You've got to be kidding...you've cluttered the example
 

OHMYGOD!!!!

What are they teaching in Wisconsin? I have several Master level friends beyond the Cheddar Curtain, so I know what's up. The original post - the same one that I have referenced in everyone of my replies - talks about a ball fielded by the first baseman. We don't know where, but the let's assume that the PU actually understands that he handles the Fair/Foul call up to the base. His first commitment isn't to charge up to third because R1 might pass second and head there, it is to insure whether the ball is Fair. Remember, Gordon said he was in "B", so he does not have an angle. Next, we are taught to follow the ball. Who has it? The first baseman scoops it up and flips it to the pitcher who is running to the bag. I think it is safe to assume that these were not professional athletes, so they probably aren't handling this like Greg Maddux. Now, assuming the finest conditioned umpires in the world, how many steps can he get after he sees that the first baseman will not be throwing to third, but will go to first? Again, logic dictates, that it won't be more than a couple. So, one guy is looking at a nearly perpendicular angle to the play and the other is looking almost directly up it a**. Who has the better angle? Not what should Gordon have done to get a better angle, but who can see it better? We know who is responsible for making the call, but if he can't tell what happened with the attempts to tag the base, his partner can certainly correct his error. Some of you are arguing that this is not a rules violation but a judgement call. All six calls made by umpires (Fair/Foul/Safe/Out/Ball/Strike) are judgement calls that can be corrected by consensus of the crew. We have referenced Foul Balls being corrected at the MLB level for the last two months. Two catches were corrected, what more do you need to see? The real problem here is how people handle it. The play ends, I call "Time" and head over to my partner. I ask him if he is sure that he saw the pitcher touch first. If he is adamant, I will back him and we will talk about it after the game. Most of teh guys I work with know that I would NEVER ask them that question unless I absolutely saw something different. If we agree that the play was kicked, we will announce the decision and correct it. No plurality, no correction. I am not a god on the field and I've made my share of mistakes. Knowing that Fed allows corrections and OBR is SHOWING US WE CAN AND SHOULD, is all the proof we need. If you can't or won't that is up to you. I prefer to walk off the field knowing that I earned my money.

WOW!
 

Windy:

I like you.

You remind me of myself when I was young and stupid.

Tee

Re: You've got to be kidding...you've cluttered the example
 

Master level, huh? 8 varsity games, attendance at the rules meeting, and 90% on two open book FED exams. Impressive. One of the "master" crews at this year's sectionals all still use a balloon behind the plate. That said....

Listen, bub, I was responding to a guy who was talking about a possible play at 1st or 3rd on a ground ball to short. If you could take a deep breath and read with comprehension, you'd notice I even quoted that poster. I wasn't even addressing the first play in this response. I already addressed that earlier -- if the fielder stabs a second time at the base, he's telling the world he missed it. Why would you even think of getting help in this situation?

You are peeing in the wind and are doing it alone. Keep bringing up unrelated esoteric ML plays as "evidence." We don't really care.

And I'm not from Wisconsin, I just live there.

I'm sorry that you live there, did someone have to read this to you?

Oriole 35 mentioned a play that similarly involved being unable to determine if the guy had the bag or not. You came back that in 15 years you've only had to ask for help once. Then you chastised him by telling us that all you need to do is move for a better angle. That's the magic??? I'm jotting a note to MLB to tell the guys that blew their calls this year, that they just need to hustle more and get in a better position.

BTW, what level umpire are you? I used to live down south and when it was 95 degrees, I would see a whole bunch of veterans break out the outside protector. I laughed until I almost died of heat stroke one brutal day.

Lastly, there are only a handful of us here that actually attended pro school and were hired to Minor League rosters. Don't pretend that your real world experience compares. I work with some of the best guys in the country and learn every day. These guys aren't afraid to make tough calls, becaus ethey know that if it is kicked, we will help them out. This is not about pride, it is about doing the job that is allowed by the rulebook. No where does it say, "Don't correct a blown call." On the contrary, FED is explicit about bad calls and insists that we do whatever we can to correct a bad call that puts a team in jeopardy. MLB has already shown us the light. If you choose to let bad calls stay, good for you. That is just another reason I'm glad I live in Illinois.

No one cares. No one cares what Minor League umpires do. This question was not asked by a Minor League umpire. It was not asked about a pro game. Amateur officials cannot look to any of the pro levels for guidance on officiating. Not only do they come from a different philosophy, their mechanics and practices are vastly different. We do not care what level you work or how pro umpires handle situations. It is not at all relevant to this discussion. I have said before, I have no intention on attending a pro school because I do not want to achieve that level. If you have and others have attended those schools, more power to you. I hope you accomplish everything you set out to do in umpiring. I have worked with guys that have attended pro school and they cannot put there hat on the right end of their body. That does not make you a good umpire and does not translate into being a successful as an umpire. I know many umpires that go to these schools and cannot get basic plays right. If an umpire cannot get a basic call right at first base, why are they there? All umpires have responsibilities on the field and we cannot be there to bail out our partner to make their calls right. This pro issue you have is really getting old.

