There has been a good discussion on changing of calls and IMO the BIG reason for the change in attitude of ML umpires over the past 10 years is TV.

Fox now has the K Zone and when a pitch is close and either F1 or B1 complains they show the pitch over and over again.

For those who watched the Twins / Yanks game the other night, remember the close play at second involving AROD where AROD thought he was safe. Fox showed that play "10 ways to Sunday"

Therefore, in Summary I think the change in attitude is not as Peter suggested "the fall of the Umpires Union" but the increased TV exposure on Every play. Also for those traditionalists out there, Get Ready because it's just a matter of time before baseball adopts some form of instant Replay. You might think this is ludicrous but I thought the same about the DH rule in the American League.

Pete Booth

I agree. With Big Brother looking over your shoulder it puts a lot of pressure on the Umpires. There indeed have been more discussions among the men in blue than ever before over fair foul etc. I would hate it if instant replay ever came to baseball. The human element is part of the game and I hope it always remains this way

I agree that the major reason umpires now get together is because of tv and the increased coverage of sports highlights. It simply doesn't make sense to die with a call that can be changed when, if wrong, the call is going to be shown on sportscenter and the like for the next 24 hours. In addition, the mlb umpires have been under tighter control from the commissioner's office since 1999 when the american and national league control of umpires ended. One of the major concerns has been to "get the call right."
However, I disagree that instant replay will come to baseball anytime soon. The only way I could see that happening would be for the limited use of possibly a fair/foul homerun decision or spectator interference. And I think it would take a major foul up in a playoff or world series game for there ever to be enough support for instant replay.

I think that replay *will* come to baseball, but not in the short run. The most obvious application, as has been pointed out, will be for fair/foul, HR/GRD, and fan interference. These calls often have an immediate impact on the score.

I think that at some point replay will be introduced for safe/out. Traditionalists will insist that umpiring is "part of the game," but that didn't stop replay from getting into the NFL, where refereeing is "part of the game." Safe/out is will be a reviewable call at some point, probably with each coach having a limited number of "challenges" per 9 innings.

I doubt that ball/strike will ever be a reviewable call. This would slow down the game too much and occur in too many instances (passed ball, dropped third strike, steal attempt) where it would disrupt the flow of the game.

The main reason I believe that replay is inevitable is that the same logic applies as applied in football: the replay is already there, why not use it to get the call right? If the disruption can be minimized by judicious use and careful rule-writing, why not?

The best counter-argument is: the pro umps are so damn good, they almost always get it right already, even when you thought they booted it when you watched it live. Pro umps are much better (have a much lower "error percentage") than pro referees in football. So even a small disruption is not worth it, since there's just not that much to correct.

I hope the counter-argument wins, but I fear it won't. We love technology too much in our culture.

You can not compare the "error percentages" of football and baseball officials. In a baseball contest, the calls of the officials are fairly limited to safe/out, fair/foul ball/strike. Football officials could call a foul on every scrimmage play. Of course when you notice that 3 fouls should have been called on a certain play and only 1 was, that is a 67% error rate. Football is a totaly different game than baseball and they can not be compared in the way you have tried to.

"After further review..." ... the game is already TOO dang slow.

Also, would that mean that the slap on the wrist given a MLB umpire a couple of years ago for looking at a TV monitor to rule on a HR will be changed? ;)

U7

Of course you can compare them. You can compare anything if you're sufficiently creative. But I think I know what you mean: every play at a base requires a call from an umpire in baseball, and not every play requires (or gets) a call by a football official. I guess that's part of what I had in mind by putting "error percentage" in scare quotes.

But look: we see a lot of close plays on slow motion replay in both sports. If you compare just those plays, it seems to me that baseball umps get the call right more often than football officials. Is your perception different?

I hate to say it Pete, but you may have hit the nail on the head! At one time, we were respected for making a decision and sticking to it. It may not have been the decision that everyone liked but we were the "judge & jury" on the field. Today, everyone pisses and moans about every damn call that is made. Replays in NCAA & MLB games have everyone questioning what we do.

