What would you do?

[blarson]

Originally posted by gumpire
When I gave the rule quote, my intention was not to show that rules would solve the problem.
What I was trying to show was that I think that a discussion between umpires would have appropriate in this situation and, since what you've said is that your partner was out of position, he should, at that point, admit to you that he didn't see the play and defer to you.
If you meet with him, and him alone, and he still won't admit the mistake, the call would stand. I would still discuss it further after the game.

Gumbypire,

Which rule are you basing your statement on in 9.04? 9.04c ?

How many games have you umpired? Rut has probably taken more barbs in a single thread they you have umpired games.

Since your such a rules zealot, why are you even letting the coach come out and discuss this?
9.02
(a) Any umpire's decision which involves judgment, such as, but not limited to, whether a batted ball is fair or foul, whether a pitch is a strike or a ball, or whether a runner is safe or out, is final. No player, manager, coach or substitute shall object to any such judgment decisions.

Now, in your world we should stop then before the utter the second word or take the second step from their position or at least as soon as it's apparent that they are arguing judgement. Custom and practice dictates otherwise in our sport.

If I'm misinterpreting your written word as it's possible on the board, then I apologize. If I'm not I can't believe that you refuse the accept a simple ruling some of the vets here.

Bob

[gumpire]

Bob -
Just trying to point out that a situation like this should be discussed. I'm not saying anyone is not handling this correctly, just sharing how I would try to handle it.
I quoted the rule to show that it was allowed under the rules for an umpire to meet immediately after the play and reverse the call if necessary.
I'm not really a rules zealot as you claim, but someone who does my very best to try to make the right call, even if it needs to be discussed and reversed. Of course I've made many, many mistakes, and I have not always handled them correctly, but I try to improve everyday.

The original post is entitled "What would you do?", so I'm sharing what I would do!

[blarson]

Originally posted by gumpire
Bob -
I'm not really a rules zealot as you claim, but someone who does my very best to try to make the right call, even if it needs to be discussed and reversed. Of course I've made many, many mistakes, and I have not always handled them correctly, but I try to improve everyday.

The original post is entitled "What would you do?", so I'm sharing what I would do!

OK, I'll buy that. Maybe I misinterpreted your quote for you being a rule zealot.

In the interest of spirited debate, which part of the rule are you quoting to support the way you'd handle this play?

Bob

[JRutledge]

Originally posted by gumpire
The original post is entitled "What would you do?", so I'm sharing what I would do!

No problem with that, and I should have made it clear what level this was. I am not concerned with OBR rules when I really do not do OBR games.

Peace

[gumpire]

Originally posted by blarson

OK, I'll buy that. Maybe I misinterpreted your quote for you being a rule zealot.

In the interest of spirited debate, which part of the rule are you quoting to support the way you'd handle this play?

Bob

I mistyped my original quote. I guess I was referring to 9.04(c).
Please note however, this is not my basis for suggesting that we meet immediately, this is only a quote to show that the rules DO allow such a meeting.

[blarson]

Originally posted by gumpire


I mistyped my original quote. I guess I was referring to 9.04(c).
Please note however, this is not my basis for suggesting that we meet immediately, this is only a quote to show that the rules DO allow such a meeting.
[/B]

That is the rule I thought you were looking at. What the rule means by two umpires making different decisions is both umpires making a call. Then they must get together. In the play involved this didn't happen. JR had a different opinion or judgment but not a different call.

JR also did correctly by FED rule 10-1-4. I agree w/ the way he handled it as well OBR or FED. One thing I might have done different was once I was asked I may have taken the umpire aside away from the coach and had a discussion w/ him. I'm not sure though, after being hung out to dry like that if I would have done anything differently. Post game would be interesting to say the least.

Bob

[gumpire]

Originally posted by blarson


That is the rule I thought you were looking at. What the rule means by two umpires making different decisions is both umpires making a call. Then they must get together. In the play involved this didn't happen. JR had a different opinion or judgment but not a different call.

