A bunch of us (all umpires enjoying an awesome Saturday off) were watching the Northwestern/Iowa game when one of my friends commented on the speed of Iowa's running back. He said he would love to see that guy on the diamond. Another of the guys said that no matter how fast a runner is, a good arm will catch him. That got us into a debate about which catchers had the best arms and whether or not the best arms would catch the best stealers. The first guy told us that he was umpiring a game in Indiana and the catcher had a laser. The first baseman would taunt the runner, telling him to stay put because the catcher would nail him before he got within ten feet of the bag. The runners would take the bait and pretty soon, the first baseman is saying, "So, go if you can do it. Come on, go, go, go!" He started this with a bunch of the runners and egged them on. The offensive coach wanted the base umpire (not my friend) to make him stop telling them to go. The base umpire said that he had no problem with what he was saying. The coach wanted him to tell him to shut up because he was becoming a distraction out there. The coach said that when he says go, especially on a dropped pitch, the runner could confuse it for the first base coach. Immediately I jumped in with our running myth about verbal obstruction and the debate livened up. If you had a chatty first baseman and see him acting this way, do you call Verbal Obstruction on him?

Mmmm,
 

And the one note samba starts all over again.

~Sigh~

t

Well...
 

I have seen just about every baseball question posed here. Many are retreads and some are slight alterations of the theme. This is such a query - new play, new action by the ballpayer and a known action by the umpire. The title should say it all, how would you call this? How do you justify your call? I thought that was the basic tenet of umpiring and this board.

What would you call, Windy?

I would not call anything on this play, thanks for asking.

The rule book has nothing pertaining to this type of play. If the offense ignores it, it is the same call - play on. You can't call the guy safe because he ran and was caught stealing. Don't run if you don't want to.

I've worked games where the entire infield of the Japanese team was chattering away and it was crazy. I've also worked games with players who make it a point to distract the runner. Will Clark was famous for this, chatting guys up and then picking them off.

If I don't find the chatter distrurbing, I tell the coach to ignore it as well. If the chatter is getting on my nerves and makes it difficult to focus, I may inform the talker of the unsportsmanlike conduct rule. That usually gets their attention. If he insists, I'll warn him and his coach. That always gets their attention.

Now, please reciprocate. By the way, my screen name is not Windy, play nicely.

[Edited by WhatWuzThatBlue on Nov 5th, 2005 at 07:15 PM]

Okay, Windy was just easier....WhatWuz,

If it were a HS game, under Fed Rules, and the opposing coach made a big stink about it, I would tell F3 to knock it off. If the game were played under Real Baseball Rules (you know how I really disdain NFHS rules), I would say nothing, and enjoy the reparte. I like a little chatter, especially when working in "A", and I'm bored, I have someone to talk to. If a coach complains in a non-HS game, I tell them to just ignore it.

Steve

I have always said that second base is stolen on the pitcher, 3rd is stolen on the catcher. If the pitcher is doing his job and holds the runner properly, then releases the ball quickly, then the catcher has a very good chance of throwing the runner out.

Now, as to the ruling. I would say nothing. Chatter and banter between teams is part of the game. Once it gets personal, then I stop it.

Bob, I appreciate your honesty.
You should have anticipated my next question. If it is okay for a fielder to say, "Go!" why is it a problem for some umpires to hear, "Back!"?

My friends at today's get together were all baseball umpires, some only officiated high school and youth while the others are college and above. Without question, the younger (okay, I'm not that young anymore) umpires said that they would penalize it, while the ones with more grey said that they don't know which rule it violates, if any.
I told them about the HS V.O. rule and the younger ones rallied around it. The silverbacks grimaced and said what I've held all along. If the book doesn't say it specifically, don't call it. Five of us have been through pro school and figured we'd say, "Don't do that." if it really bothered us. We would only do it, if the verbal chatter was distracting to us, NOT the opposition. Most of us agreed that the spirit of the game is not broken and the coaches have the responsibility to keep their players informed.

So, why is it that the runner can tell the guy to run, but not to go back? What do you do if an infielder yells "swing" to the batter and he doesn't swing?

Perhaps Richard Rogers and Lorenz Hart put it best.


Poor Johnny one-note
sang out with "gusto"
And just overlorded the place.

Poor Johnny one-note
yelled willy nilly
Until he was blue in the face.