The thing that people forget is that they see the play 3 or 4 times from different angles and in slow-motion. We get to see the play from 1 angle, in real time and only once! We make the decision in a fraction of a second, run it over in our heads for another fraction of a second and then make the call.

The game was designed for us to make the call as we saw the play. It was never designed for "getting together" to make a decision. There are only a handful of things that we are supposed to "get together" for and very few of those things are for rendering calls. The game was never designed for instant replay either. And on the subject of instant replay, where will it end? Home runs, interference calls, obstruction, pitches, tags, catches? They all warrant "instant replay".

Very simply put, if "instant replay" has to come to baseball, let them put everything under the camera's watchful eye. The game will take hours to complete and the fans will stop going to the parks because of the duration of the game. Oh I know, let's also set time limits just like other sports! Then we can all put on striped uniforms and white knickers and huddle after every call. Also, let's use whistles! That will help the TV cameramen and wake up the fans.

Let's get realistic here, people. There is entirely too much "huddling" to get a call "right" and too much pissing and moaning. None of these ideas will help the game. Oh in the short term, everyone will think that it is good because we finally get the call "right". But in the long run, we will be taking away from the game the most important element - "the decision of the umpire is final!"


[Edited by ozzy6900 on Oct 12th, 2004 at 07:32 AM]

At one time, we were respected for making a decision and sticking to it.

The game was designed for us to make the call as we saw the play. It was never designed for "getting together" to make a decision. There are only a handful of things that we are supposed to "get together" for and very few of those things are for rendering calls. The game was never designed for instant replay either. And on the subject of instant replay, where will it end? Home runs, interference calls, obstruction, pitches, tags, catches? They all warrant "instant replay".

Let's get realistic here, people. There is entirely too much "huddling" to get a call "right" and too much pissing and moaning. None of these ideas will help the game. Oh in the short term, everyone will think that it is good because we finally get the call "right". But in the long run, we will be taking away from the game the most important element - "the decision of the umpire is final!"

[Edited by ozzy6900 on Oct 12th, 2004 at 07:32 AM] [/B][/QUOTE]

I will adress them point for point.

1) Who exactly respected our decision to stick with the call made. The player or coach that got robbed? ...or was it other umpires? This argument is simply not true. Being hard headed when you are wrong is a character flaw, not an ideal to which we aspire.

2) Which sport was designed for instant replay? Since most participatory games evolved a century ago or more, instant replay or television coverage was as far fetched a dream as could be imagined. Again, a weak point of contention, since all games evolve. This evolution involves mega stadiums (not envisioned when the games were created earlier), public gambling on everything from the coin flip to the final score, millionaire contestants that never learned the rules and television coverage. The scrutiny is there because so much is at risk.

3) Your rallying cry for abandoning the call "to get it right" is misguided, at best. Because so much import is given to the outcome of an at-bat, let alone the score, umpires are in the firing line on every call. Yes, multiple camera angles show the fan what happened. We don't have that luxury to stop and evaluate tape prior to making the call. But, we are better trained than the average fan and know the rules far better than the average player. We can and do see the nuances that help sell a call. We can rely on our partners for assisting us on calls already (swipe tag, pulled foot, check swing, foul ball in the box, contacting the ball out of the box, etc.) This has turned into a contest of tradition/ego and natural evolution.

The professional team owners hold players accountable for their mistakes. The league expects the same from the officials. The bottom line in all of this is to get the call right, at almost any cost. Are we ever going to see the banger at first over-ruled? I don't think so. But, we will be expected to seek help on the calls we've discussed, ad nauseum. We can do something about those kicked calls and should. Why do you umpire? I can't believe that you do it for the power trip alluded to earlier. I don't do this for the respect or admiration of the fans. I get a deep satisfaction in ensuring that the game is played correctly. I live for seeing the no-hitter, triple play or cycle. I can't recall walking off the field and having a fan come up to me and ask where I was working next. (Well, maybe they asked in hopes that it wouldn't be at their park again!)

