Yes Carl
 

I had planned to submit again. The itch is back!! I have LOTS on my mind..

Bob P.

It doesn't matter if the ball hit the dirt before it hit the catchers glove, it's still a swinging third strike out. If it had come out of the glove then hit the dirt, then this would have been a correct call. It was a cleanly caught ball, it wasn't a dropped 3rd strike. I'm an umpire and I usually side with my brothers in blue but this PU blew this call.

You might want to review what the definition of "in flight" is.

It wasn't dropped or mishandled by the catcher.

Re: re:re: RE: what this NFHS Umpire Does
 

Bob: There are but four people who can edit your post: Brad Batt, the CTO; mick; Bob Jenkins; and - you.

BTW: "A lot" on your mind does us no good unless you let us inside.

But the batter is still entitled to run, even though the catcher did not drop the ball. That's the reason "dropped third strike" creates confusion. Your message proves that.

Here's the rule in OBR. It's the same in NCAA and FED.

2.00 CATCH is the act of a fielder in getting secure possession in his hand or glove of a ball in flight....

2.00 IN FLIGHT describes a batted, thrown, or pitched ball which has not yet touched the ground or some object other than a fielder.

6.05(b): The batter is out when a third strike is legally caught by the catcher. Note: "Legally caught" means in the catcher's glove before the ball touches the ground.

As LDUB said, you might want to go back and actually learn this rule. A pitch that bounces in and is cleanly gloved is NOT caught, and as such, is a "third strike not caught," commonly but not properly referred to as "dropped third strike."

If you've been calling out batters because a pitch skips in but is gloved, as in Wednesday's ALCS game, then you have been improperly applying a rule, opening yourself up to protests each time.

With a true salary cap like one that now exists in every other major professional sports in the United States, the Yankees would be a second division team EVERY YEAR.

Is Cashman a great GM? Who the heck knows? Someone with a team that has THAT track record and there are whispers from Phillies fans and writers that maybe Cashman wouldn't be a good choice for the vacancy.

Is Torre a good manager? Again, who knows? His pre-Yankees teams had a .471 winning percentage. Did he magically become the sage everyone seems to think he is? (Put Phil Jackson of the Bulls in the same category.)

The thing that always drives me nuts are the "national" fans -- the ones who have never even seen a Yankees game in person, live somewhere like South Texas, and are diehard fans of the team. Would these people be fans of the team if it didn't buy pennants every other season? How many closet Philadelphia Phillies fans are there in South Texas? (And let's put the Dallas Cowboys in the same category while we're at it)

In my opinion, the ball bounced on the glove not on the ground so what has "the ball changed direction got to do with anything"

The LA Times printed a picture which clearly shows the glove on the ground and the ball on top of the glove.

All that aside though, what really gets my goat is this:

Umpires are human, humans make errors. There is a whole column in the scorebook labeled "Errors" and errors make a difference in the outcome of the game. Why then, when a human umpire boots a call, is it so difficult for the men in blue to be able to say, "Yup, I probably could have done that better" and get on with the game. No apology necessary, just get on with it.

Instead, its like the same silent code as in the police department. Every one backs the guy who booted it and he comes up with some exceedingly lame excuse for why it was the correct call.

On the whole, umpires do an exceedingly good job. No body is perfect so the statistical fact is, occassionally the guy in blue will boot one.

For me, its the inability, throughout the profession, to honestly say I could have booted that and not the actual booted call that rubs the wrong way.

I was mistaken about that signal. At first I thought it was a safe signal made with one hand, but it's just Edding's strike mechanic, nothing more.

George doesn't spend his own money, either. He spends the TV money, he spends the concession money, he spends the fans' money. I'm sure none of George's personal fortune is at risk.

But that's OK. They haven't won a WS since 2000 despite overspending by a huge margin. Enjoy the offseason.

Re: Re: Exactly
 

That's idiotic.

And our local Comcast channel here in Chicago showed a huge zoom close-up shot where it was clear that the ball did, indeed, hit the ground. This shot caused several media personnel to change their minds after seeing it. They originally thought for sure the ball was caught, but subsequently stated they believe the ball wasn't caught.

Two points:

(1) Unless you're psychic, how can you <i>know</i> that the Yankees would always be second division with a salary cap?

(2) I lived in New York City in 1957, when you could get into the grandstands for 75 cents. I imagine I've seen more Yankee games than you have seen major league baseball.

One thing I know: There are always poor souls around, like you, who can't stand that someone else wins.

