Mechanics Help Please

[harmbu]

We had a close play at first last night where the throw is up the line toward home plate and the first baseman is clearly off the bag. The first baseman takes the throw and attempts a tag. The base umpire calls safe and the defensive coach comes out saying that there was a tag. The base umpire looked to the plate umpire for help. There was no immediate call and they got together with the defensive coach. The plate umpire's explanation was that he did see a tag but he couldn't say for sure if the runner had hit the base before the tag. The base umpire said that he knew that the first baseman was off the bag, but he couldn't be sure when the tag happened. After some more discussion, the umpires decided that the runner would be called out. Needless to say (do we really need to say this), the offensive coach was not happy with the call.

My question is what is the proper mechanic on the tag play. I think there would have been a lot less controversy if the base umpire had asked if there was a tag and the plate umpire had immediately said, "yes" and called the runner out. By huddling up with the coach involved, they seemed to be simply "getting their story straight."

[jicecone]

"I think there would have been a lot less controversy if the base umpire had asked if there was a tag and the plate umpire had immediately said, "yes" and called the runner out."

I agree that this would have shown that the officiating team was together on this and the best possible call that could have been made, was.

Now to ask what the correct mechanic is for this situation, on this forum, will most likely end up being another record-setter in replies. Good Luck

IMO, I would have chosen the method you suggested above.

[harmbu]

Thanks jicecone. I am glad that someone out there agrees with me. I will now sit back and watch the replies roll in.

[Dave Hensley]

Originally posted by harmbu
We had a close play at first last night where the throw is up the line toward home plate and the first baseman is clearly off the bag. The first baseman takes the throw and attempts a tag. The base umpire calls safe and the defensive coach comes out saying that there was a tag. The base umpire looked to the plate umpire for help. There was no immediate call and they got together with the defensive coach. The plate umpire's explanation was that he did see a tag but he couldn't say for sure if the runner had hit the base before the tag. The base umpire said that he knew that the first baseman was off the bag, but he couldn't be sure when the tag happened.

BU is responsible for this call. He can elect to solicit additional information from his partner if he has doubt and thinks his partner may have seen a crucial element of the play. In this case, that crucial element would be whether a tag was or was not made - not, however, the timing of the tag. BU has to have seen at least the attempted tag, and he has to be aware of the timing of the tag attempt with respect to the runner's reaching the bag.

There are 3 acceptable ways this play could play out, and 1 unacceptable way. Best case - BU makes the necessary adjustment to get the angle, and sees the tag made and makes the call without needing or going for help. Second best case, BU sees the tag attempt, realizes it was in time to get the out IF a good tag was achieved, and immediately goes to his partner "Did you see a tag?" The partner replies with what he's got, and BU makes the call "Then he's [out/safe]." Third best case, BU calls safe, but realizes there was a tag attempt and sees defensive coach coming out to make his "appeal." Because he has reasonable doubt, he agrees to go to his partner to solicit additional information. This conference happens WITHOUT the defensive manager in attendance, and it happens FAST. "Did you have a tag?" PU: "Yes, but I don't know ..." BU: "If you had a tag that's all I need." BU, to participants: "On the tag, the runner is OUT."

The unacceptable way of handling this play is the way it actually happened, as described. BU allowed defensive coach to listen in on his conference, and he failed to get aspects of the call (the timing of the tag attempt) that were his and his alone, that his partner could not be expected to help him with.

[St. Louis Blue]

I pretty much agree with Dave although with my regular umpiring partner, We use the second set of mechanics Dave described. We have worked at least 300 games together and we have the check with your partner and receive an answer routine so well practised that we can do it in the normal amount of time you would delay to make the call anyway. We usually don't even have to make a verbal request for help. My partner knows if I look his way on the swipe tag I want to know if he saw a tag.. The call is always the Base Umpires call. The only answer is tag or not, pulled foot or not. Most of the time coaches, players, and fans don't even know that the base umpire went for help. This is great when the coach asks the base umpire to get help from his partner. You already know what the answer is so there is no changing the call.

If I am working with a partner I don't have this kind of history with, I suggest doing it like Dave's third way. This is one of those things umpires should discuss in their pregame talk.

Have fun out there or don't go.
Gordon Raney

[MD Longhorn]

All I would add, or at least emphasize, is that if you are having a conference, no coach should EVER be anywhere near you. Regardless of whether you got the call right or wrong, if the call ends up in the favor of a coach that was in on the conference, it looks REALLY bad, and you set yourself up to be viewed as biased by the other side.

[Warren Willson]

Originally posted by harmbu
My question is what is the proper mechanic on the tag play.

I'm going to shock the socks off've some people here and AGREE, again wholeheartedly, with Dave Hensley's summary of the available mechanics in this situation.

St Louis Blue and I follow the 2nd option as a matter of course, primarily because we both regularly work with partners who are equally familiar with the mechanic.

I once followed the second method with an unfamiliar partner and was surprised to get the response "What do you want to know for?" At that point I had a (private) conference with my PU partner to explain that I was blocked on the tag play, etc. He was most surprised that I could ask his help. I said sure I could, as long as I hadn't made the call first and been influenced to ask by a coach.

