Giving a Coach Options

[PeteBooth]

I do not mean to keep "stealing thunder" from other Boards, but this topic got plenty of play, so to keep the discussions going here goes.


Unlike football, there are not many situations in a baseball game where a coach has an option. One of those situations concerns catchers interference (or obstruction if you are working FED games).

Sitch: r3 1 out.
B1 grounds to F6 but B1 was interfered with by F2. F6 throws to F3 to get B1 and r3 scores.

Ok playing action over and since all runners have not advanced at least 1 base, we have some work to do. Also, a coach now has some options coming his way.

As PU do you?

A. Enforce catchers interference by sending r3 back to third
and putting B1 at first. At this point do you keep quiet and wait for the coach to actually say Hey Blue I want the play to stand - score the run. Will you instruct the coach in any manner?

If one uses this approach, basically you have r3 scoring, then you put him back at third and then score the run again upon the coaches actions.

IMO, this seems cumbersome; score it, no don't score it ok score it.

or do you?

B. After playing action has ended, call over both coaches and explain to them the situation. We have catchers interference. Do you say to the offensive coach - Coach do you want the play or the interference?

This is meaningful. If the offensive team is tied or trailing by a run, chances are they will take the merits of the play, however, if they are trailing by more than a run chances are they want to preserve those precious outs and take the penalty.


In Summary concerning Catchers interference (obstruction), what's your style? For those veteran umpires who want to respond - what is taught at the schools? I have been taught both.

Thanks guys

Pete Booth

[blanco7]

Personaly I use the second approach you stated. When it is over call both coaches over and tell them what we have and that this is one of those rare instances that the offended team has a choice.

Unfortunately, you usually have to teach the coaches the rule while you are doing it, but that I think comes with the territory when you decide to umpire.

Blanco7

[BJ Moose]

Originally posted by PeteBooth

As PU do you?

B. After playing action has ended, call over both coaches and explain to them the situation. We have catchers interference. Do you say to the offensive coach - Coach do you want the play or the interference?
Pete Booth

----------------

On this play.. I have decided to (when appropriate). Call Time, and enforce the INT. Put runners where they should be.. then inform OFF coach of his option. I question involving BOTH coaches... DEF coach has nothing to do with it. Of course, in Kid baseball, when coach decides to have R3 score, DEF coach will bellow... such is life.

[Roland Wiederaenders]

My friend,

6.08c is what is taught at the "schools"

I look forward to seeing you there......go to
http://www.umpireacademy.com for more information on
education which will offer you a way to make
great calls the rest of your umpiring life !

[Roger Greene]

Pete,

I would call the catcher's obstruction verbably and(this is a Fed mechanic, but it comes out in OBR games) then give a delayed dead ball signal. After the play concludes, I call time and move to the area between home and the mound, and inform the offensive coach (usually in the 3rd base coach's box) of the obstruction and ask if he wants the play or penalty. This is done with enough volume so that the defensive coach will hear. Usually he has come out of his dugout at the call of time and is listening, and the fans tend to go quite so that they can hear also.

This way the decision is made without placing runners, and then after being approached and questioned by a coach, giving the appearance that he has caused you to change your original call. (This is what all the fans and some of the players, will think if you return runners, and then after talking with the coach move them back up)

If offensive coach questions the placement of the runners on the penalty I inform him. If defense asks for an explanation I give it. This has worked well for me, and causes the least disruption to the flow of the game.

Roger Greene,
Member UT

[Whowefoolin]

I have been taught and told to give the offensive team the best advantage when it is defensive interference. Then let the coach decide (without saying anything, because that is his job) if he wants to or not.

For this particular play, I would call Batter out and score R3. Let the coach then decide if he would rather have R1 and R3.

[Carl Childress]

Pete:

Naturally, this has been debated "furiously" on the URC. Briefly:

R3 not moving on the pitch. Catcher interferes, but B1 rolls to the second baseman and is thrown out.

Professional position:

The J/R and JEA both say the umpire should enforce the interference when it occurs -- period. Send B1 to first, send R3 back to third. And then wait. (A poster overshot himself by saying that the NAPBL also supports the "no option until asked" position.)

One amateur position:

When the coach has an option, explain it to him.

My position:

Call both coaches out and explain what you are doing: "Coach, your catcher interfered, so your opponent gets to choose: Play (1 in, 1 out) or penalty (runners on the corner)."