Recognizing that we enable the game and aren't the focus is a tremendous step in the evolutionary process. Umpires used to wear suits and ties on the field, but were pummeled for making the wrong call. Now, we've got professional umpires making $300,000 a year, flying first class and working at camps and clinics. They've become more visible and because of the remuneration they receive, others are standing in line for the job. We love to knock the guy who is working the big game. We point out their errors and criticize the mechanics. It's become part of our nature. I've alwasy believed taht if you want teh glory, you need to accept the misery. In other words, if you take the check, earn the money! Looking bad, but getting the call right is part of the modern job description.

I will adress them point for point.

1) Who exactly respected our decision to stick with the call made. The player or coach that got robbed? ...or was it other umpires? This argument is simply not true. Being hard headed when you are wrong is a character flaw, not an ideal to which we aspire.

2) Which sport was designed for instant replay? Since most participatory games evolved a century ago or more, instant replay or television coverage was as far fetched a dream as could be imagined. Again, a weak point of contention, since all games evolve. This evolution involves mega stadiums (not envisioned when the games were created earlier), public gambling on everything from the coin flip to the final score, millionaire contestants that never learned the rules and television coverage. The scrutiny is there because so much is at risk.

3) Your rallying cry for abandoning the call "to get it right" is misguided, at best. Because so much import is given to the outcome of an at-bat, let alone the score, umpires are in the firing line on every call. Yes, multiple camera angles show the fan what happened. We don't have that luxury to stop and evaluate tape prior to making the call. But, we are better trained than the average fan and know the rules far better than the average player. We can and do see the nuances that help sell a call. We can rely on our partners for assisting us on calls already (swipe tag, pulled foot, check swing, foul ball in the box, contacting the ball out of the box, etc.) This has turned into a contest of tradition/ego and natural evolution.

The professional team owners hold players accountable for their mistakes. The league expects the same from the officials. The bottom line in all of this is to get the call right, at almost any cost. Are we ever going to see the banger at first over-ruled? I don't think so. But, we will be expected to seek help on the calls we've discussed, ad nauseum. We can do something about those kicked calls and should. Why do you umpire? I can't believe that you do it for the power trip alluded to earlier. I don't do this for the respect or admiration of the fans. I get a deep satisfaction in ensuring that the game is played correctly. I live for seeing the no-hitter, triple play or cycle. I can't recall walking off the field and having a fan come up to me and ask where I was working next. (Well, maybe they asked in hopes that it wouldn't be at their park again!)

Recognizing that we enable the game and aren't the focus is a tremendous step in the evolutionary process. Umpires used to wear suits and ties on the field, but were pummeled for making the wrong call. Now, we've got professional umpires making $300,000 a year, flying first class and working at camps and clinics. They've become more visible and because of the remuneration they receive, others are standing in line for the job. We love to knock the guy who is working the big game. We point out their errors and criticize the mechanics. It's become part of our nature. I've alwasy believed that if you want teh glory, you need to accept the misery. In other words, if you take the check, earn the money! Looking bad, but getting the call right is part of the modern job description. [/B][/QUOTE]
The game has been played for decades without the aid of huddling and instant replay. But I see that I am being "old fashioned" and hard headed. Yes, I am hard headed about umpiring. The players do their jobs and I have to do mine. I expect the best out of them and they expect the best out of me. Of course, I cannot please both sides - 50% of the people will disagree with me everytime! That's part of the game. I do not agree with or will condone huddling for ecvery damn call like many of you do. That's just not what the game is all about. You have to work at the game to get things right. Just like it has been done for decades! If the rest of you want to "huddle up" that's fine. I won't! I will not support instant replays unless there is a time limit put on games - and when you do that, I'm done with the sport.

