|
Here's my $.02. I think there are a few possibilities here that may be unstated, or uncertain. Giving PU benefit of the doubt, it is quite possible he was looking for the ball throughout, did not (for whatever reason) choose use "show the ball" (I personally don't like it, it implies I'm not in position), and realized there never was possession previously, and the catcher was asking for time to mask that. At no point does the orinal post state that he clearly saw the ball in catcher's glove (although that may be an oversight in the post). If he made that explanation, it is not protestable.
A second possibility that occurs to me is that PU was thinking that possession must include voluntary release. If he made that explanation, it would certainly be protestable. If any explanation why it wasn't possession was other than the actual judgement, it would be protestable.
I am not familiar with a D position for a BU (while ASA, NCAA, and NFHS do not make those designations, I am somewhat familiar with what has been known as A, B, and C, even C1 and C2), so I can't know where he was or what he may have seen, but I wouldn't be particularly pleased with a partner who lurks like I (or any other umpire) needs to ask his input. Appreciate he came in to make sure a one-on-one, then get away unless asked.
|