It is unacceptable to go for help on a pulled foot situation AFTER you have made a call and AFTER you have had a conference with either coach. The point is there should be no need to wait that long if you have any doubt, just like on a checked swing attempt.

Hope this helps

Cheers

[Bfair]

Originally posted by Warren Willson

It is unacceptable to go for help on a pulled foot situation AFTER you have made a call and AFTER you have had a conference with either coach. The point is there should be no need to wait that long if you have any doubt, just like on a checked swing attempt.

If Warren considers "a conference with either coach" as a "lengthy argument", then I would certainly agree with Warren. However, Warren's past statements regarding this issue don't tend to reflect that belief. Warren's past statements, as I best recall, indicated he felt that if a coach merely appealed the judgment decision which was made due to a pulled foot, Warren then felt it was too late to request help. I also believe Warren has now changed his position from stating it was illegal to seek help after a coach appeals the decision to unacceptable seek help.

I disagree with Warren's past stated position, and I also believe the MLB Umpire Manual disagrees with that.
From the MLB Umpire Manual:

Section 4.12 CREW CONSULTATION AND GETTING THE PLAY RIGHT
As the Casebook Comments to Official Baseball Rule 9.00 point out, the first requisite as an umpire is to get all decisions ultimately correct. Umpire dignity is important but never as important as getting the play right.

[snip]

An umpire is urged to seek help when that umpire's view is blocked or positioning prevents such umpire from seeing crucial elements of a play. An umpire is also encouraged to seek help in instances when that umpire has doubt and a partner has additional information that could lead to a proper ruling.

[snip]

GUIDELINES:

When an umpire seeks help, the umpire should do so shortly after making the call. There should not be a lengthy argument with the manager that is followed by a crew conference about the call in question.


Some judgment calls are not subject to reversal. These include: steal and other tag plays (except if the ball is dropped without the umpire's knowledge); force plays (when the ball is not dropped and foot is not pulled) [my emphasis]; and balls and strikes (other than check swings). Also, some calls cannot be reversed without creating larger problems. An example is a catch/no catch situation with multiple runners.

IMO, there is considerable difference between a coach's mere appeal to seek help, a conference, and a "lengthy argument."

An appeal or a brief conference with a coach is his proper way of letting you know that he felt you missed a crucial element of the play. He is not necessarily arguing your judgment of the timing of the play. A "lengthy argument" regarding the call is not his proper way of appealing. Also keep in mind, a "lengthy argument" is not apt to occur unless you have certainty of your call, have advised the coach that you saw the foot on the base, and you have no doubt or reason to seek further help.
When you feel certain of your call, you should not seek help merely to appease a complaining coach.

HOWEVER, if doubt exists in your mind that the fielder's foot may have been pulled from the bag during the force play without your knowledge, then you should seek that help immediately, even if after a mere coach's appeal, if you know your partner was in proper position to provide you that needed information that can eliminate your doubt---that is, confirmation of the foot on the base vs. the foot being pulled off the base.

There is no dignity in maintaining an obviously blown call.....
And it is acceptable to seek help if there is doubt in your mind that you may have missed a crucial element of the play---even if such help is sought after a coach's request to seek that help. Seeking help is not based upon the coach's actions, but rather your certainty of your initial decision in whether you felt you saw all elements of the play to get the call correct.


Freix

[Warren Willson]

Originally posted by Bfair
There is no dignity in maintaining an obviously blown call.....
And it is acceptable to seek help if there is doubt in your mind that you may have missed a crucial element of the play---even if such help is sought after a coach's request to seek that help. Seeking help is not based upon the coach's actions, but rather your certainty of your initial decision in whether you felt you saw all elements of the play to get the call correct.

Isn't it amazing how two people can read the same MLB Umpire Manual and come away with an entirely different understanding of its admonitions?

I see the issue of getting help revolving around certain key points that reflect how different umpires call the game. Let me take you through those points on a simple Safe/Out call in a pulled foot situation at 1st with the BU in B:

1. Did you see the foot ON the bag?
   1. If the answer is YES, then MAKE YOUR CALL and NEVER go for help, despite any subsequent protests!
   2. If the answer is NO, then I say DON'T MAKE A CALL! Instead, immediately ask your PU partner "Did he hold the base, Bob?"

2. Did you see the foot OFF the bag?
   1. If the answer is YES, then I say MAKE YOUR CALL and NEVER go for help, despite any subsequent protests!
   2. If the answer is NO, but you had some suspicion that it may have come off, then I say DON'T MAKE A CALL! Instead, immediately ask your PU partner "Did he hold the base, Bob?"

3. Did you not see the position of the foot at all?
   1. Then I say DON'T MAKE A CALL! Instead, immediately ask your PU partner "Did he hold the base, Bob?"

Where, in all of those possible situations, is there any necessity to react to an "appeal" from a coach?

My point is that if you have proper timing, and you only call what you see, then you don't NEED advice from any coach to "Get help on that call, Blue!" The only officials who feel the need to accede to a coach's request to get help are those who want to make an unnecessarily quick call, even though they haven't seen the whole play, believing they can go back and change it afterward if someone else doesn't like it! That's NOT quality officiating, IMO. I believe it is also illegal under OBR 9.02(a), but that point is not really worth arguing.

