of a bad call on the last play will also have to get the call over-turned, then I say, fine, go ahead, set that precedent.
In fact, Joe Girardi, manager of the defending World Champion New York Yankees (sorry, had to squeeze that in) agrees with me. According to ESPN.com, he said, "I think it's [changing the call] something that baseball should look at possibly because if they do change it, it doesn't affect the game. It doesn't affect the outcome. I know it will be the first time that it's ever happened but you're talking about a very unusual circumstance."
Bless you, Joe. Thanks for the support. So…how does this question relate to education?
Well, kids run into rigid, sorry-but-no-exceptions-can-be-made policies all the time and rules-are-rules is a justification that in my opinion gets relied on way too often and results in hurting too many kids. Many, many educators set policies at the beginning of a class (or administrators at the beginning of a school year) and adhere to them no matter what, whether that means never accepting a late assignment, taking a kid’s phone away who makes the mistake of letting it become visible with a minute left in class, marking a kid tardy who’s not in his/her seat five seconds after the bell rings, or suspending a kid for wearing a hat in the hallway. I actually think most educators are not so rigid, that the majority are flexible and do consider circumstances on a case-by-case basis, even are willing to over-turn their own policies, but it’s the rare educator who’s willing to admit that at a staff meeting and it’s the rigidity that’s more often publicly applauded.
If we really want to address our myriad educational issues, we need to be able to look at all our students as individuals. We need to admit that one-size-fits-all often fails to fit a lot of people. Even when doing so is inconvenient and involves a more nuanced or involved explanation, we nonetheless must try to do whatever we can for each kid that’s going to lead to the greatest amount of learning and growth for that particular student. Rigidity may be the way to go for one kid most of the time, sure. Yet, flexibility might work better for another. Striking out into new ground and discovering a completely new way to look at things might work for somebody else.
But, but, but…
What about kids learning a lesson? In the long run, isn’t it better for children to learn that in life they have to play by the rules and accept the consequences? That’s just how things go in the real world, so they better get used to it?
Actually, no. I think it’s a better lesson to learn that things generally aren’t so cut-and-dried. That relying on a rule/policy whether or not the result of that policy is particularly just or beneficial, leads to a lot of poor and small-minded decisions in the face of complicated questions. I’m not saying every rule should be broken, that people have the right to make their own laws, etc., - trust me, I’m all for tighter regulations of big banks and oil companies - but it’s also true that most circumstances are more complex than might be initially apparent and being flexible can often result in a more enlightened outcome.
I believe in fixing mistakes, even if it means challenging conventions in order to fix them. I suspect there are a lot of kids who will walk across the stage and graduate from Pioneer tonight because somebody else thought so too. We ought to thank those people and we ought not to be afraid to say in public that flexibility can be a virtue, not a weakness.
*Note - if you’re looking for a really fantastic experience for high-school aged and college-aged students, The Neutral Zone is once again offering a week-long Creative Writing camp called the VOLUME Summer Institute. It’ll be from June 27th - July 2nd and features world class faculty members teaching workshops in poetry (Roger Bonair-Agard, Patricia Smith, Kevin Coval, Scott Beal); fiction (Adam Mansbach); and Creative Non-Fiction/College essay writing (Sarah Andrew-Vaughan, Karen Smyte). Tuition is on a sliding scale basis. More info is available on the Neutral Zone’s web site @ www.neutral-zone.org. *
Jeff Kass teaches Creative Writing at Pioneer High School in Ann Arbor and at Eastern Michigan University in Ypsilanti, and directs the Literary Arts Programs at the Neutral Zone, including the VOLUME Youth Poetry Project, which meets every Thursday night at 7pm. He will post new blog entries every Thursday morning throughout the school year.
Comments
Otha Bender
Fri, Jun 4, 2010 : 2:18 p.m.
