View Single Post
  #39 (permalink)  
Old Thu Sep 04, 2008, 02:38pm
jdmara jdmara is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,230
Quote:
Originally Posted by rei
Holy cow! I have not read this much malarkey in years!

The depths of hypocrisy here is astounding!

There is NOT ONE OF YOU who haven't done this very thing. There are two types of umpires in this world: Those who have called a "safe" out because of a blowout; and those that lie and say they haven't!

Time to put away the soap boxes men. Seriously, most of these posts reflect badly upon you, and are plain ridiculous. Save your arms for strikes, instead of patting your own backs for your "integrity".

I agree with the posts comparing "opening the zone" to "calling a close safe an out". It is all "cheating", and ALL of you have done it. Get real!

I am not a fan of calling things differently because of the score. The truth is though that the "close ones" ARE going to go for the benefit of getting the game done when it is a blow out. MANY MANAGERS AND COACHES WANT THIS!!! What I was taught is that this has to go both ways though! You open the zone for one team, you open it for both. Hell, the CCA manual even covers this! The NCAA standard for plate work has a section "knows when and how to expand the zone for a blow out". Nope, it doesn't cover the "banger" at 1st.

I KNOW that every single one of you will and/or bias your close calls if a certain team/manager has been all over you. It is human nature. You may call them safe to keep them off your back, or out to "screw them". ALL of you have done it one way or another. To pass harsh judgement on the guy that just admitted to it the way many of you have is some of the worst displays of hypocricy I have ever seen!

On the other hand, with metal bats, anything less than 10 runs is "close" in my book. So, a 9-1 ball game IS still the time to be altruistic. A little common sense helps.

To the original poster. I am not going to say you were wrong to call it this way. I WOULD NOT EVER admit it to a coach. That is career suicide. I will give you points for at least being smart enough to realize that. But, some great points have been made about biasing calls like this. Don't write all of these guys off. I think the right intention is there.
With all due respect, there is a big difference between opening up the strike zone and blatantly calling a play the opposite of what you observed. Opening up the strike zone (of course equally) is a way to help both teams with struggling pitchers. If one team is struggling, I may still open it up but I sure and sh*+ don't call one strike zone for one team and one for another.

Intentionally calling a play despite what you saw is against all ethical standards. I would and have NEVER done that. In fact, this spring I made two calls that sent games into extra innings. Yeah, I could have called the plays otherwise (especially the obstruction call at HP) but I always call the play the way I see it. I sleep better at night that way.

-Josh
Reply With Quote