Several people pooh-poohed that, particularly some college umpires. I was happy when both Jon Bible and Ken Allen agreed with me, pointing out that in unusual plays, both coaches should always be apprised of what was going on.

My point: If you try the professional approach in an amateur game, when you send R3 back to third and the offensive coach comes calling to ask for the play option, you will have a lot of explaining to do when you bring R3 back to the plate.

Beat him to the punch. After all, a baseball game isn't run by the CIA.

Finally: No one has ever advanced any REASON not to explain the coach's options.

[Edited by Carl Childress on Nov 3rd, 2000 at 03:07 AM]

[Mario F]

6.08(c) ....the manager of the offense may advise the plate umpire that he elects to decline the interference penalty and accept the play. ....If catcher's interference is called with a play in progress the umpire will allow the play to continue because the manager may elect to take the play.

Seems pretty simple Pete. Nothing says we can't use our better judgement and bring both coaches together to avoid embarrasment. I'm with Carl on this about bringing the coaches together and explaining things.

--Mario

[Warren Willson]

Originally posted by PeteBooth
As PU do you?

A. Enforce catchers interference by sending r3 back to third
and putting B1 at first. At this point do you keep quiet and wait for the coach to actually say Hey Blue I want the play to stand - score the run. Will you instruct the coach in any manner?

or do you?

B. After playing action has ended, call over both coaches and explain to them the situation. We have catchers interference. Do you say to the offensive coach - Coach do you want the play or the interference?

*Sigh* It looks like I'm gonna play the harda$$ed Aussie again (grin).

At the levels I call (District League A-AA standard; State League AA standard) we really have to go with the Pro approach and enforce the interference (R3 back to 3rd, BR awarded 1st) and WAIT. The alternative is unacceptable. The "option" here is for the Coach to decline the penalty NOT the umpire to offer him an option. In these particular leagues (and I stress I am NOT speaking for all leagues or all levels), if we were to approach the offensive coach and offer the option two things might happen:

1. The defensive coach would 'spit the dummy', suggesting we were interferring in the course of the game to his detriment by offering an option to the offensive coach, and/or

2. The offensive coach would 'spit the dummy' suggesting we should mind our own business and shouldn't try to teach someone how to "suck eggs", only with much less carefully chosen language.

But that's in OUR leagues and at OUR particular level of play. I can easily accept what Carl and others have offered for general amateur play. The only question I have is why you would actively offer the coach his options here [OBR 6.08(c)] and not do the same for batting out of turn [OBR 6.07(a)], or ball tampering [OBR 8.02(a)Penalty(c)]? These plays also have either an actual or an implied option for one or other coach, don't they? (grin) And before anyone starts spouting OBR 6.07(d)Comment at me, I already KNOW that the umpire can't draw anyone's attention to an improper batter. What I'm suggesting comes AFTER the defensive coach say's he's noticed a batting out of turn but hasn't specifically used the word APPEAL yet.

MY answer to this question, BTW, is that it isn't my job as the umpire to coach the coach or otherwise inject myself into the game action. Our rule book costs $AUD12.95 (about $US7.00) to buy and every one of these "options" is properly and adequately explained in there. If a coach takes on a District League or State League 1st Division side (sorry, Carl, 'team') without even reading the rules of the game, he deserves what he does or doesn't get. And that's not just my opinion but as far as I can tell it is also that of his competing fellow coaches too! Mind you, most of them gave up reading the rules 20 years ago, believing they have them all down pat, but they won't admit to that in public. If a coach says "I know I have an option here, Blue. What is it?" I'll tell him. Otherwise he's on his own.

Cheers,

Warren Willson

[Roger Greene]

Warren,

Maybe all that sun south of the equator is making your "sides" coaches to confrontational. (g)

I'm probably not calling at the levels you describe. I haven't made this call in a MSBL game, but have never had a problem with my method up to the varsity high school level play.

I can never recall making a 8.02 call in which the option applied, but I would probably treat it in a like manner, offering the coach the chance to elect before I place any runners.

I have had to make a similar call on an illegal pitch in fastpitch softball on multiple occasions, and always ask the offensive coach immediately after the play "do you want the play or the penalty?" I've never had any problems from the defense.(again up to varsity high school level)

BOO is a different animinal, it seems to me.