There are certain plays that warrant help, checked swing, swipe tag or pulled foot at first, fair foul down the line. I even agree with checking with your partner to confirm you applied the correct rule. However, I've never have seen or heard of a "bad call" that effected the outcome of a game. I agree that bad calls (I'm assuming that the umpires are competent) seem to have cost one team or another a game. However there are plays that occur throughout the game that if made render the "bad call moot". To often bad calls are used as an excuse to rationalize a teams shortcomings. (If you are a Cub fan the Cubs were guilty of this and are a good example) This is just my opinion, but bad calls and good calls are part of the charm of the game. The vast majority of the time the "right team" wins the game. When that doesn't happen "that's just baseball". Call me old fashioned but, instant replay would ruin the game, at least for me.

I smile when discussions of instant replays in baseball are brought up. Ten years ago I umpired a TV game, Purdue vs. Indiana, and had first base. Shortstop fields one up the middle, wheels and throws to the right field side of first base. I banged the runner and the IU coach came out to discuss the call. The discussion was uneventful, but since the game was televised regionally by Fox Sports, I got a copy of the tape. Upon review, angle #1 had me dead wrong. Angle #2 was unclear, and angle #3 showed I was right without a doubt. How many camera angles will a reviewer have to look at and still be proven wrong from a different angle? Perhaps a home run fair/foul, but beyond that, whew! Face it - umpires are right an unbelievable amount of the time (in my case, anyway :) ). Replays would really slow down a game that pundits say is already too slow to be consistently entertaining (what do THEY know!).

I hope that this adds to the discussion and clarifies my thoughts. We are not talking about changing the way we umpire. We are talking about making the same calls as before. However, it is now understood that we have the freedom and responsibility to give or receive an assist.

I am on the fence about instant replay at the professional level. I like the way that the Big Ten is handling it in Football this season. They have limited the replay option to a very distinct list of plays. They have set a time limit and are governed by the thought that in order to over rule it, "If 100 people saw the replay, all 100 of them would say that it should be changed." Unless you have ONE OF THOSE GAMES, 1 or two challenged calls could be handled very quickly. I despise fans who say the game is too long, but think nothing of watching a two and a half hour Adam Sandler movie. (Talk about a real waste of time!)

Finally, don't play the tradition card unless your last name is Doubleday. A great many things have changed in the game. I suggest you read a history of baseball to see how some of the most basic tenets have evolved.

Arguing that we shouldn't change because it wrecks tradition is pitiful. Should we still be wearing outside protectors and black suits? Change is inevitable and you are right to be concerned. People that stand in the way of it usually get run over. Remember, there was a time that women couldn't vote, blacks had to sit in the back of the bus and computers took up whole rooms at NASA. I just can't understand what is so difficult with conferring with your partner about one of the few calls we've discussed. You made a bad call, the stadium is hooting and your partner is walking towards you to help you out. If pride is the only reason you won't allow him to assist you, then maybe that time to step aside is already here.

A replay would take less time than the arguments that now take place. It is not a matter of time, it is a matter of entertainment. The arguments take more time than a replay but are much more entertaining than an umpire staring at a replay box.

Peter

I do not think that the crowd reaction is a good gauge for whether a call is bad or not. I really hope you are not using this that as a determining factor for if a call should be changed or not.

Peace

Please don't pretend that your are oblivious to the reaction of the players and crowd after you make a call. You know when you've done something wrong. You know how the demeanor of a player changes when he knows you are wrong. We are not talking competitive juices here...we are talking about making a call and knowing that you kicked it or not being sure, but still having to sell it.

