[Al Simmons]

WRONG, WRONG WRONG!!!

If you look at the close-up replay from in front, you can clearly see that the BALL BOUNCES UP INTO THE MITT A SPLIT SECOND AFTER IT GOES INTO THE SHADOW MADE BY THE MITT BUT BEFORE IT HITS THE MITT.

Watch it. AJ was right. The umpire was right. The announcers need to apologize to the ump on air before the next game.

He was right.

[adiaireton8]

That ball did not bounce. And when the ump signals out, and then the Angels act accordingly, there is no way the ump can reverse the call. That's just wrong. (I'm not an Angel's fan.)

-A8

[HisKingdomWillAbolishSinDeath]

Sorry, it hit the ridge in the bottom of the webbing, not the ground. Seriously, would a pro catcher just roll the ball back to the pitcher without easily tagging the runner out if he wasn't ABSOLUTELY positive he caught the ball, something he has done a million times in his career. He has got enough balls in the dirt to easily know the difference.

[mitchbert]

It took me four watches of the replay to see it, but you are absolutely correct.

The ball hit the dirt mere inches from impacting the catcher's glove. Watch it frame by frame and the frame before impact shows the ball at a lower hieght than at the catch. That was my (and my friends) first clue.

The catcher's mistake was not routinely tagging the batter. Period.

[Petronski]

That's what I thought I saw, but I have yet to see it again.

[Steven W.]

If you look at the close-up replay from in front, you can clearly see that the BALL BOUNCES UP INTO THE MITT A SPLIT SECOND AFTER IT GOES INTO THE SHADOW MADE BY THE MITT BUT BEFORE IT HITS THE MITT.

Look again - the ball is hitting the tip of the mitt (on the top) and then rolling up into the webbing, just like a catcher's mitt is designed to do. The ball did not touch the dirt.

[SideoutFred]

It does not bounce.

A major league catcher knows when he catches a ball or not, if he didn't he would have flipped it to first base if there was even a shadow of a doubt in his mind.

I have tickets to games 3 and 4...our voices will be heard.

The call does not mean the Angels would have won, but it certainly means they go to the 10th inning tied.

[Falconspeed]

With all due respect, the rule is this: If the catcher drops the ball on a called third strike, then the batter may run to first and try to beat out the throw.

The Angel catcher did not drop the ball. Thus, the batter was not allowed to run to first. But the runner did run to first and was called "safe". This goes against the above rule. And the person upholding the rules is the person who broke a rule. Inconsistent. Sad. Something we all do several times a day: break a rule.

I detect a desire for advertising dollars in the mlb officials. Suspicious.

[bikepacker67]

The umpire was right.

It may or may not have hit the ground, but the point is moot when the Ump GAVE THE OUT CALL.

[jdm]

"the BALL BOUNCES UP INTO THE MITT A SPLIT SECOND AFTER IT GOES INTO THE SHADOW MADE BY THE MITT BUT BEFORE IT HITS THE MITT."

Why did the ump call out the batter twice then, once with his arm extended horizontally, to indicate strike 3, and again with his arm vertical, making a fist? Answer that one for me.