Roger Greene,
Member UT

[Mario F]

In football, certain penalties can be declined by a team who will benefit from the declination...right?

I wonder if this is because, early on in the game's development, ref's recognized that removing the option to decline a penalty against the opposition might result in a painful death for them(the refs).

Can you imagine the conversation "Hi coach....oh, you did NOT want to take the 5 yard off-sides penalty and take the the down over? You wanted the touchdown to count instead???, Oh gee!..No...PLEASE DON"T HURT ME!!!"
(Can you tell I've never officiated football?)


I really hate explaining things to a coach who should know better. For the most part, I agree with Warren's thinking, and as a rule, I don't do it. However this situation really is different. I challenge anyone to explain what possible scenario a coach would elect to keep his player on first, and disallow the run in the situation described.

Maybe Warren's take on this has something to do with how water drains counter clockwise in the southern hemisphere.
;-)

--Mario Fiermonte

[Alan G]

I would not offer the coach the option in a league playing OBR. So now there are three of us.

But I am prepared to inform the coach of the option if he gives me ANY reason to believe he questions the penalty.

In the example that began this, I'm sending the runner back to third with BR to first. If the coach comes out and says anything that questions why the run doesn't score, I would let him know that he has an option. Even if he begins by saying, "Are you sure that's the rule?" and even though I am sure, I would then explain the option. (I have plenty of brother umpires who would reply, "Yes, I'm sure," and leave it at that. It seems to me that would be taking the view that "the coach has to know the rules" a little too far.)

[BJ Moose]

Originally posted by Alan G
I would not offer the coach the option in a league playing OBR. So now there are three of us.

As others have, let's be sure we accept that OBR does not equate with advanced level or player age. Meaning plenty of 13-15 year old games are played essentially under OBR, with safety modifications of course, slide or avoid, et al.

Point is that plenty of coaches are the equivalent of baby sitters, and I don't blame them or think poorly of them (yet) simply because they don't understand one of the most confusing documents in human history.. The Official Rules Of Baseball.

Heck, perhaps in this game you have the 3rd Assistant as Coach because Mngr, and 1st and 2nd Coach are off hunting. When the play happens.. TELL HIM HIS OPTIONS. Other that pompacity (did I make that up?) there is no good reason not to.

[cmcallm]

Vote me with Alan G. I would NOT offer the option until (or unless) it was brought to MY attention by the offensive coach.

When I went to Wendelstedt's school (1985), we were instructed specifically to enforce the interference and NOT MENTION the option - that had to be initiated by the offensive coach. Of course, that was years ago...

[Jim Porter]

Originally posted by cmcallm
Vote me with Alan G. I would NOT offer the option until (or unless) it was brought to MY attention by the offensive coach.

When I went to Wendelstedt's school (1985), we were instructed specifically to enforce the interference and NOT MENTION the option - that had to be initiated by the offensive coach. Of course, that was years ago...

cmcallm,

Pro schools are a terrific opportunity for umpires, there's no doubt about that. Jim Evans' Academy and Harry and Hunter's school are the best money can buy. The rewards from such high level learning will last an umpire a lifetime.

But there are some things that an amateur umpire needs to remember about those schools to keep it all in perspective. The jobs of those schools are to prepare a student for the professional world of umpiring. Their focus is on getting as many of their students as they can professional assignments. It certainly isn't a bad thing. I would be disappointed to learn that they were teaching their students anything but the best professional-level policies.

But in the amateur world, some of what Jim, Harry, and Hunter instruct simply does not apply. Most does apply, but some things don't. I think this option business is one example of where professional policies don't apply in the amateur world.

For an amateur umpire to gain a well-rounded education in officiating baseball, it is important not only to attend a pro school, but also to attend a camp run by the top amateur instructors in the land. That will give a student the tools he needs to realize how different the game of baseball is at the amateur level.

So I don't doubt the accuracy of the information that you learned from Harry's school back in '85. But they were readying you for a career in professional baseball, and not preparing you to deal with coaches whose knowledge of the rules of the game is novice at best.

My vote goes to bringing the coaches together and explaining to them what's going on.

P.S. Thank you for posting your name. It was not necessary. Your web page provided enough proof, at least to me, that you were indeed a real person. Ranger was playing games with us. He was not genuine. Everyone should check out http://www.4umpires.com/ and offer cmcallm suggestions on making his page even better.