Smitty stubbornness aside, if it is unclear that a player is out, it is our duty to call him out (if he is, indeed, out). One of the inherent purposes of our being on the field in the first place is to make unclear situations clear. Those that feel "they should know better" are off base - if they DON'T KNOW, they DON'T KNOW - we should not be so high and mighty as to refuse to clarify the situation.
If a 3rd strike is near the dirt, what is the purpose of refusing to simply say "Batter's out". Clarify the out just as you would on a catch of a fly ball or a close tag play. We are so emphatic and demonstrative ("selling" our calls) on every other close play on the diamond - it is absurd to me that there are those who feel it is not their responsibility to clarify this close play.
Sorry to get on the high horse about this - I've just read too much from supposedly intelligent and experienced umpires that indicates that for some reason they feel that in this one particular case, it is beneath them to call the game.
Now that I have THAT off my chest...
Perhaps it is a more uniform mechanic to verbalize "Batter's out" when the batter is indeed out - from simple 3rd strikes to close bounces - just say he's out when he's out, and we avoid the entire mess.
PS - I hate the mechanic of "No catch, no catch" in this case. Might as well say, "Catcher, tag him!!!"