As a specific example, lest there be confusion, I offer this: High school home team down by three and the bags are loaded in the seventh inning. Late afternoon and the sun is making it impossible to look into right center, sure enough the batter rockets one and my partner rules homerun on a clear ground rule double. the place went nuts when he made his signal. the visiting bench started pointing and objecting - the center fielder and right fielder were running in and the head coach is charging toward me at the dish. We had twenty people on the field! The fans were screaming - many for and some against. It just so happened that when I swept mt foot to clear the bat from the box, I got a great view and saw it bounce over. All of the runners touched and the head coach (the SOB saw it, too) was asking for the remaining baseballs. I informed him that it was going to be a double and his kids needed to get back on thrid and second. My partner was still already heading for the foul line and out the home team side for teh parking lot. (He would have been pulverized if the parking lot was on the other side.) I yelled for him to get over here and signalled "Time" and pointed for the runners to return. Sheepishly, the Home team coach asked "Did you get a real ggod look at it?" I just glared at him. My partner asked what was going on and I asked him if he saw the ball clear the fence on teh fly. He said, "No, but the player didn't put his hands up right away. Let's get out of here." I asked him if he couldn't here anyone yelling and he said - I'm not making this up - "My hearing aid isn't working well today." Stevie Wonder could have seen the kids jumping up and down and shouting about it bouncing over, but this guy figured that no one could have had a better view than he. He was wrong. The next batter jabbed one down the line for the winning runs to score, so the outcome was the same. I didn't big league him or rob him of his dignity. I did my job - without responding to the pleas of the players, coaches or fans.

I've worked some pretty big games and had my share of controversial calls. One thing always remains the same, you can't ignore the fact that our bad calls elicit far more noise than the close ones. I'm wise enough to know that my partners will always help and rely on me to help them, no matter how nasty the crowd gets. We've just been around long enough to know that some fans do know the difference!

I can only speak for myself. I could give a damn. Maybe it is because in my other sports I could carry on a conversation with fans and not have to yell or get off the playing area. Fans react when they do not know the rules or they were not in position to make the call themselves. I really do not care what some guy behind the fence and is hundreds of feet away think. I also could give a damn about some kid that thinks a pitch that was right down the middle was clearly outside in his mind because of his stance in the box. Maybe you react to those things, I do not. I have had kids admit to lying when about what took place trying to get a call in their favor. If I am unsure, I can make that determination on my own.


I have worked some pretty big games too. I work two sports outside of baseball that can have literally thousands and a regular season contest. Not all games are like this, I know if I took that attitude in basketball I would never be able to work any varsity game period. Good Lord, the fans in basketball are not only on top of you, but you can smell what they had for lunch. Why would I care what some parent saw behind a screen, at a terrible angle and 100 feet away from what you just called? Fans only complement you when you make a call in their favor and boo when you go against them. Who cares what this jokers think.

Peace

With your attitude, I don't know who gives you the assignments. I bet Bill Lopina and/or Ken Fox (Assigners in the Chicago area) don't give you games (or work with you for that fact).

I can appreciate you wanting to get the call right. However, as per rules in a Fed Game you can't over rule your partner. That being said under the circumstances you should have shared your information with him. If he agreed let him change the call. It's not up to you to change it. If not you really have no choice but to let it stand no matter how bad it looks. Incidently Stevie Wonder couldn't see the fans jumping up and down. Stevie is blind. Just kidding I got your point.

This oughta get good
 

A new alpha male appears on the scene. I hear the sounds of a windbag shuffling his resume.

[/B][/QUOTE]"You've misinterpreted. In Sal's association, you need to be better than just capable, and at least somewhat humble, or you'll get no D1 games. He gets his share every year.

And this is in an association that not only has no shortage, but has guys who barely get a taste of JUCO because there's a labor surplus". [/B][/QUOTE]


Thanks Jim - Perhaps I came off a little harsh and offended some people. Thanks for clarifying my statement.

Let me add (again) to this mess.

I am saying that we asked to huddle too much. I am saying that we should be doing our job. We should be making our own decisions and calls for the most part. Yes, there are those instances - the checked swing, the tag on the 1st or 3rd base lines, the conference for killing the game due to rain, at times base awards for one reason or another and of course the protest conference. Thee are few other times where we should be huddling up.