Concerning your knock of the Cowboys: You live in Wisconsin. Super Bowls: Green Bay won the first two - but nothing since. Minnesota (near you) lost four. Tennessee never won. Seattle never went. Pittsburg won four, the last one in 1980. Oh, the last time they went, they lost to - gasp - Dallas.

Dallas won five (tied for most): 72, 78, 93, 94, 96.

Do you dislike Dallas because:

(a) they win and your teams don't?
(b) they're in Texas?
(c) they're the world's favorite football team (based on sales of NFL products)?
(d) all of the above?

Whether that ball hit the ground or not - even some of the replay angles are inconclusive, so I doubt the PU was 100% sure - we all know that because of the angle and from experience.

In this case, where the PU can't be 100% sure - if he sees the catcher walk to his dugout and toss the ball to the mound when he could have EASILY tagged the batter - then the PU is at least 100% sure that the catcher has no doubt. Still not a deciding factor, but worth considering.

I believe the PU allowed the batter's reaction (by running to 1st base) to incorrectly influence his decision. We've all experienced this - a player reacts differently than expected, so we question what we saw. We make calls based on player reactions more than we want to admit.

If he had a chance to do it again, I'm sure the PU would react differently. I recommend the trigger or shooting gun method for calling strikes and using the fist for out calls. Unfortunately there is no uniform mechanic for signaling a dropped 3rd stike - that's one reason that catcher's normally make the tag on questionable catches, and why we can rely on their reactions a little more.

from ESPN.com: "I should have either said, 'No catch,' or, if I did have a catch, that he was out. Which I never said: 'He's out,' " Eddings said.

he knows he should have said "no catch."



from ESPN.com: "Given another chance, umpire Doug Eddings said he would've been more emphatic in making the call that helped the Chicago White Sox win Game 2 of the American League Championship Series."


http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/playof...C-DT9705204233

Which came first, them winning, or people buying their stuff?

Some people just root for whoever the good team is.

You guys need to watch the replay again. The BR didn't initially head towards 1B. He crossed the plate heading for his dugout but his teamates were yelling at him to run. So he turned and ran to 1B.

yeah, thats what happens when you swing at ball 4 in the dirt

any more gems for us?

But most people are just the reverse.

Of course, the winning came first. And Dallas did it often - and long, as least as far as conference championships and winning seasons go.

But Dallas hasn't won the Big One in over ten years. And they qualified during that time for only one playoff appearance. And they STILL sell the most product.

That's at the heart of most people's hatred of the Cowboys and the Yankees. In one word: success.

Losers <i>always</i> hate winners.

And winners often hate the competition. I don't like the Red Sox, the 49ers, the Steelers. I never root for Green Bay - regardless, even when they play San Francisco. That's because of the Ice Bowl, when Dallas <i>should</i> have won its first championship - and didn't.

But at least I have a reason for my animosity.

Finally, there's one organization that doesn't fit into my little mold: the Cubs.

Who can explain the north side of Chicago?

A. J. Looked back
 

Next time you see this look at the batter who is the White Sox catcher, he did look back and he say the PU motion and HE knew what it meant, because he had already had to tag a batter on a swinging stike skipper. Don't you think it's kind of ironic that one catcher knew the umpires mechanics and one didn't. Eddings said he would do it different next time, but his mechanics were the same from the start of the game to the end. Also it should be a clue to the catcher that when you do not hear the umpire say "OUT" you better do something besides roll the ball to the mound.

This apology for Steinbrenner presupposes that he runs his club in a vacuum, and that his operations have no pernicious effects on baseball.

Both of those claims are false.

Re: A. J. Looked back
 

The difference between a good catcher, and a substitute catcher.

Just because you make it to the "bigs" don't mean that you know exactly how to play the game.

On another note, baseball continues to water down their talent and its going to be even more evident with the "steriod" testing.

Why can Roger Clemens continue to be the best pitcher in baseball at 43? years of age. Sure, in the mold of Nolan Ryan he has great mechanics and work ethic and he's not afraid to pitch inside, but the other side is that you don't have to pitch but to three or four batters per team - the rest are batting .250 and are overmatched.

Randy Johnson was supposed to be the Savior for the Yankees since Clemens had left, but as they learned, he's not the same pitcher he was three/ four years ago, but he's still one of the better pitchers in the game.

That said, its still fun to watch, but I wonder what my boy will be saying about baseball 10 years from now????