JR also did correctly by FED rule 10-1-4. I agree w/ the way he handled it as well OBR or FED. One thing I might have done different was once I was asked I may have taken the umpire aside away from the coach and had a discussion w/ him. I'm not sure though, after being hung out to dry like that if I would have done anything differently. Post game would be interesting to say the least.

Bob [/B]

Bob;
I don't understand why any umpire would not be interested in making the correct call on the spot? If I see it differently than my partner, his body language, etc. indicates he knows he was not in position, so-on, I would talk to him then....give him a chance to reverse his decision after our meeting.

My priority on the field is calling the plays, and trying to get them correct. Rule or no rule, I don't think the officials are PROHIBITED from meeting at anytime they want (provide ball is dead of couse) and discussing a play. If my partner has as much interest in making the right call as I do, he'll take that opportunity to reverse himself.

I don't think the anyone was purposefully letting a bad call go, I just think more could have been done. I absolutely agree with the post that says when the partner asked if he saw anything, he would have taken him away from coach then. I think this is the right thing to do.

[JRutledge]

Originally posted by gumpire


Bob;
I don't understand why any umpire would not be interested in making the correct call on the spot? If I see it differently than my partner, his body language, etc. indicates he knows he was not in position, so-on, I would talk to him then....give him a chance to reverse his decision after our meeting.

Because it was his call and he was sticking to it. If he wanted help, he could have asked. But condidering the over all attitude of this individual, it was not my place to help. The ball was not dropped or obviously not at that base, there was an attempted tag. It is not our job to make a call for our partner. If we use your logic, he could have come to me and told me that a pitch I called a strike was a ball. Or that when I ruled swing to then have him come to me and tell me immediately that he did not swing. There are some things umpires are just going to have to live with. And that was something I would rather live with and not opening another can of worms. Because if I make that call for him, then the coach is going to want that all day long. I would rather live with a couple of bad calls based on judgment than have every judgment call expected to be changed. And this is what the FED rule says to do. So the OBR rule does not apply here.

Peace

[blarson]

Originally posted by gumpire
Bob;
I don't understand why any umpire would not be interested in making the correct call on the spot? If I see it differently than my partner, his body language, etc. indicates he knows he was not in position, so-on, I would talk to him then....give him a chance to reverse his decision after our meeting.

My priority on the field is calling the plays, and trying to get them correct. Rule or no rule, I don't think the officials are PROHIBITED from meeting at anytime they want (provide ball is dead of couse) and discussing a play. If my partner has as much interest in making the right call as I do, he'll take that opportunity to reverse himself. [/B]

Consider the following materials:

FED: 10-1-4 "No umpire shall criticize or interfere with another
umpireÂ’s decision unless asked by the one making it."

From the MLB Umpires manual:
(2) Official Baseball Rule 9.02(c) states, "No umpire shall criticize, seek to reverse or interfere
with another umpire's decision unless asked to do so by the umpire making it." Therefore,
except in special situations such as those referred to below, the umpire making the call must
be the one to seek assistance of a partner.
...........
Plays such as the following lend themselves to the philosophy described above:
* Deciding whether a fly ball that left the playing field was fair or foul.
* Deciding whether a batted ball left the playing field for a home run or a ground-rule double.
* Cases where a foul tip is dropped by the catcher, causing it to become a foul ball.
* Cases when an umpire clearly errs in judgment because a ball is dropped or juggled after
making a tag or force.
* Spectator interference plays.
* Balks called by an umpire who clearly did not realize the pitcher's foot was off the rubber.

MLB has set a precedent for getting crews together to get calls right and they wouldn't have under this call either unless the BU asked for help.

Bob

[gumpire]

ALL UNDERSTOOD!!!

I think I am critisizing the partner rather than J.

He should have the ethics and confidence to admit his mistake.

[mcrowder]

I don't think you did anything I wouldn't have done ... right up to the point where your partner asked for help. At that point, I'd have taken partner out of earshot of the coaches and ask him what he saw. If he admits to have not seen part of the play and asks, I'd tell him what I saw. At the end of the short conversation, it's partner's call to make and I back him either way.