Quote:
Originally posted by umpyre007
Quote:
Originally posted by Warren Willson
Quote:
Originally posted by umpyre007
Childress: Yes, as far as "overrun" goes. "Over-walk" is a different matter altogether.
Willson: Except that the Pro interpretation of OBR allows that a head feint MAY be judged an attempt to advance, vide the Evans interpretation I quoted earlier.
Me thinks that there is a problem here! Which is it??? 
|
I'm disappointed!  Does this mean you DIDN'T read my first post in this thread? It was the 3rd post in the entire thread, which is still only 1 page long, and it hasn't been deleted so it shouldn't be hard to find. In it you will find the correct PRO interpretation for OBR, quoted from JEA.
Carl, OTOH, offered an alternative view purely for amateur youth leagues using OBR.
The two interpretations certainly are different, with respect to the "head feint". Since the bottom line in enforcing this particular rule is "umpire judgement", as is clearly stated in the interpretations - both the PRO interpretation and Carl's amateur youth league alternative - I guess that means it quite possibly could be ... BOTH! 
Cheers,
|
So...Mr. Childress' explanation is based on amateur speculation [what's right and good for a specific level of players and/or training of younger umpires] while Mr. Willson's explanation is based upon authoritative opinion and/or official interpretation? Surely, we can't have it both ways?
When previously lurking I saw way too much bandwidth used to vehemently debate similar rules aspects with no real "winner" and many hard feelings. I am starting to see way too much veering from recognized official interpretations and authoritative opinion which is really starting to muddy the umpiring waters. Shoot...if this keeps up this board will be comprised purely of neo-romanticists.
Please, Mr. Administrator...perhaps it is time to close this thread before feelings start to get hurt. 
|
I read the posts by Warren in which he cited the
official OBR ruling on an umpire -- determining whether a "feint" to second is an "attempt". I also read Carl's
"practical guide" to use in youth leagues when a coach unwittingly tells the runner to go to second when the first baseman begins to chase him because let's say he turned the wrong way. I'm not sure I'll use Carl's approach but I can see where I might. I particularly liked the fact that in a youth league game he would call "time" and say he had something in his eye.
This might be real confusing to someone relatively new to umpiring. I mean
"the book says" yet Carl Childress, an expert authority is suggesting you might choose not to impose that rule. I think it is not about picking one piece of advice over another. I think it is all about game control at different levels. There is one thing I have changed my mind about in the last two or three years is that "You know you did a good job when no one notice you". I think that you come to the field with the mindset that not a single fan came to see me umpire yet you think that your Dad or Mom or someone you really cared about while growing up is sitting there watching you perform your job as umpire and when you leave that field you see that person sitting behind home plate with the widest smile you can imagine knowing full well that you did the best job you could possibly do.
If you're still in doubt go with OBR and the "book". You really can't be wrong but be prepared to change and evolve as you grow as an umpire. I hope this makes some sense but again it is just my opinion. I would also like to award Warren with this month's Most Smiley's In One Post Award with three! Jim Simms/NYC
