[QUOTE]
Originally posted by Warren Willson
Quote:
The plate umpire is the ONLY official who can unequivocally judge ALL the material facts applicable to the new criterion - did the batter offer "at the pitch". Your BU in A can't even SEE the pitch in its all-important travel over the plate with a left-handed batter. Heck, he's hard pressed to see the pitch AT ALL, because he's side on to it instead of staring straight down the path of its travel! Now tell me again how you believe that only the BU is in the best position to judge the check swing. Heck, Rich, I've seen BU's answer with "Yes he did swing" on an appeal of a half swing where the barrel of the bat broke the plane of the plate but was never more than 6" off the batter's shoulder! Surely you can't call THAT offering "at the pitch".
The base umpire is TOO FAR away, and he's got a LOUSY ANGLE to call the offer "at the pitch"! 
Cheers
|
Warren;
To answer a couple of questions from two different posts:
1. Yes the pro schools still teach "No he did not go" as a mechanic for ALL check swing calls by the PU when the PU feels that the batter successfully checked. However, the BU in pro and NCAA is now forbidden to read anything into the PU's statement. There is to be no "code" communication.
The PU is instructed to call a check swing the same way every time. If it's "Ball, no he did not go" or just "Ball" or whatever, it should be the same each time and every time. Because of the stigma attacked to "no he did not go" from the prior code, most top level NCAA types have dropped that from their repetoire. Most minor league umpires drop it shortly after leaving pro school. The PU is not allowed to attempt to clue in his partner about what he saw. The BU is to make his call based on what he, the BU, saw, not on what he thinks his partner saw.
All that being said, I am sure their are some Smittys out there who refuse to change with the times and still use code. In about 1 in 20 NCAA games that I work, my PU partner will request that I go along with his calls if he gives me a signal. With Dave Yeast's recent assertion of authority over all things NCAA, I now refuse to honor my partner's request. 5 years ago, it would have been political suicide to stand up to a big dog. No it is political suicide to tick off the administrators too much. How times have changed.
2. With regards to the check swing view from A on a lefty by the BU:
About two years ago, I wrote on the boards of a study done by Rich Humphrey, an AAA umpire who worked a dozen or so games in MLB as well before retiring to NCAA ball. During each check swing call in his games in AAA ball (which uses three umpires) the umpire on the opposite side of the call would make a note about what his impression was. Thus, the first base umpire would note all check swings on lefties while the third base umpire would actually make the call. Likewise U3 would note his impression for righties while U1 made the call. Afterwards, in the locker room and with the benefit of video tape, the umpires made a slow motion determination of what they felt the real truth was. It turned out that the opposite side umpire was correct more often that the umpire that was assigned the call by tradition. Even though they had the proof, this mechanic was never adopted because they felt that there would be no way to sell the call to the coaches.
Baseball is very tradition bound. Even though it was obvious from the early part of this century that some check swings were being grossly missed by the PU, it took until 1976 for the a required appeal to be adopted into baseball rules. At that rate, it will be the end of the 21 century before U1 is calling the check swing on a lefty.
Peter
[Edited by His High Holiness on Jul 18th, 2003 at 01:38 PM]