Please read and let me know if my facts are correct.

[Dave Hensley]

I subscribe to Pete Booth's school of thought on this issue.

First, there are plays that are so close I cannot discern which occurred first. On those plays, what Carl Childress coined as the "coin-flip calls," I do indeed take into consideration the circumstances of the play. What caused the play to be so close? Was it a batter-runner's extraordinary hustle, combined with an uninspired effort by the defense? Then the runner is safe. Was it a miraculous stab of the ball deep in the hole and then a Jeter-like throw from shallow left field right to F3's glove? Well, hell, in that case, make the execution call.

Apologies to my friend Rich, but "just call the freakin' play" is simplistic and therefore of little use in training umpires how to develop and refine that elusive characteristic all umpires desperately need - good judgment. Umpiring is not rocket science, but it's not as simple as ball/strike fair/foul safe/out, either. Otherwise why would we need all these clinics and manuals and authorities and pro schools and internet boards?

Use Childress's "Benefit of the Doubt" guidelines to resolve those too-close-to-call plays, and you will develop a self-confidence in your calls that was previously lacking, and you will, over time, gain a reputation for being a consistent, reliable umpire who understands the game and calls it the way it's supposed to be called.

[Tim C]

I went back through my diary of this season.

I think I have discovered a trend in "my" wacker calls.

But let me digress for a second:

In a game this season between the 1st and 2nd place teams in a league I was BU.

Early in the game there was a diving stop by F6 in the hole, he got to his knees and threw a strike across the diamond to a stretching F3.

The play was, in my eyes, very close. The type play that no matter which way you call it the other half the stadium will belly ache.

I gave a very strong, well sold, "OUT!"

Did I award the defense? I guess so since later in the inning when I was standing in "C" F6 said: "hey thanks for rewarding my play . . . I told my left fielder that good umpires reward good defensive play!" I guess he thought the guy was safe at first.

So let's fast forward to the third inning:

The opposite F6 goes way behind second base, snags a grounder up the middle, does the full turn thingy and throws to first where F3 is doing the splits at the stretch and we have another wacker . . .

Of course the first base rat (err, coach) is signalling safe.

I give the BIG "OUT!" from 2SF.

The runner, yep F6 from the OTHER team, says: "Well I guess that evens it up . . . wasn't that a great play!"

So in this specific game I had five "wackers" (coin flips) and I called them ALL "OUT!"

Now back to me diary:

I re-read several entries and have come to this decision about MY (and only my) wackers:

I call an unusual amount of them "OUT!"

I can draw only one of two answers from this documentation:

1) I have always been taught that umpires get in more trouble calling balls and safes than strikes and outs -- ergo -- somewhere along the line I have fallen into calling close plays "OUT".

2) I really got all 37 documented wackers correct.

In short I do reward good defense and I do lean towards not giving the doubt to poor defensive play. Do I "think" about this -- not really -- but I guess what goes on inside my noggin might be different than I thought.

[PeteBooth]

Originally posted by Rich Fronheiser

Don't reward anyone. Just call the freaking play.

Rich I wish you would post the way you umpire.

You cannot tell me that if F6 makes a Jeter like play and the play is that close you are not going to "reward" the defense, conversely, if it's a routine play and B1 is busting it out of the box and F4/F6 takes their "sweet time" and turns a routine play into a "coin flip" play that you are not going to "reward" the offense.

Perhaps you do not use the term "reward" but you have to have some rationale behind your call and IMO it's not as simple as "just call the freaking play"

With all your experience, please try and help the younger umpires by giving them guidelines rather than simply post rhetoric.

Pete Booth

[orioles35]

Every safe call extends the game by five minutes.

Bangers at first are generally ALWAYS an out, unless proven otherwise. Half the fans/players are going to groan, anyway.

[mcrowder]

I don't have time to make artistic evaluations of the fielder's efforts, nor rate the amount of hustle brought forth by the batter (heck ... I probably don't see the batter-runner for most of his run to first). This is not ice skating or gymnastics.

If he's safe, he's safe, if he's out, he's out. Call what you see.

(PS - if you SEE the foot hit the bag at the same time that you HEAR the ball hit the glove, then since the speed of light is much faster than the speed of sound, the ball hit the glove before the foot hit the bag. Out.)

[David B]

Originally posted by Tim C
I went back through my diary of this season.

I think I have discovered a trend in "my" wacker calls.

But let me digress for a second:

In a game this season between the 1st and 2nd place teams in a league I was BU.

Early in the game there was a diving stop by F6 in the hole, he got to his knees and threw a strike across the diamond to a stretching F3.

The play was, in my eyes, very close. The type play that no matter which way you call it the other half the stadium will belly ache.

I gave a very strong, well sold, "OUT!"

Did I award the defense? I guess so since later in the inning when I was standing in "C" F6 said: "hey thanks for rewarding my play . . . I told my left fielder that good umpires reward good defensive play!" I guess he thought the guy was safe at first.

So let's fast forward to the third inning:

The opposite F6 goes way behind second base, snags a grounder up the middle, does the full turn thingy and throws to first where F3 is doing the splits at the stretch and we have another wacker . . .

