Talk:Armando Galarraga

Arbitrary section header
there was a blown call....put that in the article —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.77.217.210 (talk) 15:18, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

MLB won't reverse call in Armando Galarraga's game
http://abclocal.go.com/kabc/story?section=news/sports/pro/baseball&sa=MLB&eid=5248118 Mijcofr (talk) 21:32, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Reviewing the call
On thursday morning June 3, MLB are still deciding whether to review umpire's call.http://www.suntimes.com/sports/baseball/2351150,jim-joyce-blown-call-perfect-game-mlb-review-03.article http://abclocal.go.com/kabc/story?section=news/sports/pro/baseball&sa=MLB&eid=5246454 Mijcofr (talk) 16:46, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Mijcofr (talk • contribs) 16:41, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Protecting from Vandalism
I think that it's probably a good idea to protect Jason Donald (baseball) and Armando Galarraga, Frustrated vandals may try to vandalize those pages after first going to Jim Joyce. Just a thought, and just a small protection would probably suffice.--69.212.41.18 (talk) 01:55, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

It should probably be pointed out that umpire Jim Joyce later admitted he blew the call: http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/sports_blog/2010/06/jim-joyce-blows-call-and-ruins-armando-galarragas-perfect-game.html  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.49.32.156 (talk) 03:45, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

This needs to be added
The umpire, Joyce, admitted after watching the replay that he had blown the call. His blown call kept Galarraga from having pitched an official perfect game. Joyce later apologized to Galarraga. http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/writers/tom_verducci/06/02/joyces.missed.call/index.html?hpt=T2

Or something like that. The way the page is now is really not telling the truth about what happened. If anyone has the ability to edit this page I think that info should be added. --Brendan19 (talk) 03:52, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

I strongly agree with Brendan19. --Hyung5kim —Preceding undated comment added 05:49, 3 June 2010 (UTC).


 * I concur. As it is currently written, the section implies that the perfect game was ended as a result of correctly ruled hit.  By the umpire's own admission, his call was wrong.  Gallaraga will never be officially credited for throwing a perfect game this night, but the statement needs to make it clear that the only reason that the game won't ever be recorded as the 21st perfect game in MLB history is because of an umpire misjudgment.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.130.154.175 (talk) 07:15, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

99.9.112.31 (talk) 15:01, 3 June 2010 (UTC)I have questions which maybe should be answered in this article. I think I understand why people are upset about the umpire's error, but won't Galarraga be pitching more games this season and in following seasons? Won't he have more chances to pitch perfect games? He isn't retiring right away, is he? Thanks.

Re: the previous comment about him pitching more perfect games: It's like hitting back-to-back holes-in-ones (maybe rarer) in golf. Of all the games pitched in major league history only 20 are perfect. There's almost no chance of repeating --even among the greats who did pitch a perfect game, none repeated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.249.47.173 (talk) 15:20, 3 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks for explaining it. Too bad it happened. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.9.112.31 (talk) 02:11, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

What do you say you unprotect this page?
What do you say you unprotect this page? Article currently reads like it's been written by a third grader... — X96lee15 (talk) 04:08, 3 June 2010 (UTC)


 * I completely agree. What is going on here?  Since when is it Wikipedia policy to protect an article just because it has been in the news?  I can't think of a reason why this article is protected and the writing is terrible, as the above person noted. Wikipediarul e s 2221  06:47, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Agreed. The description of the fact that the umpire's call was erroneous is completely missing. Someone please fix! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.192.55.84 (talk) 07:14, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from Vpinezic, 3 June 2010
The entire second paragraph is incorrect and should be removed. The details in the second paragraph must be for Andres Galarraga, not Armando. Armando would have been only 16 if he had signed with the Expos in 1998. Text to be removed: "Galarraga originally signed as a free agent with the Montreal Expos on October 31, 1998. He was acquired by the Rangers from the Washington Nationals as part of the deal that sent Alfonso Soriano to the Nationals in 2005."

