Should the UIC Be 'MIKED"

[PeteBooth]

Ok here I go again comparing Umpires to other Officials but the thing I like about Football Referees is that the Calls are explained to the public via their "Mike".

In the PRO Game, the Referee even goes so far as to give the number of the individual committing the infraction. IMO
people have a better understanding of the game. I'm not saying they are going to agree with every call but at least they become aware of the ruling and understand the game better.

I would like to see this avenue used for Baseball Umpires at least at the NCAA Division 1 Collegiate Level and obviously at the PRO Game.

Example; Many people (even some umpires) do not know that on a Foul Tip - The ball is live. What's wrong after the play by saying - We have a Foul Tip - the ball is live and in play? You know what!!! - Pretty soon everyone would know the rule. You wouldn't see player X in a stuper caught between 1st and 2nd wondering what happened.

Also, Give the rule on base awards. Many people in the stands and even coaches - after a ball is thrown out of play wonder why a certain player is on 2nd base as opposed to third base. Again what's wrong with saying - Since this was the first play by an infielder - Number 23 gets 2 bases from TOP. At the TOP B1 was at home plate, hence he is now awarded 2nd base. Again, pretty soon everyone would know the rule.

IMO by explaining certain rules to the public - this would make one a better umpire ( it would keep him / her sharp)and also, the coaches / players and yes the Fans would start to understand the game more. I'm not saying everyone is going to agree with the call, but they would become more educated.

It seems over the years, PRO umpires continue to be more involved with their appearance (by constantly changing uniforms) then they are about the way the game is called. It's the 21st Century and maybe it's time to change.


Pete Booth

[SamNVa]

The biggest problem I see with this approach is that it would make games that are already too long, unbearably longer. I realize that baseball is a pastoral game that's supposed to be played at a leisurely pace, but there is only so much time a person is willing to invest into any one thing these days and that amount is decreasing, not increasing.

[Whowefoolin]

This is a good idea, but I beleive the calls would be limited, thus not covering the whole spectrum.

But in addition, baseball is a different beast. Why conform to what others are doing. Basketball is not "Miked".

The reason I think it would be hard, like hockey, a lot of the plays that are ruled upon are not immediately dead (i.e., foul tip, infield fly, dropped third strike, incidental contact,etc...). You would have to kill the ball to give an explanation, only dragging out the games more.

Just my two cents.

Max

[Rog]

Put mic's on everyone, let the fans in on what is being said the whole game.
Put mic's in the dugouts, on the base coaches, the bat boy, pitching coaches, heck wire the johns as well. But, not just on a select group!

[PeteBooth]

But in addition, baseball is a different beast. Why conform to what others are doing. Basketball is not "Miked".

The reason I think it would be hard, like hockey, a lot of the plays that are ruled upon are not immediately dead (i.e., foul tip, infield fly, dropped third strike, incidental contact,etc...). You would have to kill the ball to give an explanation, only dragging out the games more.

Max in Hockey and Basketball while they are not "Miked" - they do tell the public what happened by their motions.

In Hockey, the referee will give the signal ie; holding / Boarding / charging etc. so the coach, players and public know what is going on. Same is true in Basketball - The ref will instruct the scorers table who committed the foul and by his actions indicate what the foul is all about.

If it's a charge - the ref will give the charge signal. If it's a block the ref will put his hands on his hips indicating it. If the basket counts on a continuation foul he will also indicate.

In other words, In Football, Basketball and Hockey, for the most part, the Coaches / Players and Fans know what the penalty is all about. Not true in baseball

In baseball, the Fan is left "hanging" as to what is going on out there because the UIC does not tell the puclic as in the other sports. He will discuss with the coach but only if the coach questions it.

I'm not talking about every single play so the game would be dragged out even longer, but only on those plays which warrent it - like a ball thrown out of play and awarding bases. The ball is already dead so whats wrong with giving the ruling - it does not take that long.

If I had to guess, I would probably say that the average Fan knows more about the rules of Football, Basketball and Hockey than Baseball. I'm sure there are a number of reasons but one of those reasons is because the officials in the other sports educate the fan whereas the Baseball Umpire does not.

I know baseball is a different game and I'm not talking about every single ruling, but those in which you hear the Coaches / Players and Fans say "What is happening" such as when a shattered bat strikes the ball in the field a play - that's not an everyday event and therefore, after end of playing action - it would be nice for the UIC to explain what the ruling is.

Pete Booth

[cmcallm]

I don't think it would be practical to mike the umps so they can give explanations to the fans/pressbox/etc., but for years I've thought it would be cool to have the umpire crew wired so as to be able to communicate/hear each other. Some situations call for "one-on-one" discussions, but in an ejection situation the whole crew is asked "What did you see and hear?". Certainly this would help clarify those situations. It would be easy to SAY, "Charlie, we have an infield fly situation" - then acknowledgements wouldn't require eye contact (taking an eye OFF the ball to make eye contact with a partner). How about being able to hear without looking, "Charlie, I have third" - instead of either glancing there (and again taking an eye off the ball) or just HOPING it's covered? Same thing with an appeal situation - "Charlie, it's my call and I saw it". Lots of possiblities...."Charlie, where are we going to dinner tonight?"..."Charlie, check out the girl in the red shorts behind first base".....

