Baseball Officiating - Time to Change

[PeteBooth]

Just got pelted with 16 inches of snow. Glad the season isn't starting at least here in the east as my back is killing me.

I realize this topic is a little radical but here goes. I am personally tired of hearing that baseball is unique; it stands alone and all those other accolades that one says about Baseball Officials.

The game itself has changed:
Free Agency
Smaller ballparks
Inter-League Play
The DH
Divisional Playoffs
Tightening of the ball (so it goes farther)
Lowering of the Mound
Constant changing of the Zone

I'm sure I missed a few. However, the only real significant changes in baseball officiating has been the use of the Chest protector as opposed to the old traditional balloon and the constant changing of uniform colors.

Our fellow officials in football and basketball have undergone more changes. So here's what I would like to see:

1. Once and for all it's time for the UIC to educate the Coahces / Players and Fans about what's going on out there.
How many people still do not know that the ball is live on a Foul Tip RE: THEY WERE NEVER EDUCATED . Our answer to this: "Hey read the book" IMO This is not the correct approach.

The average Fan knows more about Football and Baskeball than Baseball because they have been educated. The Football referee describes the infraction and also who committed it. The basketball referee does similiar. However, even myself in watching some of the games on TV wonder outloud - WHAT THE HELL IS GOING ON OUT THERE In a way it's frustrating.

2. OK I'm ready to take the heat on this one. Baseball should use Instant Replay . An umpire at his / her discretion should be able to use Instant Replay to determine if a ball is in fact a Home-Run or a Ground Rule Double.

3. Finally, concerning our latest thread - Changing Calls. AT THE UMPIRES DISCRETION ONLY They should be allowed to convene as in Football and Basketball to get the call right. Forget about the other runners - where to put them etc. Any coach would rather keep an inning alive than have an unjust out called against them. The opposite is also true.

Now is all of this going to prevent Human Error - Of coarse Not but IMO will make the game better - The Game is Played as a Team and it should be umpired the same way.

Pete Booth

[Jim Porter]

Pete,

1. People learn more about baseball rules from TV than they ever would from the UIC of a local amateur game. I think it would be far more productive for us to contact the networks and demand that they hire rules experts to pass along information to the masses. Instead, the public is pelted with misinformation from former ball players who have never known the rules of the game that they made millions playing. These former-ball-players-turned-announcers do more damage to baseball rules ignorance than anything else.

2. 3-1/2 hour ball games now, and Pete wants to add instant replay? Need I comment?

3. Pete, pro umpires DO meet and discuss certain rulings and certain calls. The reason that they don't meet more often is in the design of the game. Papa C. gave us a list of all the calls that can be changed during a game. This was no arbitrary list. It is a well-thought out, time-proven list of all the incidences when the design of the game allows for a changed call. If it's not on the list, there is a good reason why it cannot be changed.

Football allows for crew meetings and group decisions. Baseball does not always allow for this. Baseball is unique in that umpires make calls during play which affect subsequent play. Football officials don't have to decide safe or out NOW, and players in football are not dependent on the official's call for subsequent action.

It is impossible to do what you propose. The design of baseball does not allow for it.

[Tim C]

Why, does baseball have to change?

Really, is it THAT bad?

I mean look at football. As I say to my friend HT all the time:

A sport where you see a violation, toss a flag, wait till all the play is done (I mean things going both ways, fumbles, laterals, fumbles again, oh the humanity), blow your whistle.

THEN you get together with your buddies. Talk through it and decide what to call. Oh yeah, I almost forgot -- you can also pick up your flag and put it back in your pocket and say, "Ooops, no flag."

AND the football guys still make errors.

MLB baseball is still the best officated sports in America (that is if you leave out the America's Cup)and you want change.

I like that umpires are still the LAST line of calling.

Read the book "Who Moved the Cheese" -- I am a proponent of change, however, I would hope it would be for the better.

Pete, you're offsides on this one. Errr, "after further review" you're on the wrong station on this one.

:-}

Tee

[Warren Willson]

Originally posted by PeteBooth
I realize this topic is a little radical but here goes. I am personally tired of hearing that baseball is unique; it stands alone and all those other accolades that one says about Baseball Officials.