Now I am NOT saying there aren't calls that MUST be made, even though you don't have ALL the information necessary. What I AM saying is that seldom happens on a pulled foot at 1st base, which is the case that Bfair originally advocated and to which I originally objected.

Getting help should NOT be necessary AFTER you've made a call and AFTER you've been asked to do so by a coach.

Have I changed my position on that subject? Not one iota! Bfair is just having his usual trouble reading and comprehending arguments that are not his own.

I have ALWAYS said that there is a time and a place for getting help. Bfair and I disagree on that point. He wants licence to get help any time a coach argues/appeals his call. I say that, too, is indicative of poor officiating technique.

Hope this helps

Cheers

[Bfair]

Warren, my position on this issue has not fluctuated over the years we've argued it.
Your initial position (of which you were quite adamant) was that seeking help after a coach's request was "illegal." You then seemed to have changed that tune with your earlier post in this thread to merely stating you now feel it is "unacceptable." Yet in your last post you seemed to have slipped even further in vaguely contradicting yourself by saying........

Originally posted by Warren Willson

Now I am NOT saying there aren't calls that MUST be made, even though you don't have ALL the information necessary. What I AM saying is that seldom happens on a pulled foot at 1st base, which is the case that Bfair originally advocated and to which I originally objected.

First, Warren, you finally seem to acknowledge that those situations can exist---although "seldom." That, indeed, is what this issue has been about all through the years, Warren.
And while more veteran officials are able to avoid and minimize those situations such that they "seldom" occur, newer officials are still going through their learning process and may falter more often when under the gun. Thus, they face the problem more often than veteran officials.

Second, I feel you misrepresent the position I support by implying that I advocate to first make the call and then to seek help if necessary. I don't advocate that method, but I certainly don't condemn it---as you have in the past. We are in agreement here, Warren, that the situation under discussion "seldom" happens, but we both NOW seem to acknowledge that it can and does occur.

I think we all agree that when help is needed and the BU is confident that his partner:

1. Has that needed information, AND
   
2. Is ready to react with the needed information

THEN, the BU should go to his partner before ever making the initial call.
Still, when working a 2 man sytem and starting in C position with R2 only---which is the most typical situation where the need arises---the BU is not always confident that his PU is ready to react or even has that needed information. Thus, he ends up making the decision without first checking his PU.

There are times, especially when working with unfamiliar partners, when the BU is concerned about the PU busting his a$$ down to 3B to cover a possible play on R2 advancing after the throw to 1B. The BU doesn't know if PU has abandoned watching that foot at 1B despite PU's undeniably better angle to see a problem caused by a stretching F3. The risk exists that BU's immediate request for help will result with the PU looking like a deer caught in the headlights---offering no help and letting all present then know that doubt exists regarding the issue in the minds of both umpires. Thus, the BU bypasses the "preferred" method of checking before making that call---despite the doubt he might have regarding a pulled foot by F3.

While I don't advocate that method of seeking help after the initial call, I acknowledge that it can occur. Furthermore, I acknowledge that fact with the admission that a good pregame by the umpires can avoid that lack of confidence---but also admit that good pregames by umpires don't always occur for various reasons.

Hopefully in reading the MLB Umpire Manual we can agree, Warren, that it tells us:

1. That it's more important to get the call right than to protect a misconceived "dignity" of not seeking help. There is no dignity in maintaining an obviously blown call.
   
2. Help can be sought when in doubt about your call and when you feel your partner may have that needed crucial element of information that answers the cause of that doubt
   
3. It's ok to seek that help in some situations following an initial call, BUT
   
4. That help should not be sought after "a lengthy argument"

So that apparently narrows this to our final point of conflict, Warren, which is that you feel a coach's mere appeal qualifies as "a lengthy argument" while I do not.
Not only that, but I don't feel that a "conference" in which a coach properly voices that appeal would qualify as "a lengthy argument."

I'll agree to disagree with that remaining point of conflict......


Freix

[Warren Willson]

Originally posted by Bfair
Yet in your last post you seemed to have slipped even further in vaguely contradicting yourself by saying........

First, Warren, you finally seem to acknowledge that those situations can exist---although "seldom." That, indeed, is what this issue has been about all through the years, Warren.

It might have been better if you'd simply asked what I meant by "seldom", instead of assuming I was contradicting myself.

Those few occasions when the BU must make a call despite not having ALL the information are when there is continuing action following the call at 1st. THOSE are the cases when you have to make a call, even when you aren't certain, and then you should NEVER go back and get help afterwards. Why? Because there may be no way to unravel what followed if the call had been different. THAT is what I meant by "seldom".

I can envisage NO OTHER CASE, in relation to a pulled-foot at 1st base, for which a call MUST be made by the BU before getting help. BU's who don't trust their PU's to be in a position to answer should simply not ask! If the BU asks and the PU can't answer then the call has to be "He's SAFE".

BTW, your posts have become so lengthy that the board is now sending me TWO NOTIFICATIONS for each one! No kidding!

Cheers