Thanks
David

Re: re:re: RE: what this NFHS Umpire Does
 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by RPatrino "...if the batter swings, and the strike is caught, I combine my "sideways point" (eyes looking forward, of course)with a mild "out" hammer. I do not verbalize strike three. Now,if the players act confused,they don't realize the ball was caught, and they start to act "hinky" I will verbalize, "batter is out".
If the third strike is not caught, then I just do my "sideways point" (eyes looking forward, of course), with no mild "out" hammer."


On the head - this is what I've done for years, and I've never had a problem. This mechanic removes doubt from everyone's mind. If there's doubt in MY mind if the ball was caught or trapped, I will already have discussed this possibility in a pregame with my partner(s), and will have made eye contact with him (them), and based on what indication signal we have agreed on I will make my call. Do I still catch heck now and then? Yep. Love this game!

JJ

[Edited by JJ on Oct 14th, 2005 at 09:58 AM]

Doc:

A better plumber in my town has a pernicisou effect on all the other plumbers.

It's amazing how "communists" come out of the woodwork when someone begins using "capitalism" as it was intended.

It's a business, for crying out loud. They've already got profit sharing. All that nonsense is an attempt to keep losing franchises in business.

What's wrong with market corrections? If the Twins can't cut the mustard....

Don't use the mores of amateur sports in the same breath with the professional game.

Everybody seems upset that player salaries are sky high. The American way is for the worker to get what he can. If somebody wants to pay six million a year for a guy who bats .245, more powser to him.

Not true. Fox showed it again last night, when Jeanne Zelasko did a short promo on ACLS Game 3. The replay shows the ball changing directio, just as a ball does when it's trapped. Perhaps you haven't seen that replay but don't tell me what I've seen and haven't seen.

I've only found one article talking about team sales, and it suggests the Raiders are #1, which is equally ludicrous:

http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfranci...10/story2.html

Dallas hasn't won a playoff game in 10 seasons. But most of the people who follow "America's Team" are people who latched on in the 1970s or the 1990s when the Cowboys were winning. I've talked to Cowboys fans who have never been to Texas, have never been to a game, etc. I HATE fair-weather, band-wagon fans. It's easy to be a fan when the team wins.

You lived in New York (which I didn't know), so enjoy your Yankees. It has nothing to do with Texas, Carl -- I am rooting for the Astros to win it all.

And I live in Wisconsin, but I've been an Eagles fan since I've been walking. I grew up in PA. I could send you a cheesehead, though, if you are interested.

--Rich

As a lifelong Steelers fan, Carl, I'm trying to figure out if I should be insulted by this comment. :D

Re: Re: Re: Exactly
 

Rich,

I don't disagree with you. But in all sports around here, if you don't use strict NFHS mechanics, then you will be lucky to get a post-season assignment. If you are lucky enough to get one, then you better know your evaluator really well to move on to another round. Here it's the hammer for both strike and out, as per the signal chart on pg. 70.

<b>If somebody wants to pay six million a year for a guy who bats .245, more power to him.</b>

Absolutely right. People who complain about the money ballplayers make act as if someone is putting a gun to the owners' heads. Apparently these people prefer that the ultra-rich owners keep more of their money.

If I want to pay somebody $200 to mow my half-acre lawn, that's up to me. If someone wants to mow my lawn for $5, that's up to him.

I've heard people argue that the government should dictate what jobs pay. (I live in a university town.) All pay--of truck drivers, secretaries, painters, probably umpires, too--should be determined by "experts" (like them) at universities. "Comparable worth" is their euphemism for this kind of Stalinism. The free market, you see, results in inequity.

One guy even claims that everyone should make the same. "Garbage collectors need the money just as much as surgeons," says this Ivy Leaguer. And to make up for the fact that some people inherit money and others don't, no one should be allowed to inherit money. Instead, in the new Utopia, everyone will get $80,000 from the government at age 21 or so, to get started in adulthood. Yes, I'm serious.

In New Jersey, public schools must pay baseball umpires and softball umpires the same. Gender equity. So an ump has a choice: $74 for an 80-minute softball game where arguments are rare and the fans are polite, or $74 for a 160-minute baseball game where. . . . Well, guess which sport is overflowing with officials and which sport needs them.

[Edited by greymule on Oct 14th, 2005 at 11:46 AM]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Exactly
 

I wouldn't know what HS mechanics are. I throw the manual out as soon as it arrives in the mail. Who covers a bases empty triple in PA?

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Exactly
 

The signals are shown in the rule book.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Exactly
 

Luke,

Why would a baseball umpire need a picture to tell him "how to signal." What do I look like, an ASA girls softball robot?

