Should I Overrule the BU?

[Tim C]

Matthew:

We aren't saying it wasn't a BLOWN CALL . . .

What we are saying is that you can't testify that what you saw was correct.

Let's reverse this . . .

What if SMITTY says YOU missed the call because he SAW IT DIFFERENTLY! And then he reverses your call (which you know you got correct).

Do you understand this at all?

I know, you don't want to join in the logic parade, and that is why after 20 years of umpiring you will have one year of experience 20 times.

[Matthew F]

Originally posted by Tim C
Matthew:

We aren't saying it wasn't a BLOWN CALL . . .

What we are saying is that you can't testify that what you saw was correct.

Let's reverse this . . .

What if SMITTY says YOU missed the call because he SAW IT DIFFERENTLY! And then he reverses your call (which you know you got correct).

Do you understand this at all?

I know, you don't want to join in the logic parade, and that is why after 20 years of umpiring you will have one year of experience 20 times.

Reverse it?!?!

Smitty can't do that. I didn't do that then and I don't plan on doing that now. I simply advanced the question because of late, we have seen and heard a lot of "got to get it right". I'm in firm belief that the call my BU made was BLOWN, but I'm also in firm belief that his judgement call STANDS. If he comes to me for help, I'll give my opinion (in private), but it's still his call.

When you guys say the PU can't reverse a BU's judgement call because he saw the play different, I'm in agreement, 100%.

If I'm relegated to 20, 1-year of experiences because I notice what goes on field, learn from those mistakes (mine and others), make adjustments and yes, even entertain different mechanics to improve performance, then so be it - at least I'll be eligible for rookie of the year 20 times.

[mcrowder]

Yet another example of you completely missing the point.

I choose to stop beating my head against this rock.

[Matthew F]

Originally posted by mcrowder
Yet another example of you completely missing the point.

I choose to stop beating my head against this rock.

WTF IS YOUR PROBLEM!

I can say the same thing about you and your comments.

Get over the god complex - blown calls do exists. Appealed properly and if, and only if, the umpire making the original call chooses to change his call, they can be corrected.

I guess it's pretty useless to go to you on an appeal for a pulled-foot or swipe-tag, since you definitely couldn't get the call right - being so far from the play. Maybe a check-swing, but then again, that's doubtful since you would be "90 feet further from the play" since that's one of your criteria for not being able to see "the right call".

Two thirds of this post is taken up by this irrelevant nonsense and I'm sorry to the people who read through this crap. The question posted was answered by the first few replies - thanks guys. It then went south with nonsense very quickly.

[His High Holiness]

Originally posted by Matthew F

...
Granted this happened several years ago, should a stich like this, nowadays, be discussed between the umpires to get the correct call?

Matt;

The posters here are big dogging you. This is their way of putting little dogs in their place and you are definitely a little dog. Your original post posed a question which is legitimate and which I reprinted above since most posters seemed to have forgotten it in their attempt to put you in your place.

10 years ago, the BU would have to live with the call and you did the right thing in making him suck it up. Today, depending on the circumstances, you can get away with a conference and change the call.

Yes, you can be reasonably sure that your partner screwed the pooch. In my first post, I described methods by which you could be certain. If you believe that the team in whose favor the call went does not believe the call was correct, that is a good time to get together with your partner and have a discussion. Make him be the one to change it however and get ready for an ejection depending on how you handle it.

When you decide to make a change, go over to the coach that the call will go against and explain the change to him before you announce it. I have never seen this bit of diplomacy fail to defuse the situation. Ejections have never been necessary.

The tag up play is one type of call that is best seen from a distance. A bigger field of vision is critical to getting this kind of call right. Regrettably, umpires are so hung up on mouthing pro-school pabulum, that they fail to experiment with and to investigate ways of bettering their games. I doubt that there are more that a handful of umpires out there that realize that there are several types of calls that can better be seen from 45 or more feet. Since this runs counter to established dogma, their brains do not allow them to consider the possibility.

Peter

[Kaliix]

Matt,
I see what you are saying. I don't see what mcrowder is beating his head for???

Originally posted by Matthew F

WTF IS YOUR PROBLEM!

I can say the same thing about you and your comments.

Get over the god complex - blown calls do exists. Appealed properly and if, and only if, the umpire making the original call chooses to change his call, they can be corrected.

I guess it's pretty useless to go to you on an appeal for a pulled-foot or swipe-tag, since you definitely couldn't get the call right - being so far from the play. Maybe a check-swing, but then again, that's doubtful since you would be "90 feet further from the play" since that's one of your criteria for not being able to see "the right call".

Two thirds of this post is taken up by this irrelevant nonsense and I'm sorry to the people who read through this crap. The question posted was answered by the first few replies - thanks guys. It then went south with nonsense very quickly.

[mcrowder]

I was not going to respond anymore, but am being dragged back in kicking and screaming. I'll make one more attempt to make my point. First let me assure you that I get YOUR point. I'm not obtuse - your point is that calls are blown (true) and that there was no question this one was blown (this is where I have issue).