This is not an attack on you personally. I think you need to realize that everyone does not care what level someone works. And in baseball is definitely a sport where the amateurs do not care what the pros do. Remember, MLB umpires were so arrogant they actual thought they could resign and no one would take their place.

Peace

Yowza !!
 

I worry about even joining this raucus party... :D

Windy, many of the things you have said above are what I would consider blatantly wrong. I would not want to work with a partner that has the attitudes you have espoused above.

Your difference from the rest of the crowd appears relatively slight, if not subtle. It is obvious you understand mechanics. However, perhaps you don't understand the idea of teamwork and different responsibilities for each teammember - the umpiring crew is a team. I think the concensus is that you respect your partner's judgement and thereby, the team, above what you are calling "getting the call right."

Plainly stated, the consensus is: YOU DON'T IMPOSE ON YOUR PARTNER'S JUDGEMENT CALLS.

If the base ump missed the call but called him out anyway (he guessed the BR out), YOU CANNOT IMPOSE what you saw. PERIOD. And if you go out onto the field to discuss, YOU HAVE ALREADY IMPOSED and you have embarrassed your own teammate.

Your partner screwed it up to begin with by guessing and making the call without consulting you first. If he wants to eat crow and embarrass himself by asking for your assistance after he made the call, that's his own deal. He looks the part of the rookie and now you are doing your part to get the call right.

But if he has already called it one way and now you interupt the game to go out and give your two-bits, then you are introdcing the pluralty. And you are imposing where you should not.

Embarassing your partner lasts a long time for both yourself and for your partner (years - I've been there). A single close call is generally done and finished with the next pitch. I suggest that you place higher priority on protecting the relationship with your partner, than on what you consider getting the call right.

Re: Re: You've got to be kidding...you've cluttered the example
 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Rich Fronheiser
[B]</b></quote>Rich, et. al.: I've been following the Forum for years, and I've observed some pretty peculiar and/or exceptional posters.

But since May 2004 the linchpin of crapshooters (or shooters of crap, if you prefer) has been WCB.

I cannot imagine what took me so long to deduce the truth. WCB is nothing more than a successful Eric Redfern -- in reverse. Eric pretended to be a rookie with questions; WCB pretends to be a veteran with nothing but answers.

And he's been "successful" -- until this unveiling.

The original "Eric" was trapped because he inadvertently included his "real" email address. That won't ever happen to WCB. But the sheer numbers of his posts, along with their content and tone, trapped him; i.e., his insistence that <i>he, and he alone,</i> is the repository of truth, justice, and the Illinois way just finally rings false.

I imagine him laughing every time he sits down to the keyboard to create another of his outlandish yarns.

My advice: Leave him alone, and he'll go home, wagging his tail behind him.

BTW: Tee, you may have been that young, but you were <i>never</i> so stupid as the character our anonymous friend has created.

This was the only thing worthwhile in the whole post cause it made me laugh.

The rest? Where's Tee when you need him....

I'm finished responding, too.

--Rich

Re: You've got to be kidding...you've cluttered the example
 

Windy:

I have debated with myself and others for the past three or four months as to whether or not you are real. At times, as Peter has pointed out, you have made some observations that usually only umpires who have worked the upper levels would make. Despite some questionable opinions and your provocation of Jeff, your posts had the semblance of being written by a real veteran.

Until today, that is. You have at the very least shut off your brain when you engaged your fingers in response to Rich Fronheiser. Or, you just weren't up to the task of maintaining the visage you created.

After reading some posts thorougly and merely scanning others, I'm decisively split on who to agree with......

First, while I agree that the PU should be making his way toward 3B for a potential second play in the infield, he need not "bust a$$" since, indeed, it's only his responsibility when it's the second play. The time taken by the first play allows him to read his need of proximity at 3B. IMO, he can "cheat" his way toward 3B while watching the play, determining if it's a likely trouble play. Frequently no runner is ever breaking for 3B. I've seen too many rookie (and some vets) bust a$$ for 3B for a play that never occurs. In fact, I've seen it occur with a runner never leaving or attempting to leave 2B. A good official can read the play; a mechanics book reader will bust a$$ to 3B.

As an official that has read the play and merely "cheated" toward 3B to cover it <u>should a play occur</u>, the PU is still <u>in much better position</u> than his partenr to see a potential pulled foot or swipe tag that his partner may need help on. That is, if BU is in trouble due to angle, then the PU likely has a somewhat reversed angle and a better look.

On those issues I agree with Windy...........