For holding one note was his ace

Welcome to the party, Mr. Benham. Unlike you, I will refrain from taking a needless cheap shot and just ask you to answer the question. Others can do it with respect, why is it so easy to just take a shot instead of a stand?

How would you call it?

Hmmm,
 

WCB:

Let me get this straight:

You appear to be the only umpire on officiiating.com (actually larger than that sampling as I cannot find one other umpire - period) that believes in FEDlandia that "BACK!" as shouted by an infielder is NOT verbal obstruction if it impacts the play.

On ALL the websites your posts on this single play have been your "windmill" that you feel needs attention.

Yet if some of us feel that the subject is a WOBW or has just about been talked about to the final degree you keep bringing it back and then blame us for not wanting to listen.

Since it is simply a FED 'rule" ignore it in your games . . . but don't try to continue to take others, that are just as wise, as good of umpires and intelligent (just like you) down this road.

A2D on the root issue.

T

Actually WCB, Garth's post is an accurate view of exactly what you are and how you are using this single issue as your flag ship. It certainly was not a "cheap shot" as I know Garth personally and he paid for the eduction that allows his reference.

t


[Edited by Tim C on Nov 6th, 2005 at 12:16 PM]

Windy:

I have taken a stand. It is fairly well known. I just see no need for useless repetition as some apparently do. As an educator, I also recognize the attitude displayed by those unwilling to learn. I'll leave the evangelizing to others.

Cheap shot? Nahhhhhh. An American cultural and accurate reference to a certain behavior usually displayed by those who have no substance. As with most barbs, it only stings when it hits its target.

Thanks for taking the time to post to me personally. Good luck with your upcoming season.




[Edited by GarthB on Nov 6th, 2005 at 11:38 PM]

You remember Rogers and Hart? You must be an old fart.

My excuse? I'm a New Yorker.


"We’ll have manhattan
The bronx and staten
Island too.
It’s lovely going through
The zoo!"

I do not believe for a second that an "eduator" worth his salt wasn't behaving in a demeaning and sarcastic way. You did it again within this post. Since this is my first communication with you in a very long time, I am disappointed. I do not know your position on this latest play. I spent a little time before replying to Tim and you, I could not find a single record of a player saying "Go". When was this discussed last?

Your cheap shot was less of a sting than a character fault on your part. I felt no need to act like a child in return. Since you feel it is obvious that I hang my hat on one ruling, I suggest you read some of my latest opinions. I am a "get it right" umpire. I don't believe in cheating the players or the game. I have held this stance since pro school and that is a very long time ago. My evangelizing was met with contempt and mockery two years ago. Now MLB and the NCAA have embraced the concept. It seems like I may have more insight to the issues than you feel comfortable acknowledging.

Do you feel uncomfortable agreeing with me or can you make an articulate stance and defend your ruling? I don't subscribe to the theory that some are unwilling to learn. As there are no bad questions, there are no bad students. All good teachers are preachers of a sort.

How would you rule on the play being discussed?

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tim,

My education was not the result of a scholarship or student loans. Working two jobs each summer and keeping one while studying was the only way I could afford mine. I'm not sure why Garth's personal expenses are an issue here, but you brought it up.

You have incorrectly summarized my fascination with this rule. I am more partial to the malicious contact and "get it right" issues than I am with this. I teach a balk clinic every year and pride myself on the minutiae involved. The verbal obstruction matter is less of an issue for me than you suspect. I am not defending my position as much as trying to bring about change. If Carl can preach the expected call theory, why can't I argue contrary to what you feel the rules are? I would love to see the expected call proponents explain that philosophy to Hopkins. "Yes, I know what the rule says, but if the ball is there way before the runner, everyone expects that he'll be called out. Really, I don't even need to make the call, we should do it by applause."

I don't mind the solitude. I don't need to run with a pack in order to feel safe. Umpiring is not about making friends, it is about making the best judgement possible and communicating that call. I've been alone on the field many times after I made a tough call. At one time, Rosa Parks was the only person who said "No." to the masses. Being defiant isn't always a bad thing.

