[Warren Willson]

Originally posted by thumpferee
I understand what you are saying and agree that decisions need to be made based on the rules. But then again, if the rules were so cut and dry, there wouldn't be a need for this forum, would there be?

I'm NOT suggesting that ALL the rules are cut and dried. I know much better than to suggest that. OTOH I AM suggesting that those 4 rules that cover safe or out in advancing or retreating ARE pretty cut and dried. The rules themselves dictate how the official should decide any perceived tie, even if they never use the term "perceived tie".

For example, a runner forced to advance will be out if he doesn't reach the next base BEFORE he or the base is tagged. [OBR 7.08(e)] So, in the event the umpire believes there was a tie and the runner reached the base AT THE SAME TIME as he or the base was tagged, the runner is OUT by rule. That's as black and white as it gets under the OBR.

Excuse me if I misuse any puncuations or mispell any words. Please let me know if I do.

Now, now. I only criticised Jim's spelling and grammar because he lit the flame under me first - literally! *grin*

I mean no disrespect when I ask, Have you ever played baseball? The reason I ask is there is more to playing ball than the rules. There is also instinct, timing, judgement. You say on one hand, to go by the rules, then say, "not on some arbitrary rule of thumb ("If in doubt, call 'em out!") or a personal judgement about whether the defense deserved to make the out or not on the basis of their good or bad play. That's NOT the umpire's job, at least according to the rules".

Forgive me, but I am confused! Isn't personal judgement part of an Umpire's Job? Correct me if I'm wrong but, I don't think judgement is a "Rule". My point is that there has to be, and is some basis for the call to be made.

I have a lifetime .400 batting average, but I was never much of a player. I couldn't pitch and I sure as heck couldn't catch worth a damn. That doesn't mean I don't understand and follow the subtle nuances of the game. I wrote a 7-part series for Officiating.com explaining exactly what you said - that there is more to umpiring than simply enforcing the rules. It was called Umpire Ethics.

There is umpire's judgement and then there is personal judgement. If I decide the runner was out because he failed to beat the play, that's umpire's judgement that is fully supported by the rules. OTOH, if I decide the runner was out because I think that the shortstop made a great play and deserved to get an out, that's my personal judgement and there is NO rule book support for that. I'm not out there to decide whether or not plays deserve to be rewarded with outs. I AM out there to decide whether or not the runner beat the ball to the base - or whatever else the rules require!

Personal judgement is only ever of any use when the rules are unclear and there's no other way to make a decision. My point was that you don't need to resort to personal judgement in the case of perceived ties - because there is ample clarity in the rules to allow for decisions based on umpire judgement alone. Unfortunately many officials refuse to believe that, because they so enjoy having the power of a team's success or failure under their control. I question their impartiality as arbiters.

Have you ever called a strike a ball on a pitcher because he showed you up the last pitch?

Ever call a ball a strike on a batter who showed his displeasure with your last called strike?

I don't think those are in the rulebook, are they?

No, I never have made such a call and no those aren't in the rule book. I have once, and once only, made what Carl Childress calls an F*U call - which is pretty close to what you have described. I did it to keep a chirping catcher in the game because I'd just appointed him the replacement manager after ejecting his manager of record. Only 3 people knew that I'd made that call - the catcher/manager, the batter and me. The batter got a ball called on a pitch that could have gone either way, but was in fact a strike. The catcher got to stay in the game and quickly understood the message that I was running the game and he needed to calm the heck down. The pitcher threw the next pitch in the exact same spot (at my request to the catcher) and got the strike he deserved. It's not a call I ever expect to make again, but I will if the need arises in similar circumstances.

I don't abuse my power as an official in order to "square the ledger" with players or managers who have expressed their displeasure with my calls. Instead I use the rules for warning and ejecting as they were intended, and I rarely have to eject as the result. I have at one time umpired for 40 weeks of the calendar year for 5 consecutive years, and gone through an entire summer and winter season without a single ejection. OTOH I've also managed to dump as many as 5 participants at once for objecting to a single call. I am NOT regarded as a "red a$$" as you guys say.

How can I can get a copy of your "piece" on this subject Warren?

And Yes, I am trying to keep this post alive. It seems to be the only one going pretty good, and the comments are starting to get a little more personal, I Love It!

Sign up for your free 30 day trial at Officiating.com and you'll get instant access to over 20 of my "pieces", and a wealth of even better ones from more accomplished writers like Rich Fronheiser, Tim Stevens, Garth Benham and Carl Childress. Oh, and I think there may even be one or two from the token Canuck, Blaine Gallant, and a word or two from His High Holiness, Peter Osborne. *BIG grin*

I don't blame you for trying to keep the thread going. Trust me, without really trying I often manage to stir up a tornado in a thimble. I think it has something to do with my style of expression and use of the language that rubs so many people the wrong way. Sorry, but I can't help being an Australian and talkin' different to y'all! *grin*

Cheers

[Edited by Warren Willson on Jul 1st, 2003 at 09:13 AM]