|
Although internet discussions can help, Pete, the answer to your question is mostly gained through experience, and the decisions that are made can impact one's progress significantly. An overofficious umpire will be left behind. An official not calling what should be called risks being viewed as incapable or lacking knowledge.
Most officials don't pick boogers on things such as keeping coach's in their boxes, or guaranteeing F3 is in fair territory as the rules may require him to be. Timing issues of getting batters into the box and pitchers to pitch are relative to the overall flow of the game. These, however, are not the difficult decisions.
Greater difficulty comes in when deciding to overlook situations that occur during playing action. Carl has cited a situation whereby a pitcher is in the windup position and desires to change to the set position. When all are aware F1 is NOT starting his windup, he mistakenly steps back off the rubber with his nonpivot foot. While many say call that balk, the intent of the rule has not been compromised. I agree with Carl here, that it's something I am not going to see unless immediately accompanied by a pickoff throw, or unless so obvious that the people in Cleveland saw it. It's a technical infraction that is borderline booger pickin in my book. My experience in being alert to the other happenings at the time key me as to whether I call it or not.
I had a situation a week ago in a Fed game where, with R1 only, batter hits a high pop-up toward F4. R1 had taken a quick step or two toward 2nd, but immediately reversed his direction---chesting F3 twice in his attempt to return to 1B. Obstruction---yes, by the book. Did I call it? NO.
While the runner was a mere 10 ft from 1B, the ball had not yet reached it's apex, which was very high. The runner, despite the obstructive act, had easily returned to 1B. To complicate this matter, F4 blew the catch, thus causing R1 to be toast as a force out at 2nd. The offensive coach came out to question the no-call, and I advised him I didn't judge it to have hindered the runner. The coach put up little opposition, knowing he was merely begging for something he didn't earn.
Calling obstruction was likely the correct call per the book, yet the wrong call for the situation. It would have altered the play significantly from what would have normally occurred. Although there was definite, hard physical contact---it did not hinder the runner in accomplishing what he was trying to do. While some may think this obstruction should have been called, I felt it should not.
When advantages are gained, the rules should not be overlooked.
No advantage was gained due to the obstruction, thus--no call. Learning intent of the rules, and being able to quickly recognize advantage/disadvantage in certain situations is learned with experience. It's not an easy road, and mistakes will be made along the way. Honestly critique yourself after each game as to what you may have done right or wrong, and what you may have done differently to be better. Remember, however, making an unpopular call is not a wrong decision if it nullified an advantage that was illegally gained.
Just my opinion,
Freix
|