--Rich

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Exactly
 

That is the same thing I was thinking. In my association, we have pointers, and we have hammerers. We don't let the Fed dictate to us what a strike call is supposed to look like. We celebrate individual style, as long as it stays within accepted mechanics. No robots here. I point on called strikes, use a nonchalant hammer for swinging strikes, and on strike three not caught, I point twice in the manner of selling a foul call, in one quick, emphatic motion. I have yet to have anybody be confused by it.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Exactly
 

Have read a lot of posts on this subject since the game, have listened to a lot of talk radio, and seen a BUNCH of ESPN experts give their thoughts on this event. Rich, one thing seems clear....if baseball would maybe become more like the ASA girls softball robots as you have called us, this problem might not have even occured and a CLEAR and COMMON mechanic might have been used and dictated the play and it's results. It's funny how baseball seems to be going more and more to the slot position behind the plate even in the majors, isn't that a "softball" mechanic? Hmmmmmmmm ? Maybe us robots do know something!

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Exactly
 

Softball. Bandit is an appropriate handle for a softball umpire. I hear that they hand out "new masks and guns" each time you guys pass the fed. test!!!!!!!!!!!!! With 60 foot fields I don't understand why you need two guys to officiate the game. Unless your collecting social security you're too young to do softball!!!!!!!!! LOL

I'm sorry . . .
 

Bandit wrote:

"It's funny how baseball seems to be going more and more to the slot position behind the plate even in the majors, isn't that a "softball" mechanic? Hmmmmmmmm ? Maybe us robots do know something!"

---

Help me. What the he11 does this mean? Baseball has been working "the slot" siince 1938.

Another non-umpire answering a question.

Lah Me!

Honest I am out of here.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Exactly
 

So you are saying that using ASA mechanics would have made the situation better?

I have seen bangers on TV at second base called out with the same ugly fist straight up in the air. The ASA out is the same as the ASA strike.

Later, I'll research the sales question. Last year, Time magazine said the Cowboys were number one - and showed a Russian teenager on Lenin Square wearing a Cowboy shirt.

Eagles fan, huh? And how many Super Bowls have they won?

If you send me a cheesehead, make sure it's already bashed in. I don't want to get that stuff all over my carpet.

Oh, being a Texas boy - now - I'm rooting for the Astrols just like you.

My wife asked, before the Yankees had lost: "Suppose the Yankees and the Astros play each other in the World Series. Who are you going for?"

Silly girl!

<b>With 60 foot fields I don't understand why you need two guys to officiate the game.</b>

The great bulk of the softball I do is one-man games. Decades ago, I used to do one-man doubleheaders in a semipro baseball league, too. The baseball was actually easier. The better the players, the easier it is to umpire.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Exactly
 

PU.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Exactly
 

We use the same mechanics in Texas. It's the best way to cover that play because an umpire is waiting for the runner instead of dipsy-doodling in a double pivot from A to B and B to C.

Even worse: Suppose R1 and the ball both go to third. The PU covers that play. But if the ball skips away and R1 tries for home, the plate umpire is supposed to take that play as well.

Yuk!

Having the PU cover third in this situation was the standard mechanic until the mid-sixties, when pro umpires, like me, began to climb their way up the charts. The weight charts, that is.

National League umpire Bill Williams was the first Doing It columnist for <i>Referee</i> magazine. He described the exact mechanics I'm talking about.

BTW: The pros don't even say A, B, or C. From the PBUC Umpire Manual, three-man crew, p. 87-88:

With a runner on first base only:

The first base umpire will position himself 6-8 feet beyond the first base bag with both feet in foul territory for the pick-off play at first base.

The third base umpire will move into the center of the infield and assume a position of either side of second base that is most comfortable for him to take the steal play at second base.

In Texas, we simply say: U2, short A; U3, deep C. (U1 is the plate umpire. I had nothing to do with that terminology.)

On the other hand, you'll find a great many wannabes who use the pro mechanics regardless of what their state system is: "Hey, that's the way we do in the NCAA Division 3, so I'm doing that in 5-A high school." That disregards the fact that a good high school team will scorch some of those walk-on, D3 college teams.

Wisconsin uses FED mechanics because Rich said he throws away his FED umpire manual as soon as it arrives. In the mid 1970s David Mosqueda, Jim Luther, and I wrote a mechanics system for our association. It took us about eight years to convince the state that our system was a better mousetrap. Texas adopted the Rio Grande Valley mechanics in the mid 80s and sold them to the NFHS in 1990.

Cornerstone: PU gets out from behind the plate. Whenever hte abandons home, the BU prepares to cover. We didn't invent that, you understand. We just realized that the old boys had done it right all along.