I strongly disagree with Windy on the issue that a PU should <u>offer</u> what he saw to the BU when not asked. While I am a strong advocate of getting the call right, this is one not to be jumping into unless asked because of.......ACCEPTED PRACTICE AMONG OFFICIALS!!!! No differently than what you would do as BU if you saw the batter bunt the ball after stepping outside the box. That call belongs to PU.....keep quiet unless asked. Why???........accepted practice amongst umpires.

The BU knows that if he is in doubt he has the option of coming to you before (preferably) or after his call. Note that the MLBUM disallows reversal of force play calls <b><u>UNLESS</b></u> it involves a dropped ball or a pulled foot. Well, it seems to me this entire discussion has evolved around the issue of a potentially pulled foot. Obviously since the MLBUM acknowledges it as an exception, it certainly means it is not illegal to change that call after it has been made (which was a postion once advocated by Carl). Most of the time any ensuing action will not be affected by a later changed call at 1B, however, be aware of the possibility that the wrong call at 1B may have had an affect on the pursuing action. If it did, then correcting the call may be doing more harm than good to the game.

As for Rich who says the BU should always be in position to see this and should never get straight lined.......I say hogwash. IMO, that is mere arrogance of perfection when working in a 2 man crew. Because of the need to stay clear of all possible throwing lanes, and because of the velocity of some errant throws at upper level ball, it remains possible to get straight lined as a result of a poor throw. You can't predict when those errant throws will arise, and there are times when you cannot move quickly enough to eliminate the poor angle caused by the errant throw. Don't feeled demeaned if you admit to having been straight-lined in the past-----it happens to all of us, even to those not willing to admit it. It's a flaw within the 2 man system. Jon Bible, a highly respected official, even offered to us a passage about his need to seek help on such a call <u>after he made his original call</u>.

In summary, I believe in getting the call right, but it needs to be done with respect to both accepted practice and with consideration of whether that changed call would have impacted post action of the actual play (which is not usually the case). Don't over-hustle to 3B for plays that never occur. That action may result in abandoning your partner on difficult plays where he may need your input. You can still see the play at 1B, be ready to support your partner if needed, and still adequately cover a play at 3B.


Just my opinion,

Freix

Are you high?
 

Look at this post you wrote, Windy. It has no paragraph breaks and is almost unintelligible. This isn't up to your normal high standards of English composition. Were you drunk when you wrote it?

Let's see, you've recently had trouble with separating truth from fiction. As another umpire has posted, you've been illogical in your arguments. Now your English writing skills have gone into the toilet. Hmmmmmm. Who do we know with those three problems? You've taken on all the characteristics of your nemesis.

Re: For Windy
 

You, OTOH, are a wannabe like Jurrassic Referee or any of dozens of anonymous posters.

[/B][/QUOTE]A "wannabe" what,Peter? Just exactly WHAT do I aspire to be? What claims, resumes,etc., etc. have I ever posted? I yam what I yam- no more no less- and that's all I've ever claimed to be on these forums. If someone disagrees with something I post, big deal. Who cares?

I know what you are too- just another one of the petty "Observers" of the world. If somebody doesn't agree with you, hey, quote 'em your resume, tell 'em what a big dawg you are, call 'em some names and then tell 'em they sleep with farm animals. Your act is old, Peter. That's why you're not writing for this site anymore. Sorry, but I can't even get a l'il bit upset with a goober like you, no matter how hard you try.

I'm relatively new to this forum. And as you all know I started this thread. The main reason I joined is to get different view points on rules handling situations etc. I thank all of you for the constructive crtiques that were presented. Some I agreed with and some I didn't. But all had points worth considering.

Personal attacks name calling etc. are not how we learn from each other. I enjoy debating and defending "your position" etc. I would like everyone to treat each other with respect.

Have a good week-end everyone.

Re: Re: For Windy
 

The truth could never be stated any better.

Peace

And then...the gavel comes down
 

I will address your post, since it contains the least amount of vitriol and directs charges that can managed without the thread getting locked.


From Peter:
I usually can get a fairly accurate impression of an Internet umpire from his writings. However, there are a number of things that have started to bother me about your postings.

1. For someone who remains anonymous, you have made an lot of claims about where you work/what kind of ball that you do. I assign 300 umpires directly (within a 50 mile radius of where I live) and have access to an additional 150 or so umpires for high level ball from a 200 mile radius. If one of them were to get on the Internet and anonymously make the claims that you are making, I would be able to identify that person. You have simply given away too much information not to be identified. That fact that you have not been identified indicates to me that you are not telling the truth.

That must be the reason two members of one of my groups, contacted me about filing grievances! At least a few people here, know what I do and who I am.



For instance, you have told us that you are a member of UMPS. I do not know how big that organization is but it cannot have more than a dozen super big dog members unless it is unlike any umpire organization that I have seen. Add to that all of the specifics that you have given us over the last three months and you are down to a very short list at best. Even someone of limited intelligence who lives in the Chicago area should be able to identify you. (like you know who.)

