Evans take on the Eddings Play

[Dave Davies]

Part I is my question about the Eddings play.
Part II is Jim's answer.

Is Jim's answer the only Authoritative one? I don't know. I would be curious to get Roder's, Yeast's or PBUC's take on this Play.

Until I hear differently, I will follow Mr. Evans recommendations.
************************************************** ************************

Hi, Jim.

I didn't want to bother you with that play in Chicago, but I can't find any definitive mechanic that should be used for the dropped 3rd strike.

I have been told by those better than me that my mechanic is wrong. I signal the swinging strike 3, put both hands out and say, "No Catch', or "Balls on the Ground."

Jim, I would reslly appreciate your input on this before I explain that call to the guys in my associations.

Dave
******

Dave,

I did 7 telephone interviews yesterday over that incident. One of them was a talk show on ESPN Radio. I turned down a stint on a LA station, KFI. They wanted me to do a 30 minute call-in talk show. (I was born at night but not last night!) As you know, I will never degrade an umpire publicly and I did not yesterday. However, I feel comfortable telling you what I think actually happened.

Eddings was surprised. It was one of those plays that usually calls itself but this time it had a surprise ending. Regardless of whether the ball hit the ground or not, his mechanic complicated the problem. He should have signaled the Strike 3 (as he did out to the side) and verbalized "Strike" or "Strike 3" and then either (1) declared him out verbally as he pumped his fist emphatically, or (2) pointed to the ground and declared "Ball's on the ground" followed by the no-catch signal and verbalize "No Catch!"

I see nothing wrong with your mechanic. For those who argue you should say nothing, I say "You are just asking for trouble!" The only two people in the ballpark who have their backs to the umpire are the batter and catcher. They are the ones who must know the status of the ball so that they can properly react.

Dave, I hope this helps. I can tell you have had some good training. Where did you get it?

[briancurtin]

ive done what jim suggests: the point to the ground and signal/verbalize "no catch" since i moved up and have had no trouble with it. the mechanic you use, dave, would not be considered incorrect anywhere i have worked as far as i know.

[mbyron]

Dave:

I can confirm: that's what Jim taught 2 weeks ago at the Florida Classic.

Signal & verbalize the strike; signal and verbalize "he's out!" or "no catch!"

[Sal Giaco]

Originally posted by mbyron
Dave:

I can confirm: that's what Jim taught 2 weeks ago at the Florida Classic.

Signal & verbalize the strike; signal and verbalize "he's out!" or "no catch!"

According to Tim C., an umpire should NEVER say "he's (the batter's) out.... In his xx years of umpiring, he's never done that. Looks like he's been using the wrong mechanic for xx years

[BigUmp56]

I guess I've been using the wrong mechanic as well. I only say "out." I have a distinct feeling they know who I'm calling out.

I know this is a little off topic, but I don't announce what base I'm calling the outs on during a play.


I remember when I worked softieball in the early 90's, some of the umpires would call thing's like:

"Out at two, out at one."

It always seemed a little over the top to me.


Tim.

[Tim C]

The "out at two" and "safe at one" cries were headed towards being an epidemic about three years ago.

We found it directly associated with umpires that had come to us from Little League. That is not an attack just a fact.

We still hear it from time-to-time and try to, as Barney Fife often intoned, "Nip it in the bud, nipo it in the bud."

AND, I still will never say "batter's out" . . . I will work on the "catch, no catch" with safe sign as directed in the e-mail I received from the people assocaited with umpire development.

Tee

[GarthB]

Originally posted by Dave Davies
Part I is my question about the Eddings play.
Part II is Jim's answer.

Is Jim's answer the only Authoritative one? I don't know. I would be curious to get Roder's, Yeast's or PBUC's take on this Play.

Until I hear differently, I will follow Mr. Evans recommendations.
************************************************** ************************

Hi, Jim.

I didn't want to bother you with that play in Chicago, but I can't find any definitive mechanic that should be used for the dropped 3rd strike.

I have been told by those better than me that my mechanic is wrong. I signal the swinging strike 3, put both hands out and say, "No Catch', or "Balls on the Ground."

Jim, I would reslly appreciate your input on this before I explain that call to the guys in my associations.

Dave
******

Dave,

I did 7 telephone interviews yesterday over that incident. One of them was a talk show on ESPN Radio. I turned down a stint on a LA station, KFI. They wanted me to do a 30 minute call-in talk show. (I was born at night but not last night!) As you know, I will never degrade an umpire publicly and I did not yesterday. However, I feel comfortable telling you what I think actually happened.

Eddings was surprised. It was one of those plays that usually calls itself but this time it had a surprise ending. Regardless of whether the ball hit the ground or not, his mechanic complicated the problem. He should have signaled the Strike 3 (as he did out to the side) and verbalized "Strike" or "Strike 3" and then either (1) declared him out verbally as he pumped his fist emphatically, or (2) pointed to the ground and declared "Ball's on the ground" followed by the no-catch signal and verbalize "No Catch!"

I see nothing wrong with your mechanic. For those who argue you should say nothing, I say "You are just asking for trouble!" The only two people in the ballpark who have their backs to the umpire are the batter and catcher. They are the ones who must know the status of the ball so that they can properly react.

Dave, I hope this helps. I can tell you have had some good training. Where did you get it?

Dave:

During your absence from the internet, and about two days after the incident, I posted an email from Jim that is identical to this.

Either he is using "copy and paste" or he included one of us in the "copies to" line and we didn't notice.

GB

[Dave Davies]

Garth, good observation. Jim probably got a lot of explanation requests and decided to write just one letter. I didn't pay attention.