--- [snip] ---

1. Once and for all it's time for the UIC to educate the Coahces / Players and Fans about what's going on out there.
How many people still do not know that the ball is live on a Foul Tip RE: THEY WERE NEVER EDUCATED . Our answer to this: "Hey read the book" IMO This is not the correct approach.

2. OK I'm ready to take the heat on this one. Baseball should use Instant Replay . An umpire at his / her discretion should be able to use Instant Replay to determine if a ball is in fact a Home-Run or a Ground Rule Double.

3. Finally, concerning our latest thread - Changing Calls. AT THE UMPIRES DISCRETION ONLY They should be allowed to convene as in Football and Basketball to get the call right. Forget about the other runners - where to put them etc. Any coach would rather keep an inning alive than have an unjust out called against them. The opposite is also true.

Now is all of this going to prevent Human Error - Of coarse Not but IMO will make the game better - The Game is Played as a Team and it should be umpired the same way.

Pete Booth

Pete,

I have made my feelings known in another thread about change for change's sake. I also concur with what Jim Porter and T. Alan Christensen have posted. Let me just add the following comments:

1. Umpires have enough to do without adding the requirement to educate coaches and players on the rules. Most players and coaches would probably either be embarrassed by that effort or resent it or both, certainly at the upper levels. It simply isn't our job and shouldn't be our job, any more than it is their job to help us understand why they put on this play instead of that.

2. Part of the game, and among its underlying principles, are a requirement to have respect for authority and reward for self discipline. Baseball tries to instill those principles in its participants in many subtle ways. Instant replay destroys the respect for authority by second-guessing the officials, and encourages the abandonment of self-discipline to force officials to go to replay. Quite apart from Jim Porter's valid point that the game isn't structured to allow it, I say that the game is deliberately reliant on individuality of its officials, and the possibility of human error, to get some of its most important messages across. Life isn't absolutely fair, and as a reflection of Life baseball is deliberately designed to mirror that.

3. Convening to discuss close calls would destroy the fluid nature of baseball's plays. Football fans might be prepared to sit for 2 hours 30 minutes to arrive at the outcome of a game intended to take half that long. Baseball fans already expect games to take much longer than that, and you want to add the extra time that conferences would take? That is NOT a proposition calculated to boost flagging attendances and keep the game attractive to its fans.

I'm sorry, Pete, but I agree with Tee on this. I'd go so far as to say, with the best humorous intent, that you may even be on the wrong PLANET with this one! (grin)

Cheers,

[Bfair]

Jim Porter (quoted):
People learn more about baseball rules from TV than they ever would from the UIC of a local amateur game.....
.....Pete, pro umpires DO meet and discuss certain rulings and certain calls. The reason that they don't meet more often is in the design of the game. Papa C. gave us a list of all the calls that can be changed during a game. This was no arbitrary list. It is a well-thought out, time-proven list of all the incidences when the design of the game allows for a changed call. If it's not on the list, there is a good reason why it cannot be changed.

Tim C. (quoted):
MLB baseball is still the best officated sports in America (that is if you leave out the America's Cup)and you want change.

Warren Willson :
Part of the game, and among its underlying principles, are a requirement to have respect for authority and reward for self discipline. Baseball tries to instill those principles in its participants in many subtle ways.

Let's take these 3 statements and combine them. I agree that for the average person the game is learned on TV. Rule changes, however, need to be PUT INTO THE BOOK and not discussed at meetings and passed along to CC or someone else. This system is ludicrous !!

I disagree with Tim C. in that I feel the level of officiating displayed on TV in baseball is possibly the second worst of any sport (next to hockey). Warren, we certainly are teaching our youth (especially with what they see and idolize on TV).

Now, what do we see on TV ??
Highly skilled players playing primarily by the book in most instances.