Ibid

2. I do not know any senior umpire that would take your position that you have taken in this thread. PU's will not overrule a BU on the type of play that you describe at any level above coach pitch.

I don't recall using the word "overrule" in regards to this thread. You know better than to put words in my mouth. Read it again, carefully - I suggested that Gordon’s partner ask if he SAW the pitcher’s tag of the base. If he was adamant, you don’t have a consensus, leave it alone. Otherwise, you may have the opportunity to get it right. I fault any umpire that sees a blown call and doesn’t at least talk with his partner about it after the game. Too many members have suggested that they would keep mum, that’s sad.


3. Top level umpires are usually too busy to post at the rate that you post. We have games to work and jobs to do. You have made over 300 posts here in less than four months and that does not count the ones that have been deleted. You are posting as fast as Rut. Your posts are not one or two sentences like what Mick posts; they are lengthy epistles.

Ah, here we go with the suppositions. My business is not a desk job. I am on the road an awful lot and usually have time to surf. (These Starbucks are amazing - wireless technology and awesome lemon bars!) If my free time bothers some of you, I suggest a career change that affords you the same luxury. It doesn’t take long to formulate my thoughts and put them into text. Again, I can’t help being efficient.


There are several other things that are starting to bother me, but I will leave it at this. We use to have a poster here from down under. He was able to get away with all sorts of outlandish claims because there was no way that anyone could check up on him. You are from the center of our country. It is time for you to come clean so that we can verify your credentials.

Why? So that the same people that find my opinions to be caustic can f*ck with my life. You should know better than that.


Carl's credentials are easy to verify. You can do Google searches and verify the levels that I work. Likewise, the other senior posters here have people that can vouch for their authenticity. You, OTOH, are a wannabe like Jurrassic Referee or any of dozens of anonymous posters. Until you come clean, I will join Carl, Garth, Rich, Tee, etc. and assign you to the wannabe tribe.

Stop...the flattery is making me blush. If you need an identity to support the advice or opinions I offer, then that is your dilemma. Dear Abby and Ann Landers seemed to do alright without using their legal names. Come to think of it, much of Hollywood manages just fine with pseudonyms. My nom de net was borrowed from someone already using it on McGriff’s a few years ago. In fact there is an organization called Windy City Blues in our area (nudge/wink). Those are the only clues I will provide.


My operating assumption from now on is that you are a Chicago area umpire with an axe to grind against Rut. Or perhaps you are in a political war with local organizations and are using the Internet to settle scores we know nothing about. You are one or two rungs below the top of a local organization with access to senior umpires. Therefore you know what to say and what not to say. Maybe you are an assignor, so you get constant insight into the game without having to work the top levels.

That is an excellent deduction, Clouseau! I couldn’t possibly be someone who currently sits or did sit on a Board that runs one of the groups in Chicagoland. It is a near impossibility that I have current and past minor league experience. Who would even suggest that I work for any major college conference? I am aghast at the thought that I even know what an indicator is. As for Jeff Rutledge, I’ve actually met him at a meeting a year ago. He’s a nice kid and from what I gather, a pretty decent basketball and football official. I took to busting his balls when he made a couple of missteps. It became a self-perpetuating dramedy. Jeff and I share a few commonalities and I have tried to let the past slip away. He too, has learned to judge the thread on its merit. I may disagree with him, but I admire his tenacity.


I am willing to be proven wrong but until then, I will operate under the assumption that you are a JUCO umpire who may have worked a couple of D1 games and perhaps went to pro school. Along the way, you may have filled in with the minor leagues when someone got sick. That is the best that I think that you are. At worst, you are a FED umpire who hangs around with a lot of college umpires at the local watering hole.


Okay. Can I go cry on my giant pillow, now? This war of words has me tied in knots.


You are not an NCAA D1 conference umpire with extensive minor league experience. You are not the top big dog or even a top 10 big dog in your local group unless your group only has 20 umpires.

You forgot to number the last few graphs. But I was able to follow along anyway, HHH. ;)
I’m not sure that “top big dog” isn’t a tad redundant, but I may be wrong. I hope that my use of language has impressed Mr. Lyle this time. Papa C. won’t reply to me, but feels comfortable quoting my words. Lah me!

Finally, this really didn’t take that long to answer. Illinois baseball is damn near nil at this time of the year. But, that doesn’t mean I will disappear, much to some member’s chagrin. Take your best shots when you disagree, as I will certainly do the same. Until then, this umpire has no problem having my crew assist me when I have blown a crucial call. The MLB boys seem to have adjusted, as well. If you choose not to follow the course, don't ask why you can't get my schedule.

Gordon, you started a great dialogue. I've been known to toss some zings and barbs :) Name calling doesn't bother me, I'm an umpire.