What would be the best position with a R3? B or C?
a. less than two outs
b. two outs.

On the 90' diamond, we use C if less tha two outs, B if two outs.

With less than two outs, there is still a possibility of a play at third (pickoffs, throwing behind the runner, etc). With two outs, the chances of the infield going to 1B with the play are ALMOST 100%.

If there is a reasonable chance for a play at 3B, you are better off in C (usually). With two outs, the almost 100% chance of the first play going to 1B means you are better off in B.

OK,
 

Please show me in the Federation Manual, the NCAA manual or the NAPL manual where it says "go to 'B' with two outs".

In fact the CCA manual says clearly, "outs do not matter".

Iffin' you want to do it by the book stay in "C" -- if your local area suggests you move to "B", don't buck the trend.

BTW, there is no logical reason to move to "B" IF you are a reasonably good, experienced umpire.

Oh yeah, I go to "B" with two out.

Tee

Re: OK,
 

Good one, Tee! :)
mick

Stay in B
 

We simply stay in B. No need to go to C.

Have a great angle of the play from B so there's no flip/flops depending on outs etc.,

Gosh I've been watching too much politics ugh!

Thanks
David

A different philosophy
 

There are reasons to adjust; depending on the quality of players (does the catcher have a snap throw?), score of the game (is it a blowout?), right handed or left handed pitcher, is third creeping in and your level of conditioning are just a few.

You should be in a good starting position and anticipate what could be a problem. The original post said there was a runner on 3rd, but there could also be a runner on 2nd or 1st, and you need to adjust.

The NCAA and CCA manuals have changed a great deal over the last few years. I've never worked a D-1 game without two partners, and the D-1 guys drive the engine of change. It is not surprising that the rules guys haven’t come around to the mechanic originally mentioned. Don’t be surprised if you see it taught at a clinic in the near future, though.

Proponents of it insist that most 3rd outs from the infield are made at first. Unless the runners are moving and the ball is hit right at 2nd or 3rd, the infielder characteristically gets the batter/runner at 1st. I used this mechanic during the last year and had no trouble.

However, staying in “B” no matter what, is a mistake. If you have a runner on 2nd, you need to be ahead of him, otherwise your looking up his backside on a steal or sliding play. I see a lot of guys with runners on 2nd and 3rd drop back to “B” with two outs and don’t understand the advantage gained. In fact, if the catcher throws back to 3rd, your farther away for a tough call!

In games were the players shave, I could probably count on my right hand the number of times a pitcher has attempted a pickoff at third. Throwing behind the runner? Two to three steps toward the back of the mound from the "B", and I am in perfect position to see it.

On a ground ball to the infield, most of the time the runner at third will be looked back and then a play at first will happen, except if the runner attempts to go home. So if most of the time I need to be closer to first, why not start in the "B" position.

In lower level ball I may adjust to the conditions.

R2,R3 always in the "C" position. My first move for a play to third is 2-3 steps toward home plate, right turn and guess what I have a great view of.

I get in C for an R3 only situation, which is by the book in the books I have. However, if the 3b man is so far from 3B there is slim chance of a pickoff or throw back from the catcher, then I move to B, for the more likely play at 1B.

With the infield in. a. 3rd only b. 2rd and 3rd c. loaded.

Be ready to get out of the way.
 

With the infield in, and 2-man mechanics, there isn't a lot of room for anywhere besides right behind the pitcher - I would choose the "C" side but it is only one step from the "B" side so it kind of depends upon positioning of F6 and F4.

Where have you been, a man with brains not set in concrete.

a) C b) C c) C

Infield in) C [moving to the left for F6]

Infield out) C

Infield DP depth) C

When am I in B? R1 only.

It's the way I was taught. Old dog, new tricks?...nah.

I am sincerely curious and by no means intend any insult; but what kind, or level, of baseball refers to the base umpire as an FU?

Well, when I have been on the field, "FU" has been mentioned before.

The CK umpires.

Chippewa, Kansas?

Cliff Kleen?

Tim.

Garth: In Texas, we referred to the base umpire as "the field umpire" until the mid 70s. I imagine FU is still around in many parts of the country.

Contrast what the FED does: Here's a three-man crew: U1, U2, U3. U2 is at first!

Now that's worse than FU.

Even Blaine's FU.

Just curious. R3, outs immaterial. Why is C the right position?

What I meant to write was "but in what kind, or in what level of baseball is the base umpire still referred to as an FU?

Heck, I remember some referring to the BU as the "grass umpire", even on a dirt field. I guess that "GU" is being used somewhere.

I don't know, maybe it's just me, but the idea of a coach yelling "hey FU" at me from the dugout sends me into tossin mode!http://www.officialforum.com/images/icons/icon10.gif


Tim.
http://www.volnation.com/forum/style...ault/bump3.gif 56

Before you get on Garth for his sig, I suggest that you note his sig is a quote by Benjamin Franklin.

If your sensisibilites are so frail that you take exception to this one little thing, I would also suggest you read the following letter written by Benjamin Franklin:


"I have read your manuscript with some attention. By the argument it contains against a particular Providence, though you allow a general Providence, you strike at the foundations of all religion. For, without the belief of a Providence that takes cognisance of, guards, and guides, and may favor particular persons, there is no motive to worship a Deity, to fear his displeasure, or to pray for his protection. I will not enter into any discussion of your principles, though you seem to desire it. At present I shall only give you my opinion that, though your reasons are subtle, and may prevail with some readers, you will not succeed so as to change the general sentiments of mankind on that subject, and the consequence of printing this piece will be, a great deal of odium drawn upon yourself, mischief to you, and no benefit to others. He that spits against the wind spits in his own face.

"But were you to succeed, do you imagine any good would be done by it? You yourself may find it easy to live a virtuous life, without the assistance afforded by religion; you having a clear perception of the advantage of virtue, and the disadvantages of vice, and possessing a strength of resolution sufficient to enable you to resist common temptations. But think how great a portion of mankind consists of weak and ignorant men and women, and of inexperienced, inconsiderate youth of both sexes, who have need of the motives of religion to restrain them from vice, to support their virtue, and retain them in the practice of it till it becomes habitual, which is the great point for its security. And perhaps you are indebted to her originally, that is to your religious education, for the habits of virtue upon which you now justly value yourself. You might easily display your excellent talents of reasoning upon a less hazardous subject, and thereby obtain a rank with our most distinguished authors. For among us it is not necessary, as among the Hottentots, that a youth, to be raised into the company of men, should prove his manhood by beating his mother.

"I would advise you, therefore, not to attempt unchaining the tiger, but to burn this piece before it is seen by any other person, whereby you will save yourself a great deal of mortification by the enemies it may raise against you, and perhaps a great deal of regret and repentance. If men are so wicked with religion, what would they be if without it?"


Tim.
http://www.volnation.com/forum/style...ault/bump3.gif 56

[Edited by BigUmp56 on Dec 13th, 2005 at 05:54 PM]

newatumpiring,

Please don't give the rest of Christianity a bad name by being offended by a reference to beer. I know Kenneth Copeland and Jesse Duplantis personally, and I assure you, they are not offended by references to alcohol, and neither should you be. Jesus himself drank wine, for cryin' outloud. When the Holy Ghost descended on the day of Pentacost, the town folks thought the disciples were drunk, since they did, on occasion, enjoy a libation with the Master.

You may or may not be new to umpiring, but you are certainly new to this forum. You will find much more to be offended by than beer if you stick around.