Quote:
Originally Posted by NCASAUmp
No, but that is where the bat does not make contact with the ball. If the bat makes contact with the ball, the lack of a verbal detracts from the call. I believe it does not show certainty in the call, even if the PU gives an immediate visual signal. It's almost like it's a half call. A foul tip is not an "obvious call" to everyone in the stands and on the field, which is why we often give no verbal on certain calls like obvious foul balls or, in your example, a swinging strike,
We verbalize a called strike (when the batter doesn't swing). We even verbalize a called ball. Why are we not verbalizing a foul tip for a strike? How would verbalizing "strike" on a foul tip detract from the game?
|
I will state this for the umpteenth time, batters and runners have a tendency to stop when they hear anything out of an umpire's mouth EVEN WHEN IT IS "SAFE". The idea of no verbal is to not interupt play. In this case, the first sound out of your mouth would be "foul" and I guarantee that is all they will hear.
Even if you give a verbal, odss are you will still need to explain what just happened.
I don't think it is necessary and would just muck up the waters that much more. When they argue, cut them off and ask if they would like to protest your call, sign the book and move on.
How did we make it this far without any issues by not verbalizing a foul tip?
