Play that haunts me still

[gordon30307]

This happened two or three years ago and it still bothers me. I have had people tell me different things on how to handle it and I would like more feedback.

Working with a partner in the field who never (I'm neither mad nor upset with him to this day.)should have been assigned to do a 16 year old full time traveler wood bat tournament. Did a pregame with him going over two person mechanics and realized this could be trouble. I told him between innings I would help him with his mechanics etc. Which we did.

I got the dish. Runner on third less than two outs. Batter bunts the ball in the air before the mound more towards the plate than first. 1st baseman coming toward me clearly and without doubt (opposing coaches both agree) catches the ball on the short hop. First baseman about to throw home hears the field ump yell out and instead throws to third for an apparent double play. Needless to say the offensive coach is going balistic. My solution was to nullify the double play award the batter first and allow the run to score. My rationale to fix this was I knew the first baseman was aware that he short hopped it and should have thrown home (first basemans body language was a major factor in my soultion) to get the runner from third just in case. Naturally the defensive coach goes ballistic. and wants an out at home. While sympathetic I told him I couldn't assume a good throw, a good tag at the plate or a successful rundown if that occurred. In retrospect I think what I should have done was put the runner back on third the batter on first. I just couldn't let an unjustified double play occur. However some say I should have let the field guy take the heat and let the play stand.

[bluezebra]

You overruled your partner's call. That's a NO-NO!

Let the play stand, and wait for a coach to make an appeal to your partner. When he comes to you, away from all ears, tell him what you saw.

Put BR on 1B, R3 remains on 3B.

PLAY BALL!

[LDUB]

Originally posted by bluezebra
You overruled your partner's call. That's a NO-NO!

Hold on, his partneer stole his call, and that is a super no-no. This guy is in C and he is going to make calls on catch to catch half way up the first base line? I am going to get together wiht him weather a coach says anything or not. I am going to tell this guy that it was my call, and that it was an obvious no catch. I don't care if he says that he knows that the ball was caught, I am going to rectify the situation (put R3 back on third.)

[PeteBooth]

Originally posted by bluezebra

You overruled your partner's call. That's a NO-NO!

Let the play stand, and wait for a coach to make an appeal to your partner. When he comes to you, away from all ears, tell him what you saw.

Put BR on 1B, R3 remains on 3B.

PLAY BALL!

Here's the play per the thread.

Batter bunts the ball in the air before the mound more towards the plate than first. 1st baseman coming toward me clearly and without doubt (opposing coaches both agree) catches the ball on the short hop.

The aforementioned is NOT the BU's call to begin with, so your statement "You overruled your partner's call. That's a NO-NO"! is not correct.

IMO, what should have happened is the moment the PU saw the ball short hopped is when he should have said EMPHATICALLY NO CATCH! NO CATCH! - that way regardless of what the BU did would have been moot.

The BU is behind the play (F3 coming in) and the PU is right in front of the play so it's the PU'S call. The OBR rule that comes into play is

OBR 9.04
(c) If different decisions should be made on one play by different umpires, the umpire in chief shall call all the umpires into consultation, with no manager or player present. After consultation, the umpire in chief (unless another umpire may have been designated by the league president) shall determine which decision shall prevail, based on which umpire was in best position and which decision was most likely correct. Play shall proceed as if only the final decision had been made.

Since we have a 2 person system the UIC would be the PU and since it was his call to begin with he DOES have jurisdiction to overturn the call.

Now what to with the runners. R3 back to third B1 to first, now here come the EJ's.

In a FED game the rule is 10-2-L and in a FED game the ump could call B1 out and put R3 back at third so that both teams are not disadvantaged because it's a good bet that one of the runners would have been out if not for the changed call.

Bottom LINE, it was the PU's mechanics that caused this fiasco. As mentioned if he said in an Emphatic Voice NO CATCH / NO CATCH then the BU's call is irrelevant.

Pete Booth




[Edited by PeteBooth on Aug 6th, 2004 at 02:44 PM]

[gordon30307]

The only problem with UC saying no catch no catch is that BU is calling catch. You still have a confusing situation. Obviously it's UC call no question about that.

[cbfoulds]

Originally posted by gordon30307
The only problem with UC saying no catch no catch is that BU is calling catch. You still have a confusing situation. Obviously it's UC call no question about that.

Actually, I think that (part) of Pete's point about UP calling NO CATCH, despite FU's (an appropriate double entendre acronym, here) OUT call is to set up the "two calls" situation so that 9.04 can be invoked to "fix" the situation, and avoid [or at least deter/ deflect] a protest. It's that, or make FU eat the call.

[gordon30307]

So you're saying it would be better if the plate umpire made the safe call. Even though we have two different calls. That way the mistake could be rectified. With the justification that it was plates call to make. The question is now where do you place the runners? You could make the arguement that the runner on third would have been out at home. Or you could assume the runner on third would have scored and the batter runner is out.

[cbfoulds]

Originally posted by gordon30307
So you're saying it would be better if the plate umpire made the safe call. Even though we have two different calls. That way the mistake could be rectified. With the justification that it was plates call to make. The question is now where do you place the runners? You could make the arguement that the runner on third would have been out at home. Or you could assume the runner on third would have scored and the batter runner is out.

No, I'm not really advocating for either approach. I can see sorrow coming my way from the 9.04 path, as HHH suggests [H3 also points out, correctly, that 9.04 is an unavailable woulda/coulda/shoulda in the original post: there was no conflicting double-call]; particularly since I am disinclined to "assume" anything.

