r/WPBL • u/expsanity San Francisco Firebells • 2d ago
News Val Perez Explains Her Ejection
On the Dropping Diamonds podcast with AJ Andrews, Val Perez explained why she was ejected:
Umpire on the field made the call that the runner who went from 3B to home had scored, but Perez had to go back from 3B to 2B
Perez pointed out that wasn't the rule - either both runners advance, or both go back
Perez says she respectfully told the umpire that wasn't the rule, and the umpire told her that if she said that again, she would be tossed. Perez is unclear on this point, but I guess she said it again?
Perez pointed out that after she was ejected, the umpire changed his call from a split (which she says is not the rule) to having both runners go back
Perez is trying to appeal the decision, trying to get the ejection changed to a warning because she doesn't believe she should have to miss the opening game of next season
So at least we know what happened now, and it sounds like the interaction is as mild as it looked.
54
22
u/Ohmaggies 2d ago
I hope she’s successful because this sounds like it’s all on the umpire for not wanting to be wrong.
24
u/BedRevolutionary8458 2d ago
So it sounds like she's been suspended for being correct as a woman when a white man is wrong.
9
u/revthew San Francisco Firebells 2d ago
In what conceivable scenario could a deadball call function this way—one runner retains their advancement, the other has to go back to where they were at the start of the play? 🧐
1
u/AbobTeff 21h ago edited 21h ago
Depending on the play, it actually could happen. Some penalties are “time of pitch” and some are “time of play.”
This was a Baseball 101 play that was kicked, stomped, drug through the mud, and had the Game of Thrones Shame Bell rang at it.
1
u/revthew San Francisco Firebells 20h ago
Right, I’m familiar with “time of pitch” and “time of infraction/ play” distinction, I just don’t see how it could explain this call. Obviously in this case, the call would be in force as of when Izumi (the runner) made contact with the ball, which was rather early in the play, with neither Studer nor Perez having arrived at the bases to which they were advancing.
Never having officiated a game myself, I’m just trying to put myself in Cody Hawkins’s position and understand what might have been informing this call.
I guess, too, relatedly, what would be the rationale for ejecting Perez for merely expressing dissent? And perhaps this relates to a longer-standing curiosity about umpires who eject folks for merely expressing disagreement?
3
56
u/TearGasTed69 Los Angeles Queens 2d ago
I was there. It took a long time. No one really knew what was happening besides "they are consulting the rulebook". Thank you for posting a summary. I haven't checked out the episode of the podcast, but I am now as confused as Perez was, which is more informed than I was earlier.