If you are really spending all of that time searching other boards, I suggest you come to my house next week for the college games. You can explain your newsletter hypothesis to the gang. We have about a dozen guys and a collective two hundred years of experience. Some of these guys work the Mizzou Valley, Gateway, MAC, Big Ten and Big East. A couple of state and American Legion championships and a host of Minor League action are also accounted for in this room. Oh, they paid for their pro school so they earned the right to dismiss bad mechanics and rule interpretations.

I've also read some of your posts and it seems you like to reiterate your beliefs quite a bit. You have an issue or two that serves as a core for your philosophy. Is that a glass house perhaps?

judgment or judgement
 

WWTB, I'm sure that "eduator" was a typo, and a funny one at that, but I have been misspelling a word, and so have you. It really looks weird, but it is "judgment" not "judgement". Since you are a stickler for proper grammar, I figured you would appreciate the correction.

http://media.scout.com/media/image/19/190047.gif

Edited to correct my weird spelling of the word "weird"

[Edited by SanDiegoSteve on Nov 6th, 2005 at 08:54 PM]

Re: judgment or judgement
 

Somehow, "wierd" looks weird too. :D

Jeez, I need a remedial spelling class. I knew I should have used the word "strange" instead!

http://media.theinsiders.com/Media/O...9031_gavel.GIF

Deja Vu All Over Again
 

So, we start by talking about idle banter amoungst the boys, and we end up back to the "back/go" conundrum?

When will the madness end??


BP

Since when did the Gateway become a college baseball conference?

Peace

I wrote "work", Jeff. Pay attention or you'll get left behind again. I usually use the word umpire (go back and check) if I'm only talking about baseball. Sometimes I forget and use a more casual word, but I am one of the most precise writers you'll come across here.

You actually know one of the guys that was here. He did some basketball and umpires baseball in a couple of those conferences. Most of the guys live in the Chicago suburbs or southern Wisconsin, but one is from near the Quad Cities. That might help you figure out who is who. One of those attending is a state interpreter. But, you probably figured that out already.


Bob,

Why is it that we can't argue like gentlemen? I posed a question that was simple. You and a couple others agreed that saying "Go" means little. I then asked why "Back" is radically different to some umpires. It is not about beating a dead horse, it is about making people think. As I've said all along, call it however you see fit, but think about it first. Debate and dialogue are amazing things. Communication is the single biggest skill a rookie umpire must possess. We have seen the NFHS make changes to poorly constructed rules because of such outcries. Maybe this is my Waterloo, but most of us agree that verbal obstruction is a horse**** call and hate making it. That said, I only ask for the same respect I gave you. Disagree all you want, but don't belittle.

With that said, I think I've made my point. You can't say that a fielder can tell a runner to go but not go back. It makes no sense and you look bad.

[Edited by WhatWuzThatBlue on Nov 7th, 2005 at 04:11 AM]

YAWWWWWWNNNNNNNNNNNNN!!!!

Hey Windy, roll over and stop snoring!

Ozzy, is that you? That protection order forbids you from getting anywhere near my house anymore. Return the clothes you took or it's back to the playpen for you.

oops
 

I have no idea what happened to my post!

Tim.

[Edited by BigUmp56 on Nov 7th, 2005 at 07:55 AM]

Windbag,

I've numbered your rather demostrative comments that I take exception to so that I can address them in an orderly manner.


(1) Yes, Windbag you are a precise writer. Precisely arrogant and condesceding to those whose opinions differ from yours in all of your responses.

I wonder how often you dislocate your shoulder while patting your self on the back as you lord your writing skills over the rest of us peasants.

(2) Please tell me who *most* of us are that agree with you.
There has not been one umpire on this board that has agreed with you Windy, not one! If your referring to your troll pals on Mac's, then maybe you have a point. Then again, you are in the right company with those idiots.

You say that *most* of us agree that the call of verbal obstruction is a horse$h!i call and hate making it.

By including yourself in the *most of us* group, you now by your own admission have said that you have called it and just don't agree with having to call it. Tell us all again just how *precise* your writing ability is.

(3) You say you've made your point. Just who do you think you've made your point to? The only point you've made here is that you will not be swayed by reason. Look closely at these posts on this subject, then click on our profiles. You'll see that umpires from California to the East Coast, and umpires from the Midwest to Texas all seem to be in a agreement. *YOU* are the lone stand out on this, and you still feel everyone else is wrong for calling it.