I wouldn't have posted if I had know it had been done so previously.

Dave
******

[Mike Walsh]

Originally posted by briancurtin
ive done what jim suggests: the point to the ground and signal/verbalize "no catch" since i moved up and have had no trouble with it. the mechanic you use, dave, would not be considered incorrect anywhere i have worked as far as i know.

Before the play, I didn't indicate when the ball was on the ground. Since then, my game has evolved. It makes sense to use the mechanic described. One of the things I love about being an umpire is the constant tweaking in an effort to improve.

Mike

[Mike Walsh]

Originally posted by Tim C
AND, I still will never say "batter's out" . . . I will work on the "catch, no catch" with safe sign as directed in the e-mail I received from the people assocaited with umpire development.

Tee

Tee, I appreciate your experience, and have learned from your posts that you mean what you say. If I have a sitch with R1 and less than 2 outs, and the batter attempts to advance to 1st on an uncaught 3rd strike, I do say, "Batter's out!". What would you do in that situation? (and why not say it under these circumstances?). Thanks.

Mike

[Dave Davies]

I want to make sure that everyone understands that I am not using Evans suggestions against anyone on this board, Tim C specifically. Jim would be the first to say that what is preached in his church is not necessarily the way to do things in other venues or associations.

I think Tim has worked about 140 games per year for about 30 years at the highest levels. I will never be able to make that claim. Not even close. I read all of Tim's posts and respect all of them. I certainly wouldn't work my games exactly the way Tim and others on this board do and I certainly know that most of you wouldn't adhere to some of my standards. A terrifying thought.

I was hoping that by posting Jim's comments, others with knowledge of Harry's or PBUC's or NCAA's guidelines would share them. Nothing more, nothing less.

I know that Sal's Comment was just having having some fun with Tim.

Comments made in jest and without any vitriol whatsoever, don't always come off that way on these boards. Too bad.

Wouldn't it be nice if somehow we could all be in the same room sharing beers, stories and lies, not worrying about hurting each others feelings?

You say, "Well, there is an annual NCAA or NASO meeting for this kind of stuff." That's crap. Just getting past the pomposity and posturing at these gatherings can give you swamp gas.

I run meetings for two groups on a Monthly basis, every Month. One group is for the volunteer org. known as 62, the birthplace of "The Pinch". The other is for everything else, Youth HS, College, etc.

At all of these gatherings, food and beverage are available, and disagreements with rules, mehanics, and game management are mandatory. We agree, disagree, take different sides, and fight like hell. At the end of the meetings, however, we all leave pretty much satisfied and unbloody. The official meeting times are from 7p to 9p. Some of the Umpires don't leave until 11p. Pretty informal stuff.

Would it be possible for such a venue to occur, at least on a Regional basis, once or twice a year, with a different area hosting these get togethers each time? Possibly.

Certain subjects could be proposed for each synposium just to get things started and then, hopefully, bedlam could ensue, the difference between message board bedlam and actual live interaction being the difference.

If there is any interest, I would get it started. I will be relocating to Prescott Valley, Az in a couple of weeks, not too far from Arizona Fall Ball and Spring Training.

Would it pique your interest to combine a weekend of Umpire discussion and attendance at some of these Spring or Fall games?

There would be no NCAA or NASO politics, just a bunch of board denizens like us to enjoy a short time together to discuss umpiring, personal stuff or anything else we feel like talking about.

Just blowing in the wind here. Comments welcome.

Dave
******

[WhatWuzThatBlue]

I just checked with a friend in Florida. He helps at one of the schools from time to time. The schools are teaching to call the strike, swing the strike (they don't point the strike in pro school), point to the ground and say "No catch" while signaling 'Safe' and stepping back. They then signal the tag out with an emphatic fist pump.

That sounds like what almost everyone thinks should be done.




F-ing Bears! Third ranked defense, my foot.

[BigUmp56]

Dave:

If your serious about starting something like this let me know. I'm certain I can get a group of guys together to come to Arizona from some of the different internet forums.

If they don't want to come for the umpiring interaction, they'll come for the libation and Spring training games!

Tim.

[Tim C]

I've gone back through my meager memory and tried to figure out exact what (or "if") I say when a dumbass batter starts to run to first with it occupied and less than two out.

I thought about it, and thought about it.

I even scratched my head a little.

I think rather than ever saying "Batter's OUT!" (which I will intone again - I WILL NEVER SAY)I think possibly in a very low voice to F2 I might lament something such as: "Nah, he's toast."

I don't remember saying that but at least one grey cell seems to go that direction.

Mostly, I just step back and let stuff happen.

NOW, with this new "concept" (new to me maybe, only) I will incorporate the "no catch!, NO CATCH!" and safe sign.

That is what I'll do and what I'll teach.

Tee

[socalblue1]

Originally posted by Tim C
I've gone back through my meager memory and tried to figure out exact what (or "if") I say when a dumbass batter starts to run to first with it occupied and less than two out.

I thought about it, and thought about it.

I even scratched my head a little.

I think rather than ever saying "Batter's OUT!" (which I will intone again - I WILL NEVER SAY)I think possibly in a very low voice to F2 I might lament something such as: "Nah, he's toast."

I don't remember saying that but at least one grey cell seems to go that direction.

Mostly, I just step back and let stuff happen.

NOW, with this new "concept" (new to me maybe, only) I will incorporate the "no catch!, NO CATCH!" and safe sign.

That is what I'll do and what I'll teach.

Tee

Which resolves the issue fully - batters out unless PU says different. F2 can't pick up on that, oh well .....