Vpinezic (talk) 04:51, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Correct info per: . — X96lee15 (talk) 05:04, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
 * No, it could have been Armando. It is not uncommon for Latin American players to sign with a MLB club at 16 or 17 years old.  It does not need to be changed.  173.48.113.64 (talk) 07:00, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the template. &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 08:24, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Andrés Galarraga was on the Atlanta Braves from 1998 to 2000 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.5.241.139 (talk) 13:17, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

8.2 innings is incorrect
In the last paragraph it says "he pitched 8.2 perfect innings". I believe this should be 8 2/3 perfect innings. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Saosinnn (talk • contribs) 09:48, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Agreed. 8⅔ is much different than 8.2 (especially in Wikipedia where we have the ability to use the fraction). — X96lee15 (talk) 12:41, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
 * In baseball scorekeeping 8.2 = 8 2/3. 8.1 would equal 8 1/3.  It's shorthand that's been accepted by statkeepers.  Jr ss r5  13:29, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree it's shorthand, but it's much less correct than 2/3. It's shorthand when you're putting stats in a table where you have limited space.  In an encyclopedia where we have space, it should be the fraction. — X96lee15 (talk) 13:34, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Is this article being protected from vandalism or correct information? 64.130.123.34 (talk) 11:25, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

What idiot is writing on this page??? Just plain rubbish —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.5.241.139 (talk) 13:09, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

It should be 8⅔ for an individual game. If it was a seasons work then it would be the way it is now, for example. La Fuzion (talk) 17:27, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

The blown call MUST be acknowledged
The current language describing Galaragga's performance on June 2, 2010 is a complete travesty, and reflects poorly on Wikipedia's accuracy.

"On June 2, Galarraga nearly became the 21st pitcher in Major League history to throw a perfect game.[7] He pitched 8.2 perfect innings, but lost the perfect game after an infield hit by the 27th batter. Rookie Jason Donald hit a ground ball to first baseman Miguel Cabrera, who tossed to Galarraga, but first base umpire Jim Joyce called Donald safe, ending the perfect game and no-hitter."

That phrasing does not recognize that Jim Joyce's call was universally viewed as a blown call, even by Joyce himself. The Cleveland Indians broadcast team recognized that the call was wrong, despite it being potentially beneficial to the Indians. There is absolutely no disputing that Joyce's incorrect safe call for Indians baserunner Jason Donald is the ONLY reason that Galarraga was not recognized for throwing the 21st perfect game in MLB history. This article needs to be revised to fully reflect the effect that Joyce's call had on the game and its historical implications. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.130.154.175 (talk) 16:17, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Different user: I agree with the above user's statement. The call wasn't just "controversial." There is video graphic evidence proving that the call is completely incorrect. There is no disputing that the runner was out in the full speed video let alone the slow-motion replay. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.204.155.1 (talk) 00:12, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

proposed fn re article re "Fans applaud Galarraga for being perfect gentleman"
I'd like to add the following footnote, perhaps after the sentence that says the ump acknowledged he blew the call. The topnote says an administrator can add this, if there is consensus. The proposed fn is: Eagle4000 (talk) 21:53, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Information to be added when editing of this article is reinstated
When the editing limitation of this article is reinstated, the following information should be added:


 *  On June 3, 2010, he presented a brand new Chevrolet Corvette to Detroit Tigers pitcher Armando Galarraga. The previous night Galarraga had a perfect game through 9 2/3 innings when umpire Jim Joyce incorrectly ruled safe Cleveland Indians shortstop Jason Donald on a ball hit to first baseman Miguel Cabrera.  Reuss cited the professionalism with which the pitcher had handled the situation as the reason he deserved to be recognized. 

Special:Contributions/69.171.163.209 added this information to the Mark Reuss article, but I feel that it does not belong there. OSX (talk • contributions) 23:15, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from Mattstermh, 3 June 2010
He pitched 8.6 perfect innings, not 8.2 8.2 = 2/10 which = 1/5. He pitched 8 and 2/3 innings, which is equivalent of 8.66 innings.

Mattstermh (talk) 23:31, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made.  — fetch ·  comms   23:41, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

That would be incorrect in baseball terminology anyway. 8.2 inningspitched is the equivalent of 8 2/3 innings pitched, just like 8.1 and 8 1/3. Soxrox 00:53, 8 June 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Soxrock24 (talk • contribs)

External links modified (February 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Armando Galarraga. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100606092056/http://tigers.scout.com/2/974557.html to http://tigers.scout.com/2/974557.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 21:40, 5 February 2018 (UTC)