Protest filed, Scioscia adamant in stating case

Protest filed, Scioscia adamant in stating case

CHICAGO -- Angels manager Mike Scioscia confirmed on Saturday that his team officially filed a protest of Friday night's 8-6, 10-inning loss to the White Sox at U.S. Cellular Field because of a controversial play in the first inning.

The White Sox had the bases loaded with no outs when Paul Konerko hit a ground ball to third base. Alberto Callaspo fielded it and threw home to get a force out before catcher Chris Iannetta threw wide to first attempting to double up Konerko, who was ruled safe after Albert Pujols was pulled off the bag by a wide throw.

Scioscia argued that Konerko's path to first base took him into Iannetta's throwing lane, which he contends should be an automatic out. Instead, the White Sox were only charged one out and proceeded to score four runs against Zack Greinke after an RBI single and three-run home run.

Scioscia's conviction hadn't lessened a day later.

"What they can and could change, and should change, is the fact that the judgement was, 'Was he inside the line? Yes. Was he in the lane? Yes.' Now it's assumed that he absolutely was affecting the throw of the fielder, because he was in the lane and was in jeopardy of the throw," Scioscia said. "It's not even being disputed by the umpires. They're saying the throw was bad, so they're not going to make a call ... which has no logic to it at all."

Iannetta said Saturday that he did alter the throw wide to the left of Konerko because of his path to the base.

"I know I had to adjust where I'd throw," Iannetta said. "Normally, I'd throw to Albert on the base and he'd be at the base, but just the fact that he was pulled off the bag by the throw was an indication of how I had to alter it. I didn't want to take the chance of throwing at the runner, so I threw it around him and pulled Albert off the bag."

Scioscia was asked what he thought would've been called had Iannetta hit Konerko in the back with his throw.

"I think if he would've hit him in the back, they absolutely would've made the call," the former catcher said. "But it's not contingent on that. The interpretation of the rule is not contingent on if you hit the runner. It's contingent on the parameters that [the umpiring crew] already set. That's my whole argument. The parameters they set call for that guy to be called out [from] what they told me, and that's what the protest is about."