What do we see from the officials ??
Highly skilled officials making many accurate calls of both routine and non routine plays. However, a large percentage of the non routine incidents, which are relatively rare in occurrence, are overlooked by these same officials. We excuse them as calls "not made at the MLB level due to the other pressures put upon them" by the league or paying fans. Warren speaks of respect and self-discipline taught by the game. That is certainly what we saw taught by the stern officiating in the WS when a pitcher through a jagged bat remnant at a runner (while he was running) and was not ejected. NOT

What do we see from the rule makers and interpreters ??
Very little and possibly none that is published as official interpretations or changes to the rules. Why ???? Would it be that frequent a need ?? Even the census is every ten years. Where is our official guidance ?? Kicking thoughts around in a forum ?? Is there not enough baseball in the country (world) to warrant it ?? We even have to decide what applies at what level. It is illegal to fake a tag on runner in amateur ball, yet it is a heralded play when seen on TV at the Pro level. Of course, we are teaching our kids and parents the rules by what they see called on TV. Now, the fielder is not obstructing the runner, he just made the mistake of putting the fake tag down because he thought the ball was actually coming. He certainly wasn't attempting to impede the progress of the runner. Great interpretation at the MLB level. Certainly in accordance with the rules and their intent. NOT.
(BTW, Abner Doubleday rolls over in his grave each time that one is not called---thanking the interpreters).

Gimme a break. The system stinks. We watch and emulate the Pros when we want (and that is where most learn), and then dismiss their actions, or lack thereof, because they are Pros. We take what we want when we want, and we dismiss what we want when we want.

Pete------you are on the money. Something needs to be done to address the obvious loopholes if only to make today's rules catch up to today's interpretations. We have been living in Pleasantville. At least the other sports have attempted to address apparent weaknesses and made attempts at improvement. Current OBR baseball is archaic.

Just my opinion,

[Tim C]

Bfair, when I first read this post I wondered “What’s he Smokin’”

Then I read the whole thing and it BEGS for an answer:

The Official Rules of Baseball have flourished for over 100 years. The book has attempted over the years to keep from making what could be considered “trendy” changes.

The OBR has traditionally been written for the masses not a bunch of internet umpires that attempt to tear each rule down to comma’s and dashes. The book is an attempt to write a simple set of nine rules (10 if you count the all important Scoring Section) that can be used by all types of play.

The WONDERFUL part of OBR is exactly what you decry. It is a simple set of rules that can be discussed and interpretations made that make it a living book.

"What do we see on TV?" We see players and OFFICIALS calling a professional game exactly as the “system” wants. bFair, the “way” the TV game is called is what professional sports want (i.e. in the NBA the system wants players to decide a game at the end not the officials – so they don’t call bumps on the inside and NEVER call lane violations. In the NFL much more contact is allowed between receiver and DB when late in the game and, as we all know, you could call holding on every play).

You see officials making “many accurate” calls – wow, what a statement. What you really see, if you’ll set your ego aside, is THOUSANDS of calls made PERFECTLY. So b, I don’t know where your manufactured quote (“not made at the major league level due to other pressures put upon them”) comes from but it is inaccurate. Your example of the Clemens bat incident is your opinion, not the opinion of the six guys working the game. By taking one example, a poor one at that, and trying to make your point is much like saying “everyone does it!”

You ask “what do we see from rule makers and interpreters?”

We see a system where thousands of games are played under a simple rulebook. We see that the Major League Baseball, which has the financial resources, produce for their users a detailed manual that covers “things not clearly listed in the OBR.” That book has been researched and published by a specific user for games played under THEIR view of what rules are. The book certainly is not appropriate for use by ALL ages that happen to play under that general set of rules, therefore that book should not be for public use.

Since Abner Doubleday invented only the BASE for a game I have serious doubt if there would be a problem with the ‘modern’ view of the game. The game, the players and fans have all evolved over the decades of play. And it is WONDERFUL that the book has stayed as current as it has.

Bfair, even in Pleasantville there was an understanding that change simply to change may not be best for all. We need to review rules, processes and administration for the LEVEL of play which we umpire. Not endorse wholesale change to fit the attitude of the “Now” generation.

If you want "new" watch the XFL. For me baseball is baseball BECAUSE OF the rules NOT in spite of the rules.

[Edited by Tim C on Feb 8th, 2001 at 01:42 PM]