Revisiting the Holliday Slide...

The three most covered stories over the past few weeks regarding the Colorado Rockies have been

1) Their amazing run (as it stands 19 of 20 wins)
2) A "controversial" interference call on BJ Upton sliding into second base
3) Matt Holliday's slide into home plate against the Padres

The major media outlets have let the latter two go away for the most part, and are now focusing on the playoff games yet to be played.

Last time I covered this, I made the unfortunate mistake of calling Rich Campbell over at MVN a "faggot," and failed to properly address his ridiculous argument that McClellan purposely blew the call. In retrospect, I should have stuck with my other favorite juvenile insults, including but not limited to, Douchebag, Loser, Asshole, and Pussy.

I thought this whole debacle was behind us, but according to Rich Campbell, "Holliday Controversy Proving to Have Legs." Oh really, Rich? That's funny, because I haven't seen a single news story on the matter in well over a week.

As we approach mid-October, I would expect the feelings to have calmed over the single blown call that punched the final ticket to the post-season for the Colorado Rockies. And what is oddest about it is who seems to be the most passionate about it.

Who? Tony Kornheiser?

Padre fans continue to be very matter of fact about it. If anything, I am one of the most virulent complainers, at least in print.

Maybe because most Padres fans realize that it was a very close call, mostly negated by another blown call on a Garret Atkins Home Run, and that the real, primary reason the Padres lost is because Trevor Hoffman blew the save in the first place.

For the most part, there is a fatalism on the part of the Friar Faithful. It says, "This wasn't our year." And there is plenty of evidence to support that. Suspensions. Injuries. David Wells having the size of his posterior referenced by an umpire months before a different umpire deliberately provoked the Padres most volatile personality. And then Boomer gets the seven game punishment.

Yep it's part of baseball. Woulda, Coulda, Shoulda, etc. What happens, on the Rockies' side, if Cook/Taveras/Hirsch doesn't go down with a season ending injury?

Padre fans almost seem to be taking a perverse pride in it. Now we have our moment; our Bartman, our Bucky Dent, our Pine Tar Incident. This totally tops "Strike Four" in 1998. And if the Rockies win the World Series, we can look at our pitching and the probability that we would have had Mike Cameron back and we can say we would have won it too. Which is, of course, ridiculous. Baseball is anything but predictable that way.

Now you're making sense.

No, we will cherish this moment in our perversity and reference it the way we point out our proclivity for running into teams like the 1998 Yankees or, in football, the 1994 San Francisco 49ers. Whenever a San Diego team gets to the ultimate showdown, they always seem to face an all-time great team.

I was reminded of this by the very interesting work done over at www.hollidaynevertouchedtheplate.com

So, now, after an extended prologue, we get to the reason Campbell made this post. I feel decieved, after the tagline "Holliday Controversy Proving to Have Legs." I thought there was going to be some big blogosphere/print media push to recognize the bad call. Instead it's just some guy with $15 and free blogging software who registered a domain to prove... something? I guess if someone had registered the domains http://www.garrettatkinswasrobbedofahomerun.com/ or http://www.uptonwasjustslidingtothebagandwasnottryingtoelbowkazmatsui.com/ would that mean there is some "leg" to their respective arguments? No.

What I noticed the most, and what I really find fascinating, is how incredibly adamant and myopic the comments from Rockies fans are. They rant, they rave, they take offense… they talk about rules that have never been applied to catchers as though they are self-evident and obvious… They invent game-winning hits by Brad Hawpe. By the way, Bud Black has already said he would have ordered Hawpe walked. And the Rockies had completely exhausted their decent bullpen personnel. No, the odds are far greater that the game would have gone more innings. But that is all speculation now.

No, the problem here is the opposite assumption made by you. That if Holliday had been called out at the plate, the Padres would have won. That McClellan purposely made the wrong call.

To the Rockie fans. To the people who feel the need to make observations about my possible education, my sexual orientation, my propensity for tear-filled evenings, my drinking habits, my fitness to be employed or my understanding of the rules. To the ones with the vocabulary consisting primarily of words that have to edited in order to prevent having an "Adults Only" portal over this page. I direct you to the works of one William Shakespeare. Some of you might have heard of him (although if I were to judge by the tone, grammatical content and lack of imaginative language in many of your comments, it's not that many of you.)

Yep that's me. Just me. Don't start this being about "Rockies Fans." It was me and a handful of others who threw juvenile insults at you. Just like not all Padres fans are taking a "perverse pride" in the play. Just like how only a few people are still beating this dead "holliday still hasn't touched the plate LOL" horse to death. (I'm guilty of said horse beating too, I suppose) What if, instead of me calling you a "faggot," I had just called you a douchbag? Would you say "those dastardly Rockies fans... Making observations about me being shoved up a menstrating womans' crotch to prevent yeast infections and promote overall cleanliness?" I called you a faggot much like one uses other juvenile insults. After you made a big stink about a word that, as far as insults go, is just another word, I made up some other stuff about you being gay in jest of your exasperated offense to said word.

Rich, you or that ridiculous site still haven't addressed a few things:

That McClellan purposly blew the call. Actually that's just you, because the owner of http://www.hollidaynevertouchedtheplate.com/ believes it wasn't a malicious call. Until we get the camera angle from McClellan's facemask (hint, there isn't one) we'll never know what he saw.

That it is %100 certain Holliday didn't touch the plate. That site has "definitive proof" that Holliday never touched the plate, but if you look at all the replays he has complied, I looks very possible that Holliday might have touched the tip of the plate. For the record, I'm pretty sure Holliday didn't actually touch the plate either.

That video replay would have changed the outcome of the play. This is the most laughable part of the argument, and I'm going to completely ignore the implications replay would have had on the Atkins HR. Even if video replay was in place, McClellan would have made a call after the play came to its climax. Think of it like replay in the NFL: McClellan's "safe" call is like the whistle. After that call, no tag on Holliday could have been valid, because the play is now complete or "dead" in football terms. Since Barrett didn't ever have possession of the ball before the safe call, video replay could, in no way, overturn the call.

In conclusion, Rich is still mostly wrong about the outcome of the game. I made some bad jokes, and a terrible argument against Rich in my previous post. For that I apologize.

And for the record, Rich, I read a bunch of posts on your Blog, and it's a pretty decent one. Pretty good analysis and perspective.

I completely agree with you about fans trying to justify McClellan's call as interference. Barrett obviously had rights to the basepath since he was in the process of fielding the ball. McClellan simply believed that Holliday touched the tip of the plate. And why wouldn't he? His view of the play was blocked by Barrett's back, and Barrett's foot yielded as Holliday slid home. It was a tough call.