Managing a game

[PeteBooth]

Jim P has posted some really good interps of the week. These interps get most of us to dive back in the books and keeps us sharp for the upcoming season, however,

Most of the plays described by Jim P thus far are rare in nature and therefore, would we actually enforce per the letter / authoritative opinion of the law

We have discussed rules in the past that basically we do not enforce such as the 20 second rule for F1 except if the kid is being a real wise a@@@@.

The uniform rule. I do not know about you, but there are many situations especially in doing modified and Freshman HS ball in which all kids believe it or not do not have proper uniforms, however, we continue the game anyway.

Also, it prettty much is a give now-a-days that F3 is allowed to keep 1 foot in foul ground when holding a runner at bay even though the strict wording of the rule says that F2 is the only player allowed to have 1 or both feet in foul ground.

In past threads, all the Boards had very Heated Discussions concerning the Neighborhood Play at second. In fact some of the threads (especially at McGriffths) got real nasty.

This year we had a thread on F1 while in the wind-up hearing his coach say hey Joey go from the set - Joey steps back (with wrong foot), but runners are not going anywhere - we ignor.

Also, at least in modified, some concessions are made with regard to Balks otherwise we have a balk-a-thon on our hands.

Ok Finally to the point of all this - This might sound simple and rediculous but How should we manage a game? , especially if we want to advance.

I know we are going to have to make some tough calls out there, but at what point do we enforce vs. let go?

Ok guys thanks

Pete Booth

[Jim Porter]

Originally posted by PeteBooth
Most of the plays described by Jim P thus far are rare in nature...

Although I agree that the exact plays may not happen on your field, the principles involved are wide-ranging. I try to choose an interpretation that gives one a different angle on a rule. I try to make everyone look at certain rules, rules they may be taking for granted, to hopefully make them look at it in a way they never have before.

My biggest hope for the Interp of the Week is that umpires will expand on the situations posted, create even more circumstances under which the interp could apply, and gain a knowledge and understanding of those rules that they never had before.

[Thane Yennie]

And we thank-you for that. Helps to get our brains focused for the upcoming season.

[Warren Willson]

Originally posted by PeteBooth
Ok Finally to the point of all this - This might sound simple and rediculous but How should we manage a game? , especially if we want to advance.

I know we are going to have to make some tough calls out there, but at what point do we enforce vs. let go?

Pete,

What you are talking about here is not just game management, as suggested by your title for this thread, but also encompasses umpire ethics. I don't know whether you read my 7-part series on that subject, in which I provided a number of practical benchmarks and logical reasons for enforcing specific rules one way at one level and another way or not at all at another. I also outlined the reasons why choosing to ignore some rules should be considered perfectly ethical practice in certain cases. If you haven't read the series I strongly commend it to you, if you need practical guidelines to help you to resolve issues such as these.

The thing that I believe many umpires may not be aware of is that their job entails much more than the "conduct the game in accordance with these rules"(sic). Umpires also have a number of other competing tasks as well, including maintaining discipline and order on the playing field (aka game management), representing the interests of baseball and representing their league. It is not in the least bit unusual for these often competing responsibilities to come into conflict with one another. At such times, the umpire needs to make an ethical choice between enforcing the rules and any alternative requirement. When it comes to following a league directive rather than enforcing a rule, that choice is all but made for us most of the time. You do things your league's way or you don't work there. Simple. OTOH, there are occasions where the issues and choices are not so clear cut.

The examples you mentioned of not enforcing the technical balk at certain levels, allowing the neighbourhood play, and the so-called phantom tag are just some of the many cases where the distinction between enforcing the rules, the need to maintain discipline and order, and representing the best interests of the game and the league all become intermingled and difficult to define. Sometimes you can resort to some catchy tenet to help you either justify or remember your choice, such as "If in doubt, call 'em out", "Ties go to the fielder" or "Never make an unexpected call on a routine play". The bottom line is, though, that you are making a choice between your competing responsibilities, and it is only to be hoped that the choice you finally make will be ethical, practical and maintain the balance of the game between offense and defense.

Cheers,

[Ump20]

Originally posted by PeteBooth

The uniform rule. I do not know about you, but there are many situations especially in doing modified and Freshman HS ball in which all kids believe it or not do not have proper uniforms, however, we continue the game anyway.

I think Warren's writings and the response to your post about game management and ethics is excellent. I don't think you need to "do the right thing" just to advance. I think it is part of a maturing process. Part of my philosophy is that no one comes to watch me umpire but yet. I disagree that I've done a good job if no one notices me. On uniforms I had several Varsity games with a poorer school [funding wise and ability wise] where hats didn't match. I mentioned it to the manager but let this go in this level with that team but I would not let it go in a game between two "A" schools.

Also, it pretty much is a give now-a-days that F3 is allowed to keep 1 foot in foul ground when holding a runner at bay even though the strict wording of the rule says that F2 is the only player allowed to have 1 or both feet in foul ground.

I don't think it is a given that we don't enforce it but we treat it somewhat like the coaching box rule. We don't enforce it until asked. Actually I'd be a little ticked if a coach wanted me to enforce the coach in the box rule. I would not with respect to the left-handed first baseman setting up in foul ground [see former Met Keith Hernandez who used to wipe out the lines by first base] as he gains a distinct advantage of glove being closer to the base.

In past threads, all the Boards had very Heated Discussions concerning the Neighborhood Play at second. In fact some of the threads (especially at McGriffths) got real nasty.

See Carl's reference to unusual calls on routine plays. I used to believe that the fielder needed to touch the bag at some point i.e. before he got the throw, at the same time, or after he released it. In fact I remembered a play where the second baseman never touched the bag and I ruled "safe". I was emphatic enough that the defensive coach agreed. I think most veteran officials would have seen what I saw as an out. Correctly called the neighborhood play adds harmony to the game.

This year we had a thread on F1 while in the wind-up hearing his coach say hey Joey go from the set - Joey steps back (with wrong foot), but runners are not going anywhere - we ignore.

I think Carl Childress addressed this at length here a month or two ago. I agree that it is a technical balk that does not need to be called. I didn't call just such a "balk" in the last inning of a Mickey Mantle tournament and after reading Carl's position felt better in hindsight.

Also, at least in modified, some concessions are made with regard to Balks otherwise we have a balk-a-thon on our hands.

Especially at lower levels I've told coaches I keep my balk gun in its holster or I don't think you came to see how many balks I could call. At higher levels sometimes a word between innings will help correct something that you see as borderline i.e. letting manager and pitcher know you are aware of what they are trying to achieve and that they are pushing the envelope so to speak.

Ok Finally to the point of all this - This might sound simple and ridiculous but How should we manage a game? , especially if we want to advance.
I know we are going to have to make some tough calls out there, but at what point do we enforce vs. let go?

I think Warren has made some specific points that begin to address this bigger picture type of inquiry. The one thing that I might add is sometimes mechanics, game control and appearance are more important than "rules knowledge" but if you want to excel whenever you can pick up and read the rulebook. Jim Simms/NYC