There ARE times when you can use post incident information to correct a call. Certainly many are familiar with the famous "shoe polish" incident about a ball hitting a batter. For instance, there are times when you may
think a ball batted downward may have hit a batter but you're not sure. Many will consider
the reaction of the batter to assist them with their judgment call when that occurs. So, could a good actor receive a favorable call---certainly.
I had a situation a couple seasons back where a batter, with bases loaded and less than two out, hit a swinging bunt down the 3B line. The sound was not a solid sound, and I knew the pitch
may have come off the hand, but possibly also the rubberized grip on the handle---I wasn't sure as to which. Still, I didn't have a lot of time to react.
R3 is charging the plate, F5 and F1 are both charging toward the ball, and F2 is positioning himself. I've got worries of runner interference if he contacts ball or fielders, fair/foul, and the anticipated play at the plate. The call became much easier when F5 overran the fair ball without gloving it.
NOW, immediately looking to 1B the batter has received time and is attending to an injured hand. I made my way down there to confirm that the ball hit his hand. I asked the batter,
"Hoss, did that ball hit you?"
"Right on my fanger", Hoss responded in his Texas twang.
"Well, did it hit the bat too, Hoss?", I asked knowing at this point I'm not going to let any play stand.
"Hell, no! It hit my fanger !!!", Hoss yelled.
"Hoss, are you
sure it didn't hit the bat too?"
"Hell, no! All it hit was my fanger. Look at it!!"
Well, at that point I made the call, which was the 3rd strike on Hoss, and negated the play. Frankly, there was not significant argument about the
timing of the call, rather, the old argument of the hands are part of the bat. That argument was promptly dismissed with the rule being explained. It
was the correct call for what occurred. I just used "slow timing" (LOL), and added information to get it right. Certainly plays like this are uncommon.
Danny, you were in a difficult situation, and I doubt if I'd have handled it differently after the players had changed sides. There's a difference between a player claiming a missed call that would
favor his team versus admitting a missed call that would cause the call to go
against his team. There is little reason to doubt the truthfulness of the latter.
I would like to comment on the play itself, though. You describe a bobbled ball by F6 followed by a swipe tag where you were screened. My first thought was "Where is BU, that's his call!." Still, you may have been doing 8 year olds solo. However, when a swipe tag occurs it is generally due to a defensive miscue (or poor throw). As a rule, I make the defense
prove that tag to me on a swipe tag. Unless I'm
certain it happened---it didn't---and I have a safe call.
And to Brandda who says:
You could not change it if you wanted to as it is not an appealable call.
A call
CAN legally be changed by the responsible official. It's been done many times, and will continue to be done. It's specifically addressed by the General Instructions to Umpires, and more recently supported by NCAA's stress to attempt to get the call correct over umpire image.
Choosing whether or not to live with an obviously wrong call remains the decision of the responsible official, but more modern officiating is changing, understanding that nobody is perfect, and granting much greater respect to an official willing to admit obvious error and correct the call. Each situation, however, must be judged within its own circumstances and for its own merits. With proper mechanics, proper timing, and good rules knowledge, a quality umpire can greatly minimize his risk of getting himself into such predicaments.
Just my opinion,
Freix