I don't recall anyone telling you that you were wrong for not calling it. It's all about judgement and you can most certainly call your games as best you see fit. Why do you
keep telling us were wrong for calling it? Obviously were not just going out a limb in our associations and making this stuff up. We are calling the games the way we are instructed to.

We've beaten this to death for three months. Lets just A2D, and move on.

Tim.

Windy,

So now you're Rosa Parks. Do you think that you'll get a Medal of Freedom?

Thanks for the invite. I'd love to come to your house next week. Click on my email button and send me your address and phone number. I'll be there as I'm within a couple hour drive.

Bob

I guess my point was missed. I didn't intend to be argumentative, nor did I intend to continue to contribute any longer to this argument.

It reminds me of my Grandpa and Grandma. My grandma always asked Grandpa if the pasta was done. Regardless of his answer, she would say he was wrong. His reply, " if you knew the answer, why did you ask me?"

BP

Bob,
You are one of the only people I actually enjoy seeing post here. I know you didn't intend to extend the conversation and that is fine by me. It seems that the same few people respond and they have neither the experience nor verbal acuity to handle these verbal sparring sessions. I rather enjoy Garth and TAC chiming in, but they often let this get personal and that is a shame. Bob Lyle is not worth words.

When I said that I made my point it was simple. It is preposterous to think that an infielder is within his rights to tell a runner to run, but cannot tell him to go back to the base. Therein lies the conundrum; I have to explain it in simple terms because there are those members who see my name and shake with contempt. They don't care if I say the sky is blue and God is good. The world has encountered these beings before and Darwin has shown that they usually eliminate themselves before much harm is done to the gene pool. Too often they are so obsessed with proving me wrong that they fail to see that I may be agreeing with their view. They view my tone as condescending, but embrace Carl's diatribe as mother's milk. I find that utterly (yes, pun intended) hysterical.

There are a few umpires here that I respect. Sal, JJ, HHH, Bob Jenkins and a couple of Illinois boys that I won't mention because they'll think I'm kissing up. I actually am kind of fond of J.Rutledge because he wears his heart on his sleeve. I may disagree with some of his sentiments, but I respect the fact that he is usually sincere. I didn't notice any of those mentioned agreeing or disagreeing with the interpretations I have proposed. They are around to be certain; we've seen their names pop up every so often. Why is it that none of them have taken a stand against what I proposed? Maybe it's because we call it the same way. I have had my share of scuffles with a couple of them. They are not too shy to disagree. Hmmmm...

The only thing I can say to BigUmp56, is that you are guilty of the thing you accuse me of doing. You posted about verbal obstruction a few months ago on another board. It was ugly, as a few people took it beyond the realm of civility. You then posted it here and received a handful of responses. A little while later, you went back to the other site and did it again. I don't believe for a second that you are currently not participating in that madness over there. You can deny it all you want, but few people write like you and that is not a compliment. There, that wasn't too condescending, it was very direct. If you failed to appreciate the irony in the plays I suggested, that is not surprising either. Calling Verbal Obstruction is reserved for very serious infractions. I don't rely on decade old newsletters to support them. Do you even have a copy of that newsletter, BigUmp56? No, you weren't even umpiring high school ball back then. But enough already, you'll never appreciate the message.

In the end, we all have to make the calls we can live with. I have not personally encountered one official that would call the Verbal Obstruction as discussed here. I run with a pretty talented group of officials (multiple sports) and none think that this is a sensible rule. Most are glad that they don't umpire high school baseball. The others are glad that Illinois expects the officials to only enforce rules forund in the Rule and Case Books. So, call it however you want. I'm pretty certain that the coaches know what to expect when the see you in the parking lot. Mine know that I will hustle, call them according to the book and work together with my crew to get them all right. I keep getting asked back, so I must be doing something right.

As Garth said, good luck next season. It'll be here before you know it.

I did not ask you how well you write. I asked you since when did the Gateway conference have baseball? If you misspoke that is OK to just say that. Or you could say that one of the people worked football in the Gateway. I do not need a life history and where everyone is from or you telling me I know someone there personally. I just was asking a question.

Sorry I asked. ;)

I never stole the damn clothes, that was the guy from the other board! Now pipe down so I can get some sleep! :>)

Oh, this is so rich. To quote Garth, HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH AHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHA.

