Quote:
|
Originally Posted by CoachJM
WWTB,
The situation I posed is materially different than waiting to hear if a batted ball is going to be ruled foul or not. In that case, there is no "better" thing to be doing, even if the ball eventually proves itself foul.
In the situation I posed, if the batter is already out, I want my catcher to take a shot at the R2 advancing to 3B. If the batter is not out and has become a runner, I want my catcher to take the "easy out" at 1B. I don't see why the umpire can't let everybody in on which it is. He's the only one who knows & he's not the only one with a legitimate reason to know.
I don't see any legitimate rationale for mechanics which keep this from the players when it's not obvious. I'm kind of "irked" by umpires who say "the players should know the situation" or "that's not how my evaluator does it".
MY players DO know the situation. They just don't know what YOU judged - because you didn't tell them and they can't read your mind. Maybe your evaluator should re-evaluate his mechanics.
JM
|
Put me down as with the Coach. Sheesh, so many are making this so hard just because there's no carved in stone, universally applied, black-and-white promulgated mechanic for filling the gap that was embarrassingly exposed with the Eddings incident.
What does a BU signal on a trouble fly ball that he judges to be uncaught? Safe signal, "no catch" verbal. Uncaught third strike is completely analogous, and the same mechanic works perfectly well. No muss, no fuss, no Eddings incident.