Peter, Peter, Peter....

[Striker991]

Another reason I am not renewing my subscription to the paid part of this site...

The type of mechanics you are talking about may (and I only say "may" because I "may" not agree) be appropriate for the most experienced umpires that have trouble hobbling about the infield and can no longer apply the correct mechanics. However, do not forget that your audience, or at least 95% or better, is not at that level. The only thing you are trying to prove is that you think because you are such a big dog with God's experience on the field, that incorrect mechanics are the right way to do it. I'm calling BS, and that umpires should do it the right way, using the correct mechanics, to be in the best position at the right time.

To teach something so drastically different to this audience is wrong and on the verge of malpractice. No one is talking about the mechanics of positioning at the start of the play. If you are in "C" with a runner on 2nd, you aren't anticipating a play at 3rd. Your statement to anticipate by moving to where you expect the play to be during the play is opening up a whole can of worms, especially for newer umpires. Anticipate the play....next anticipate the outcome. What did you see on the bang bang play? Why, OUT! of course...that is what I anticipated. An even worse outcome is not quite getting out of the way of the 85mph (embellished? maybe..) ball because I was anticipating it going somewhere other than it did.

So, I guess what I am really saying is to do what you are teaching...anticipate who your audience is and teach appropriately.

I appreciate very much the people who have trained me and are training me, because they realize what my level is and understand what I should be working on. In other words, if my career goal were to be a rocket scientist, I need to learn the basics about chemistry first. To show me how to do hands on experiments with rocket fuel when I am in High School is only going to get me hurt.