From 'LITTLE LEAGUE' to the ranks of 'PROFESSIONAL BASEBALL'>>>'GOOD SPORTSMANSHIP' & 'FAIR PLAY' is something which is 'adamantly' stressed as a 'NUMBER ONE' concern/priority between 'opposing' team members...In light of the fact that the 'PITCHER', the 'INFIELD THROWER', the 'MAN on FIRST' as well as the 'RUNNER' >>>'ALL' simultaneously realized (as their reactions clearly indicate) that he was {{{'OUT'!}}}...combined with the 'immediate admission' of the 'UMPIRE' that he had made a 'BAD CALL' & that the 'runner' really was {{{OUT!}}}...'THE MAJOR LEAGUE BASEBALL COMMISSIONER & THE COMMISSION' (itself)...representatives of 'ALL TEAMS' and possessing the 'POWER' to 'MAKE IT RIGHT' by 'CORRECTING' the call...have 'EXTREMELY PROVEN' that with them 'GOOD SPORTSMANSHIP' & 'FAIR PLAY' means 'ABSOLUTELY'/'POSITIVELY' NOTHING'! (what a 'HYPOCRITICAL' example they have set!) 'TRUTH is TRUTH'>>>No matter how you try to 'suppress' or 'change' it! 'MAKING THE 'CORRECTION' WAS/IS a 'NO-BRAINER'! Now, I guess that it will be okay for teacher's to 'NOT' correct themselves whenever they may 'mistakenly' mark a childs answer on a test paper wrong!
Mick52
Fri, Jun 4, 2010 : 9:51 a.m.
I was somewhat surprised the MLB has not already expanded instant replay to cover more plays. According to commentators heard "around the world" yesterday, they use it only to look at supposed home runs. I would hate to see a team loose a world series for something like this. When so much can be at stake, anything that improves the game should be seriously considered. I would not be surprised that this has happened before. Before replay, all the cameras and angles its probably happened before when the only thing to rely on is the ump's call. That said, the class shown during all this by Armando Galarraga, Jim Joyce, the Tigers organization and the Detroit fans has been pointed out as well by the national media. It shows the kind people Michigan is made up of. Hoooo Rah! I have to agree with lumberg, I wish I had a better article to post this comment to.
Matt Cooper
Fri, Jun 4, 2010 : 7:56 a.m.
First of all let me say that in spite of that horribly bad blown call, I am quite proud of Mr. Joyce for acting as professionally and as honorably as he did. His actions after that game are an example of sportsmanship we should all aspire to. And I would also like to say that I am equally impressed with the heroic actions of Armando Gallaraga, Jim Leyland and the Detroit Tigers organization for they way they have handled this situation. But in aside from all that, let me also address a couple points here related to this story. @BasicBob: You said: "Armando Galarraga pitched a great game, and no one is disputing that. The only statistic that counts is the win, which would not be changed if the call were to be reversed. The rest is just sports trivia." You are quite wrong BB. Gallaraga didn't pitch a great game. He pitched a perfect game. In nearly 120 years of baseball there have been only 20 perfect games pitched. 20! And for Gallaraga to have what would have been perfect game #21 taken away from him in such a horrible way is absolutely outrageous! And not only was perfect game #21 taken from him, the hall of fame was most likely taken from him as well. And so, for you to trivialize such a historic accomplishment by saying that the only stat that counts is the win tells me that either you care nothing whatever for baseball or its players or it's traditions, or that you are simply ignorant of the historic implications involved in this situation. The only way to fix this and set things straight is for Bud Selig to step to the proverbial plate (no pun intended), and do the right thing: A: Overturn the call that robbed Gallaraga of perfect game #21, ending the game with recording that the baserunner was thrown out at first thus rewarding Gallaraga the perfect game he so deserves, B: Installing instant replay on plays other than questionable home runs. Bud Selig will say that the human element is part of what officiating is all about. "Call 'em as you see 'em". But if that's truly the case, then why did he agree to the use of instant replay on homerun calls? You can't have it both ways, Bud. Either use it, or don't use it. But to use instant replay for one type of call (under the auspices of making the correct call regardless of the onfield officiating), and not for a call such as this is ludicrous!! I n ordinary, normal, every-day game I have no problem with blown calls as a part of the human element argument. It happens all the time. But this was no ordinary game, and this was no an ordinary, every-day situation. This was a perfect game. And Bud Selig should step up and make the correct (perfect if you will) decision.
Basic Bob
Fri, Jun 4, 2010 : 4:21 a.m.
Armando Galarraga pitched a great game, and no one is disputing that. The only statistic that counts is the win, which would not be changed if the call were to be reversed. The rest is just sports trivia.