Of course the first base rat (err, coach) is signalling safe.

I give the BIG "OUT!" from 2SF.

The runner, yep F6 from the OTHER team, says: "Well I guess that evens it up . . . wasn't that a great play!"

So in this specific game I had five "wackers" (coin flips) and I called them ALL "OUT!"

Now back to me diary:

I re-read several entries and have come to this decision about MY (and only my) wackers:

I call an unusual amount of them "OUT!"

I can draw only one of two answers from this documentation:

1) I have always been taught that umpires get in more trouble calling balls and safes than strikes and outs -- ergo -- somewhere along the line I have fallen into calling close plays "OUT".

2) I really got all 37 documented wackers correct.

In short I do reward good defense and I do lean towards not giving the doubt to poor defensive play. Do I "think" about this -- not really -- but I guess what goes on inside my noggin might be different than I thought.

Tee,

I looked back over my last HS season of notes and I note the same thing.

I know in my mind I'm not trying to reward any kind of play, but I do note that most all of my wackers are OUTS.

but, I've also noted that I've gotten very little complaints on most all of them for some reason, so maybe I'm just pretty good (g)

Thanks
David

[Dave Hensley]

Most all of my whackers are outs, also. But I still use the aforementioned "benefit of the doubt" principles in making those calls.

A couple of years ago at a regional MSBL tournament, I was U1 for the championship game. I had about 7 or 8 really close whackers, and called them all outs. At one point, after about the third or fourth out call, a first base coach pleaded with me in frustration, "Blue, what does he have to do to be safe?" My reply was "run faster."

[ChapJim]

Originally posted by U of M Sam
Runner is either "out" or "safe" (no ties).

We know that. No one says otherwise. No one proposes a possible call other than "out" or "safe." Nor do we need to get metaphysical about the matter and concern ourselves with the speeds of light and sound. We look and listen. At some point, the "bang-bang" can merge to "BANG." We simply cannot sort out what happened first. Doesn't matter whether the sorting threshhold is .04 seconds, or more, or less. That, like it or not, is a tie.

The real question is, having observed a tie, do you call "out" or "safe?" As jesmael points out, the rules have no problem with the concept of a tie. To the contrary, they provide specific guidance when to call "out" or "safe" no matter what happens. Unfortunately, the burden is different at first base (throw must beat the runner) than at the others (runner must beat the throw). That doesn't make the rules in error. It may be puzzling but it is not unmanageable.

[Edited by ChapJim on Jun 13th, 2005 at 02:32 PM]

[DownTownTonyBrown]

My fundamental principle is the same for every force out - all bases. The runner beats the throw or he's out. During a game I am completely unconcerned about any linguistic intricacies of word choices in the rules statements that create an appearance of allowing ties and which base, etc.

Beat the throw (run faster) and you're safe. Perhaps it matches my simple mind.

[David B]

Originally posted by Dave Hensley
"Blue, what does he have to do to be safe?" My reply was "run faster."

thanks Dave for a laugh! I can just see the look on his face.

Thanks
David

[Rich]

Originally posted by PeteBooth
Originally posted by Rich Fronheiser

Don't reward anyone. Just call the freaking play.

Rich I wish you would post the way you umpire.

You cannot tell me that if F6 makes a Jeter like play and the play is that close you are not going to "reward" the defense, conversely, if it's a routine play and B1 is busting it out of the box and F4/F6 takes their "sweet time" and turns a routine play into a "coin flip" play that you are not going to "reward" the offense.

Perhaps you do not use the term "reward" but you have to have some rationale behind your call and IMO it's not as simple as "just call the freaking play"

With all your experience, please try and help the younger umpires by giving them guidelines rather than simply post rhetoric.

Pete Booth

With apologies right back to Dave and to you, I don't subscribe to any of this.

If it is that close I can't discern whether the ball beat the runner or the runner beat the ball (it happens very rarely these days), I call the runner out EVERYTIME regardless of the circumstances.

[DG]

Originally posted by mcrowder
I don't have time to make artistic evaluations of the fielder's efforts, nor rate the amount of hustle brought forth by the batter (heck ... I probably don't see the batter-runner for most of his run to first). This is not ice skating or gymnastics.

If he's safe, he's safe, if he's out, he's out. Call what you see.

(PS - if you SEE the foot hit the bag at the same time that you HEAR the ball hit the glove, then since the speed of light is much faster than the speed of sound, the ball hit the glove before the foot hit the bag. Out.)

At a distance of 25 feet the difference between speed of light and speed of sound is not discernable.

[GarthB]

Originally posted by DG

At a distance of 25 feet the difference between speed of light and speed of sound is not discernable.

Never the less, the statement is true.

[DG]

Originally posted by GarthB

Never the less, the statement is true.

Not discernable means the difference between sight and sound leaves you without a clear call.

[LMan]

Originally posted by Rich Fronheiser

With apologies right back to Dave and to you, I don't subscribe to any of this.

If it is that close I can't discern whether the ball beat the runner or the runner beat the ball (it happens very rarely these days), I call the runner out EVERYTIME regardless of the circumstances.

thank you.