[Edited by Carl Childress on Oct 14th, 2005 at 06:22 PM]

Re: I'm sorry . . .
 

No, baseball has not been working the slot since 1938. for one, AL used the box while using the outside protector. I see more than one MLB umpire working over the top. I saw more than a few Mariner games this year and saw Mr. Emmel working what would best be described as the Paul Emmel, which is neither Gerry Davis nor the box nor scissors nor anything else.

And,
 

According to Bill Blair's definitive piece documenting the development of the modern chest protector a group of umpires started using a version of the "inside protector" in 1938 and by 1939 the umpires moved to what was eventually called "the slot"(these umpires eventually combined when MLB separated umpires into American and National League umpires and became "NL guys"). . . remember Bubba, there were once two sets of umpires that worked different mechanics.

"ASA Robots" are funny to watch.

[Edited by Tim C on Oct 14th, 2005 at 06:25 PM]

Re: Re: I'm sorry . . .
 

You need to be careful because the umpire schools use the term "box" to describe a <i>slot</i> position, where the umpire instead of heel/toe is in the wrestler's balanced position. John McSherry used that. In his career, I think he missed three pitches.

Emmell is using the sliding box, not what you called the box (the AL true box). He starts in the slot and slides down while the pitch is on the way, moving more of his body behind the catcher. It's guaranteed to be the safest place for a slot umpire.

I used the AL box from 1954 until 2002. I switched to the Gerry Davis. I can't imagine using any other stance.

Of course, I get the bejezzus knocked out of me on a regular basis, but I am still fresh after four hours of plate work. That's because in GD, the skeleton supports the lock/load position rather than the muscles.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Exactly
 

Baseball is not a free market
 

I'm a great fan of both baseball and capitalism, but if baseball were a free market, the Twins would be able move to New York and compete for the dollars of that large market.

MLB uses its monopoly powers unequally to the benefit of some owners like Steinbrenner.

-LilLeaguer

Re: What about...
 

I'm sure Doug Eddings is a great umpire. I have no doubt about it.

But let's all agree on something - many umpires, once they arrive in the big leagues, start adopting their OWN, unique, style. Some are pointers, some are hammers, and some have weird variants. One umpire, I forget his name, gives a quick flash of his hand as if he is a cobra striking or swatting at flys.

I'll bet they were all much more standardized as AAA umpires. Or, at a minimum, less "colorful". Most AAA umpires don't try to distinguish themselves by having unique styles.

Doug Eddings has the following habit/routine when calling a swinging third strike. He extends his right arm parallel to the ground, ostensibly indicating that the pitch is a strike. Then he follows it up with the classic hammer.

Not really a big deal, but it IS unusual. I don't think I've ever seen an umpire give a double signal to indicate a swinging strike other than when you POINT at the batter on a checked swing.

Normally nobody notices or cares. It doesn't really matter that much. And Eddings' unorthodox mechanic had NOTHING to do with the chaos that ensued on the play. Josh Paul never looked at Eddings so he can hardly claim he was confused by some signal Eddings may have given.

Unfortunately for Doug Eddings, when something unusual happens in a high profile game, your mechanics sometimes go under a microscope. The <b>very</b> thing happpened that would most highlight Eddings' unusual strike mechanic. The question was whether he had already called the batter out. He gives what many would interpret as a "strike" call (the extended right arm) and then follows it up with what many would interpret as an "out" call (the hammer). The confusion is understandable notwithstanding that Eddings had been calling it this way the entire game.

David Emerling
Memphis, TN

Remember this thread?
<A HREF ="http://www.officialforum.com/showthread.php?threadid=21597&pagenumber=1">Cardin als - Marlins game, batter interference</A>?

This occurred during a regular season game. Chris Carpenter of the Cardinals was called out for batter's interference during a suicide squeeze.

The problem is that there were fewer than 2 outs and the *RUNNER* should have been called out - not the batter. The umpire blew the call and MLB admitted as much the following day.

The home plate umpire? ... Doug Eddings.

David Emerling
Memphis, TN

I am not an evaluator nor an expert but it seems that trouble always follows Eddings. His well publicized spat with Estrada of the Braves this year, as well as his inconsistent strike zone. Question is how did he get an LCS assignment?

The interestering thing is Jermaine Dye struck out on a pitch in the dirt the out before Pierzynski. Eddings held his right arm out, then gave the hammer when Dye was tagged. I think we can all agree that his mechanic was poor at the very best.