Quote:
Originally Posted by RichMSN
Nonsense. Calling out "dead ball" shows an umpire who isn't trained just as much as an umpire calling out "no, no, no, no" instead of "safe" is showing the same thing.
There is a right way to do things and there are other ways. I wonder what Jim Evans and his instructors would do if you shouted out "dead ball" at school -- oh, I know that. They'd pretend to shoot the baseball.
|
Well, sure, but sometimes the "right way" is just an opinion that becomes adopted by sycophants. This is part of the minutiae evaluators use to determine who gets to be a member of "the club". It's in a group with what foul line you stand on between innings, how long the brim of a plate umpire's hat is, what brand of clothing you wear, what hand you use to take off your mask, and whether you use an indicator. To be in "the club" you have to adhere to the minutiae, but they don't add to the quality of your calls.
The distinction between "dead ball" and "time" is more like "three balls, two strikes" and "full count"; umpires are trained to say the former, but on the field the players understand both equally well, and couldn't care less which is used. "No, no, no" isn't even in the same league--it's ambiguous.
Evans could just as easily deem "dead ball" the preferred call--it's more logical, certainly, than calling time when the play is already dead by rule--and if someone called "Time", pretend to look at his watch. Nobody cares except umpires who want to be in the club.