If I had to deal with a two-calls situation like this, I am probably only making an award to BR (1st) if he wasn't actually put out during the play. If someone else scores or gets put out, I am probably leaving that alone. Everybody else stays where they stand.

Is this a quality outcome? Nope: thus the "let the idiot eat it" option. Of course, my hapless partner can come to me for "help" and maybe change his call; then we are back to where to place the runners. I'm probably coming down the same way [BR on 1st; everybody else is how they actually ended up]. Is this a good result? Probably not.

Of the two, I think the 9.04 route leaves the least opening for a sucessful protest. Probably the only path that cannot [at least by the book] be protested is if FU makes the only call and refuses to correct it. Then it's JUDGMENT. Of course, if I am the senior guy & UIC and let that kind of obviously wrong call [even a judgment call] by the wrong guy go uncorrected, I probably take a hit on my reputation and with my assignor.

If I'm actually on the field, I'm probably going to have 9.04 to work with, since I always (automatically) call and signal "NO CATCH" when there is a drop or bounce like this. Being the devious lawyer-b@$tard that I am, I MIGHT intentionally set up a 9.04 "conflict" to be able to correct an obvious horrible brain fart by my partner: at least I have a rule to support my decision and runner placement becomes a matter of judgment. Mostly, I am going to be wishing that there was a rock on the field I could crawl under or hit my partner on the head with, 'cause for sure the rest of the game has just gone south.

-- Carter

[Edited by cbfoulds on Aug 6th, 2004 at 05:07 PM]

[gordon30307]

Thanks for the insight. Have a good weekend.

[bbump82]

Gordon I really hope that you got a kick out of hearing the THUMP! THUMP! of the bus wheels, because you really threw your partner under one.

I saw the post earlier, but was unable to reply. I disagree with Pete on PU making the NO-Catch, IMO it would not have mattered if the PU made a safe call. THe Def Coach will come out and argue that his player made teh play based on teh FU's call. You have got to go to your partner, away from everyone and tell him what you had. He needs to make the call based on the additional info, even if it wasn't his call to make (since he made the 1st one, he gets the second). BR & R3 ended up where they should have been, you and your partner need to wipe the egg off of your faces, and the FU needs to get started on the plate full of crow!

The crew is going to get flak on this one, the both of you are going to go to the mad manager, Fu needs to tell him the he blew it and he is going to work his butt off to make sure all of the rest of the calls are right, with you there for support.

"work his butt off to get the rest right", sounds like something someone else wrote about the thread I started (problems at the plate...).

See Tee, LL guys aren't the only ones who get to work with knuckleheads.

[gordon30307]

You're missing the whole point. This is the PU call all of the way. No way FU can make that call from his position because the play is coming to the PU he has a good look at this play. All the FU has is a look at the play with a fielder in the way. This is a play that is obviously blown. How do you fix it?

The easy thing is to let FU take the heat. The hard thing is to come up with a solution within the rules.

[bluezebra]

To those of you who disagreed with me, re-read the original post. The BU made the call. The PU did not. After the play, the PU came out and overruled the BU. I don't care what the proper mechanic is/was, the BU made the call, and the PU said/signalled nothing until AFTER the fact. There were no simultaneous calls.

Therefore, there is no cause for a protest, ONLY an appeal to the BU to check with the PU.

[LDUB]

Originally posted by bluezebra
To those of you who disagreed with me, re-read the original post. The BU made the call. The PU did not. After the play, the PU came out and overruled the BU. I don't care what the proper mechanic is/was, the BU made the call, and the PU said/signalled nothing until AFTER the fact. There were no simultaneous calls.

Therefore, there is no cause for a protest, ONLY an appeal to the BU to check with the PU.

In my mind, I see this play as an obvious no catch. On obvious no catches, do you signal/say safe? I would assume that you do nothing. If this is the case, there would be no reason for the PU to make any call on the catch.

You are really asking a lot of the PU to call safe quick enoght to make a difference in the play, after he hears the BU call out. Think about it, after F3 grabs the ball, BU says out. PU, R3, and F3 all hear him say out at the same time. R3 starts to head back toward third, F3 starts to throw to third, and the PU yells no catch. Now the ball is on its way to third, and R3 dosen't know which way to run.

Once the FU calls out, you are going to be stuck in a weird situation no matter what the PU does.

[Edited by LDUB on Aug 7th, 2004 at 03:16 AM]

[bob jenkins]

Originally posted by gordon30307
You're missing the whole point. This is the PU call all of the way.

If F3 was moving straight in (not toward the foul line), some mechanics give the play to BU. BU (likely) won't be strightlined by this play, PU might be.

[bbump82]

Originally posted by gordon30307
You're missing the whole point. This is the PU call all of the way. No way FU can make that call from his position because the play is coming to the PU he has a good look at this play. All the FU has is a look at the play with a fielder in the way. This is a play that is obviously blown. How do you fix it?

The easy thing is to let FU take the heat. The hard thing is to come up with a solution within the rules.

You are absolutely right, this is PU's call, and there is no need to fix it unless someone gets the FU to ask you for help. If he does, tell him what you saw and let him make up his mind to let it stand or overturn his call. That is why I said that if he made the 1st call then he gets to make the 2nd, either let it stand or overturn it.

If he lets it stand, you just play on. If he overturns it, you still play on because in your original post

Originally posted by gordon30307
My solution was to nullify the double play award the batter first and allow the run to score.

and I believe that this is right. And the FU will take the heat for it!