Macabre Sunset
Fri, Jun 4, 2010 : 12:39 a.m.
hometown, I have run a blog for years. I would be thoroughly embarrassed to post such an abortion of the English language. What's wrong with posting my opinion? I would think the editors here, if they have any interest in maintaining standards, would want to take another look at this poorly argued and written "column" and decide whether it's a good idea to find a more coherent writer to take his place. I'm shocked that someone capable of producing such an incredibly bad piece of writing is teaching our young people creative writing. Perhaps the word "creative" has a different meaning for the folks at EMU. It's no wonder they've frozen tuition rates.
eCoaster
Thu, Jun 3, 2010 : 5:33 p.m.
@Macabre Sunset - I couldn't agree with you more - on ALL points.
David Briegel
Thu, Jun 3, 2010 : 5:12 p.m.
The truth you say. The truth doesn't matter. This is America. The lie is equal to the truth in everything we do. We can't handle the truth. There is no requirement that anything stated or printed be truth. AT is correct. At least that would preserve the no hitter! And yes, the whole world knows that was a perfect game. Only the future will never know.
Macabre Sunset
Thu, Jun 3, 2010 : 1:14 p.m.
I'm sad for Galarraga. I'm also sad for the future of this blog - this may be the most horribly written piece ever printed. I'm not for changing the rules of baseball to accommodate an entry in a record book. This should be addressed after the season as an argument for implementing instant replay. And that's it. No changed calls.
Ignatz
Thu, Jun 3, 2010 : 12:15 p.m.
AT (if I may refer to you as such): The problem with your argument is that Galarraga did not make an error. He did step on the bag and in time. I'd like the call overturned because it would rpresent the truth. Why do so many have a problem with trying to get to the truth?
Andrew Thomas
Thu, Jun 3, 2010 : 11:55 a.m.
Okay, here's another possible solution... The official scorer could change the "hit" to an error. They do this fairly frequently. The official scorer credits someone with a hit, or an error or a passed ball or whatever, and after seeing the replays (sometimes even a day or two later) changes the ruling. So charge Galarraga with an "error" for failing to step on the bag (the throw was clearly in time, so you can't give Cabrara an error). This would preserve the no-hitter, although not the perfect game (I'm not sure on this, but I think "perfect game" means nobody reaches base, even on an error). Sure, it's not really fair to give Galarraga an error, but it's better than cheating him out of a no-hitter. And this avoids the whole issue of creating a precedent for overruling an umpire's call. The batter gets a hit taken away (which he clearly didn't deserve anyway) and you don't have to adjust the at-bat for the next batter. Whaddya think?
kulse012
Thu, Jun 3, 2010 : 11:13 a.m.
Sadly even if they overturn the call, it really does not mean much. Galarraga knows he threw a perfect game, umpire knows he threw a perfect game, the world knows too. However, they can't give him back his moment last night. That is the really sad part. He didn't get a chance to soak it all in and go nuts with his team and the fans. It may be the "right" thing to do to fix the call, but it won't matter a whole lot.
lumberg48108
Thu, Jun 3, 2010 : 10:45 a.m.
what a stupid premise for an argument... make the case for with out using the logical and reasonable points against it????? that is not how one argues or makes a point! the point is valid only if it can wishstand the simple, basic and rational points against it - or in the cause, RULES and precedent! therefore, an umpires call is final becuase that is how its done is the simple, reasonable arguement that is sure some creative writing Jeff
chosen1
Thu, Jun 3, 2010 : 10:45 a.m.
Here's why Jeff....Then the baltimore orioles will be asking why Selig sat with its hands under his butt and did nothing when Jeffrey Maier reached over the fence and gave Jeter a home run in that series that turned that game into a Yankee win. And there are more other great examples of what should have been.....Just enjoy the fact that we all know he pitched a perfect game. Sports is great because of the human element. UM has benefitted in football because of this. God knows my daughter's soccer team would have won 3 more games this season if it weren't for the "human element". But its life and life isn't always fair and neither is sports. Get over it.
friend12
Thu, Jun 3, 2010 : 8:49 a.m.
Bud should reverse the call. 1) Doesn't change outcome of the game. 2) Actually helps next batters numbers by making that at bat go away. 3) It is just the right thing to do.