For example, last weekend, I was the BU and there were 3 pickoff attempts to 3rd base. The last one was an inside throw from the catcher so F5 made an outside tag on the runner. A quick glance to my PU proved to me that he wasn't even looking at the play so I banged R3 out based on the information that I had. F5 made it all look correct (the triumphant raise of the glove) and I was sure there was a tag. Some oo's & ah's and that's it. As I walked back to the "C" position, I ran the play over for the 4th time and I realized that I made the wrong call. Should I have huddled wtih my partner? Should I have dropped to my knees begging forgiveness from the baseball gods? NO! I made the call and I felt I had all the information (otherwise I would have asked for help before making the call). The call was wrong and I had to live with it. It's part of the game - the human element. An inning later, the manager came to me quietly and told me that there really was no tag. I just said to him that I if I had a chance to rule on that play again,the call might be different. He simply said "Well blue, that is just part of the game" and that was that. No screaming no yelling. Why? Because for the entire game I had done my job. I had good delay, took in all the information, was in position and rendered decision after decision.

Yes, if there is a question of rules application of the instances listed above, my partner and I need to get together. What I am against is that today, we seem to be expected to huddle for everything changing calls let and right. I am saying, do everything possible to get all the information to make the call. You as an umpire are responsible for that. You are not supposed to rely on a huddle to fix everything. And as in my case, if you make the wrong call, well, that is going to happen. When it happpens 3 or 4 times in a game, you need to concider getting some better training.

Mario,
You make some great points and I believe in what you are saying. It seems like umpiring is making a 180 degree turn from "live and die" with your calls to now what seems like the football approach to discussing calls on the field.

The recently adopted "get it right" philosophy has some merit but you have to know HOW and WHEN to use it. For the most part, I think it's evolved as a tool to apease(sp?) the players and managers. Perhaps, it also brings a more working relationship between managers/players and umpires which for a while anyways, was going in almost opposite directions.

Bottom line - work hard on the field to build your angles and get in the best position possible to make your calls. Also, know your responsibilites as well as your partners responsibilites for each play and only get help as a last resort. By doing this, it should limit the possibilities for managers requesting assistance from other crew members.

Sal,
Go back and ask your assignor about my schedule. Bob Jenkins slipped a few days ago and tipped a couple of guys as to my identity. If you can't figure it out, then that says a great deal about your knowledge of the top guys in our area. It's kind of funny that the charade lasted this long, despite my efforts to throw some of you off with some disinformation.

Maybe now you'll find a reason to humble yourself and admit that you had no idea who you were talking to or about. I will be glad to stack my resumé up against you anytime. Even with a surplus of talent, my schedule is full. My assignors have long recognized my abilities and rewarded them accordingly. I bust my *** to make them look good and have never had a problem with any of them.

Bob Lyle is like the kid that throws a rock at a soldier with a gun. When he gets shot, no one asks why, they just wonder how come he was so dumb. Do a little homework and I think you'll find that not only have you been shot, but buried by this soldier. You asked for proof of just what I've done and what level of ball I work, it isn't that difficult to find out now.

Windy City Blue & Bob Lyle
I don't know who you guys are and you don't know me either. I'm not the name dropper and I'm not on this board to compare umpire resumes/schedules.

What I am here for is to learn some things about umpiring and hopefully share some experiences that may help a fellow brother out. I don't hide my identity nor do I try to figure out who other people are.

As I said before, feel free to contact me privately at [email protected] or you can even call me at 586-530-6795 and I'll be glad to talk experience with you. But to take other people's time with useless information is not very productive for this board.

We have a winner...

The hypocrite of the year award goes to Sal Giaco!

You claim that you come here for learning. Yet, the first thing you did was to belittle me and rip my perceived experience on how I handle a coach chirping from the dugout.
You couldn't carry my gear bag.

Why would I want to waste my time talking to someone who can't read. I'be been on this Board for quite some time and most members know that I bring a pretty experienced perspective to the table. Since you don't want to read about resumes or what level of ball we work, I can't assume that you really do want to learn. We handle things differently here and not only can get away with it, but would be run out of town for doing it any other way.

Watch TV sometime, when a coach is chirping constantly, what happens? The mask comes off and someone heads to teh showers. It seems apparent that you have to explain your calls, especially since the dugouts are probably less than fifteen feet away. Up here, the coach has to yell to be heard. Most of us don't like it when they yell.

You're questioning my reading??? How about your spelling.
The bitterness is really coming through - stop while you're ahead... or I guess behind.