[Bfair]

Pete, I won't be as thumbs down as some. Like anything, throw it in somewhere as test case to try. Very possibly could have some merit except for certain in grown flaws. First, would have to initiate at Pro level for all to see and gain interest. Second, not that many infractions occur at Pro level. And third, most of the infractions that occur at Pro level don't get called. There's nothing to explain !!

Understand, official is not a play by play commentator. During any dead ball, awards made or players penalized, he states rule and why. Simple, short info. Don't expect play by play as some earlier replys seem to have envisioned.

I guarantee, though, that you are right that officials are going to be more certain of their rules knowledge knowing their RISK exists of having to explain publicly.

Probably would die out because of boredom at the Pro level.

[chris s]

Hey Pete, hockey has miked some refs this season. Fans LOVE it from what I have heard, true you have delayed penaltys, but when homeys getting the door to the box, ref explains call over p-a system when at the scorers window. But I agree with everything else, I sure don't wanna be miked out there!

Originally posted by PeteBooth

But in addition, baseball is a different beast. Why conform to what others are doing. Basketball is not "Miked".

The reason I think it would be hard, like hockey, a lot of the plays that are ruled upon are not immediately dead (i.e., foul tip, infield fly, dropped third strike, incidental contact,etc...). You would have to kill the ball to give an explanation, only dragging out the games more.

Max in Hockey and Basketball while they are not "Miked" - they do tell the public what happened by their motions.

In Hockey, the referee will give the signal ie; holding / Boarding / charging etc. so the coach, players and public know what is going on. Same is true in Basketball - The ref will instruct the scorers table who committed the foul and by his actions indicate what the foul is all about.

If it's a charge - the ref will give the charge signal. If it's a block the ref will put his hands on his hips indicating it. If the basket counts on a continuation foul he will also indicate.

In other words, In Football, Basketball and Hockey, for the most part, the Coaches / Players and Fans know what the penalty is all about. Not true in baseball

In baseball, the Fan is left "hanging" as to what is going on out there because the UIC does not tell the puclic as in the other sports. He will discuss with the coach but only if the coach questions it.

I'm not talking about every single play so the game would be dragged out even longer, but only on those plays which warrent it - like a ball thrown out of play and awarding bases. The ball is already dead so whats wrong with giving the ruling - it does not take that long.

If I had to guess, I would probably say that the average Fan knows more about the rules of Football, Basketball and Hockey than Baseball. I'm sure there are a number of reasons but one of those reasons is because the officials in the other sports educate the fan whereas the Baseball Umpire does not.

I know baseball is a different game and I'm not talking about every single ruling, but those in which you hear the Coaches / Players and Fans say "What is happening" such as when a shattered bat strikes the ball in the field a play - that's not an everyday event and therefore, after end of playing action - it would be nice for the UIC to explain what the ruling is.

Pete Booth

[DJWickham]

I'd love to know what happens on the controversial call, but we won't hear it on TV. Even if the mike was live, the censors would beep out every other word.

My father always brought a radio to the Padres games because it was the only way to find out what happened on these plays. The broadcasters alwasy seem able to find out what happened from the dugout, and would report a "cleansed" version of what was said.

[David Emerling]

Originally posted by SamNVa
The biggest problem I see with this approach is that it would make games that are already too long, unbearably longer. I realize that baseball is a pastoral game that's supposed to be played at a leisurely pace, but there is only so much time a person is willing to invest into any one thing these days and that amount is decreasing, not increasing.

Actually, I don't think it would significantly slow the game down. Especially not at the PRO level.

Unlike youth league games where unusual things are happening all the time, seldom do very unusual things happen in professional games. Most games are rather vanilla - I'd have to say.

Yes, on occassion, something unusual will occur. But that would be an excellent time for the umpire to do just as Pete is suggesting - explain to the fans.

I'm assuming that the umpire would be allowed to use his own discretion as to whether a particular ruling rises to the level of needing an explanation.

How often do we see running lane interference at the pro level? Not often. And when it occurs, I also think it would be beneficial to give a very short explanation of the public address system (ala football)

How often do we see obstruction violations at the pro level?

Unlike football, where you can have penalty after penalty after penalty, where it seems the official is having a running dialogue with the fans ... I don't envision anything close to that occurring in baseball if they were to employ this same technique of communicating infractions. They just don't occur with the same frequency as in football.

I'm assuming, of course, that if adopted, the umpires would not be explaining the obvious. For instance, I would not expect to hear.

"The batter is declared out as a result of the third strike being called and the ball being securely held by the catcher."

But I might expect to hear:

"The ball is dead. The runner at first is OUT for being struck with a batted ball. The batter is awarded first. No runners may advance unless forced. Therefore, the runner on third must return to his base."

It may be the only thing this umpire may say to the crowd all game.

I would sure rather the umpires explain the ruling than have to listen to Joe Morgan or Tim McCarver muddle through it for the next 15 minutes.

I think it's an innovative idea!

[GarthB]

Somewhere in this thread it was stated: "But in addition, baseball is a different beast. Why conform to what others are doing. Basketball is not 'Miked'."

While vacation in Southern California over Christmas I read an article in the San Bernadino Sun about Phil Jackson, who was fined once earlier for refusing to be mic'd, bitching that the two technicals his Lakers received were due in part to the fact the the ref "was mic'd and not concentrating on his job like he would have if it weren't for the microphone."

I don't know if this becoming common or not, I normally don't watch basketball until the playoffs, but it seems at least in this game a basketball ref was "mic'd".