[IRISHMAFIA]

the closer you are to 2B, the more of an angle you lose at 1B on a throw from anywhere other than the 3B line.


I dont think this is supportable or accurate.

Sure it is. If the throw is coming from F4 near the base line or F6 shaded toward 2B, it is most likely F3 will stretch toward your general direction. That is a dimension lost compared to a throw from the 3B line area. Even if you step toward the play inside the diamond, you will still have the same angle and can easily loose any view of F3 touching the base.

Of course, this can happen on any play regardless of the BU's position, but most good umpires I know move toward 1B at an angle which will give them the best view, not necessarily the closest.

The out at 1 is extremely important, especially if the def is willing to possibly give up or at least rist the run to get that out. This is where I differ with those that believe BU's priority is R1 when it is in fact BR.

The BR must still advance three more bases to affect the score whereas a runner on 3B needs, but a single base to have the same affect. As Steve noted, the play and runner at 3B is much more critical and an error on behalf of the umpire can have an instantaneous and direct affect on the game, much more than an error on a call at 1B. This is covered during schools and clinics.

What is the obsession with umpires and degrees? I don't care if you are at 90, 45 or whatever...

I think its not an obsession, but rather a training of the mind to try and get the best position for most situations. 45 is plenty good in many cases too.

From another game maybe. The only time I've heard anything close to a "degree" mentioned is moving into fair territory at 1B to an imaginary line running across the base, corner to corner. Of course, this is basically a 45, but even that angle has been questioned. Maybe some people just think it is easier to use a measure of "degrees", but I think some people place way too much emphasis on these numbers.

I dont agree that the 10% are the most important.

Didn't say that. I said the mechanics are based to allow the best coverage available given non-specific scenarios.

The thing is, the positioning set by ASA are more rigid than a mere guideline mike. They are in fact law of the land and a template of positioning at the pitch, despite the fact you say otherwise.

It's whats taught, its how its called, and how its expected to be done and evaluated.

If that were so, many would never see a national tournament, let alone anything at the Elite level.

When I say "outside the box", I'm talking about adjusting from those rigid guidelines set by ASA for best coverage in a deficient coverage scheme (2 man) to begin with, based on game situations as they present themselves... and ASA expressing in some manner that this is acceptable.

A good umpire will do that and not lose anything on the evaluation. The idea is to cover the plays and everyone, from the top down, know that deviation is not only a necessary part of an umpire's game, but quite acceptable as long as the crew is on the same page and all plays are covered. I don't know how many times I've heard "if you deviate, communicate". That's a long way from "these are the mechanics, obey them."

I will not say that there are not some people of higher position in certain areas that may be anal (and trust me, I know anal ) approach toward the mechanics. Sometimes, that is not bad depending on the level of experience of the umpire.

Maybe what seperates us on this board from the rest is our willingness to adjust and cheat and hustle..

But the fact is, A B C positioning is uniform as can be.. and the vast majority of umpires maintain that position prepitch regardless of game situation even if disadvantageous, and thats because of ASA Policy, Training, and Evaluating that demands it.

And that is just plain bad/lazy officiating, not how I've seen mechanics taught or have taught the mechanics, by policy or otherwise. Again, if the evaluations were based on the "fact" you suggest, many with advanced experience would routinely receive poor evaluations.

I don't think we disagree that much on anything except your perception of how ASA addresses the mechanics. You may have run into some people who have tunnel vision as it concerns this matter, but I don't think ASA, in general, has such a rigid view of the mechanics as you believe. BTW, please note that I'm referring to mechanics involving an actual play or possibility of a play. The pre-pitch mechanics (general vicinity of starting positions, no longer walking the line, closeness of a BU to the base/nearest defensive player, etc.) are, in my opinion, pretty good in theory and deviating from these are an evaluation issue.

Like it or not, whether the game you agreed to officiate is sanctioned by ASA, U-trip, NSA, AFA, USFA, NCAA, NJCAA, NAIA, NFHS, LL, ISA, ISC, etc, you are being paid to represent that respective organization and should be more than willing to adapt to each's prescribed mechanics.