Second, let me reiterate that there are cases where someone 90 feet away DOES have a better view (usually because of angle). Check swing, pulled foot, swipe tag, etc. Perfect examples of that, and I fail to understand why you felt I could not make these calls when called upon to do so.

Third, not sure where I drew such ire from you. I've been completely civil here trying to explain my point, where you've been nothing but hostile. Completely undeserved, IMHO.

Now - my point. For the last time, I hope.

Yes, calls are blown. Often because an umpire was out of position (whether because of his own mistake or because the fielder's went somewhere he didn't expect with the ball). Often because of poor knowledge of the rules.

But in this case, you STARTED by telling us he was in the right position. He made a call, from a good position. You seem to be under the impression, for some reason, that since you saw something different than he did, from an admittedly poorer position, that YOUR viewpoint was correct and his was wrong. (Please don't use input from the offended coach/fans as "proof" or even "supporting evidence" that your viewpoint was right - I think we all know where a coach's viewpoint comes from.) That's where I have the problem. Why do you assume, solely because you saw something he didn't, that you are right, when you admit his positioning was better than yours. It baffles me. You say the call was obviously blown. Had this been your call, he would probably feel that your call was obviously blown, since he saw something that caused him to rule the way he ruled. I'll ask it simply... What Makes You Right?

[Tim C]

mcrowder is saying exactly the same thing.

Let's ignore for a second HHH's tremendous broad brush (that is his "gig" and that is what he tries to sell) and silly post:

All some of us have asked is how do you know what you saw is correct?

Ignore the bench reactions, ignore Pete's silly retoric --

AS noted your partner was in position and he just saw something different than you -- again what makes what you saw correct?

What if you're the "Smitty" and not your pard?

Peter:

Most of us recognize far more in umpiring than you give credit. Your attempt to lift up the "small dog" becomes tiring after awhile.

T

[Matthew F]

Sorry.

What makes my judgement right? Absolutely nothing.
What makes my judgement wrong? Absolutely nothing.

You had to be there to see, that's pretty much it.

Fastball comes in a PU's eyes, he blinks/moves, batter swings and catcher comes up; PU calls ball (Don't laugh - seen it happen). Fortunately, after a little defensive banter, PU came to me on that one.

(edit: added questions)
TimC and mcrowder: What do you do if the PU doesn't come to you for help? What do you do if the PU does come to you for help.


It's not that "he saw something that caused him to rule the way he did", it something he didn't see that caused him to rule the way he did.

[Edited by Matthew F on Aug 2nd, 2005 at 01:09 PM]

[mcrowder]

"What do you do if the PU doesn't come to you for help?"

Nothing.

"What do you do if the PU does come to you for help."

Give him the "He Swung" sign, just like it was a check-swing appeal.

Not sure this applies at all, as PU is asking in this case, and BU was not in the original.

[Matthew F]

Originally posted by mcrowder
"What do you do if the PU doesn't come to you for help?"

Nothing.

"What do you do if the PU does come to you for help."

Give him the "He Swung" sign, just like it was a check-swing appeal.

Not sure this applies at all, as PU is asking in this case, and BU was not in the original.

That's my case!

BU didn't come to me, I did nothing.

If BU had come to me, I would have said he left early.

How do you know that the batter really swung? How did I know the runner left early?

[mcrowder]

Your case for what?

I don't think anyone was saying your ACTIONS were wrong at the time... just your assumption that since you thought he blew the call, then obviously he blew the call.

(Note that if he'd come to you, then in my opinion he, himself, felt that he had missed something, which changes EVERYthing in my previous posts. Since he didn't, not only does his call "stand", but further I'm inclined to assume he did NOT, in fact, blow the call.)

[Matthew F]

Originally posted by mcrowder
Your case for what?

I don't think anyone was saying your ACTIONS were wrong at the time... just your assumption that since you thought he blew the call, then obviously he blew the call.

(Note that if he'd come to you, then in my opinion he, himself, felt that he had missed something, which changes EVERYthing in my previous posts. Since he didn't, not only does his call "stand", but further I'm inclined to assume he did NOT, in fact, blow the call.)

So (using the example of my previous post) if the PU doesn't come to you, you say the ball call stands - we agree.

If the PU doesn't come to you, does that mean you didn't actually see the batter swing the bat? By your logic, that batter's swing didn't happen!?!?! Yet, you would have said "He Swung" had the PU asked for help. Can't have it both ways!

Just because one umpire makes a judgement call and doesn't ask for help, doesn't mean it's the correct call; it just means it's the call that stands on that play.

[DG]

Reminds me of a story I was read when I was a child about Little Black Sambo and the tigers. The tigers ended up chasing each other around a tree until they turned into butter. Maybe it's the going round in circles part that reminds me of this childhood story.

[jumpmaster]

this has turned into mental masturbation...or even better, one of Roland's articles.