You seem to think you are the only one who has experience, and the rest of us are just ignorant hillbillies that just fell off the turnip truck. The reason you didn't get the responses you were looking for, is that people see right through you. If we disagree with you, you call us stupid. If we don't verbalize our thoughts a certain way, you tell us we can't spar with you, that we're not experienced enough. You started this thread with a nice, flowery story about you and your buds hanging out watching football. This naturally led to a discussion about chatter, blah, blah, blah. You asked a question about F3 saying "go, go" to the runner. Then, when you got a few opinions, you sprang out of your hiding place, and said "AH-HA!!!, I tricked you all!!! I really wanted to keep the 'back, back' argument going." Then you get mad at the people who point out the fact that you are playing that "one-note samba" again.

Bob Lyle is not worth words? That's just downright rude. What a thing to say about someone. Do you think he would agree?

Going with the Darwin card? That's just downright lame.

While I disagree with much of what Carl Childress has said over the years, have you had a column in a major officiating magazine for over 20 years?

There are only a few umpires you respect on this forum? Do you even realize how many people you insult when you spew this garbage?

BigUmp56 is a great guy, who enjoys the opportunity afforded on these forums, to discuss baseball, and baseball umpiring. Someone has been posting using his name over on McGriff's board, since that ridiculous site let's you use any name you want, or no name at all! They take his prior posts, and re-paste them, to make him look bad, so they can talk s*** about him. And as far as his writing style goes, what business is it of yours? Nobody here is trying to impress you.

Lastly, so you hang around big-shot umpires. We all know big-shot umpires. My association has 3 current MLB umpires. So what? I have 20 years experience, BigUmp 56 has 15. Lots of folks that disagree with you have years and years of experience. While some of your buddies are glad they don't work high school, many of us are glad we don't work NCAA, with the idiotic rule book they use.

Respect goes both ways. You as much as said that you don't respect very many umpires on this forum. I am sure you're
one helluva umpire, but you shouldn't hold that over everyone's head. It isn't pretty. Until you give everyone here the respect they all deserve, you will get little respect in return.

http://media.theinsiders.com/Media/O...3_pounding.gifhttp://media.theinsiders.com/Media/Other/34853_lame.GIF

I did, but obviously you don't.

Yu simply don't get it, I'm not trying to gain the respect of anyone here. I don't want to write a column or go on vacation with you. My opinion is backed by more years than you and your cohort combined.

I can take jibes from Ozzy and laugh. I'm sure he can appreciate a sense of humor. The Bob Lyle reference was accurate and steeped in history. Again, you wouldn't understand that I have no intention of swimming in his toilet. Aside from TAC and Garth saying that they were bored by the topic, the same two guys keep trying to show this board that they are smart. Wake up, none of those guys answered my recent question because they know it makes sense! Even J.Rutledge stayed away from it and he doesn't keep quiet about much.

You'll think I'm picking on you, but you spend so much time and energy focusing on my words. Try to do the same with these; if you call verbal obstruction on a runner for diving back to the base when an infielder yells "Back", do you also call it when the runner is caught stealing after the infielder yells "Go"?

This is a baseball site after all and a couple of you are shaping this into a tabloid. Please answer the question and I'll know that you are capable of understanding the hypocrisy of your previous ruling.

Lastly, a buddy of mine lives in Evansville. While we argue about baseball BS, that Indiana town was rocked by a November tornado. His house was destroyed and twenty two people lost their lives - I'd rather think about them tonight. Pardon my lack of rebuttals but I'm tired of this nonsense. There are bigger issues in the world.

Some of us are knee deep in other sports and the last thing they are thinking about is baseball. Do I have to keep reminding you that it is football season right now. I am less than a week away from Basketball season starting. Some of us are not concerned about baseball rules at this time of year or baseball umpiring. I know I am definitely not concerned about a sport where I will not attend a rules meeting for 4 months from now.

Peace

[QUOTE]Originally posted by WhatWuzThatBlue
I did, but obviously you don't.

Don't what?

Yu simply don't get it, I'm not trying to gain the respect of anyone here. I don't want to write a column or go on vacation with you. My opinion is backed by more years than you and your cohort combined.

You have been umpiring more than 35 years? WOW, I didn't realize that. That is a lot of experience! BTW, when did I ask you to go on vacation with me? I missed that. I would have had to be stoned out of my mind to do that!http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/pimp.gif :D

I can take jibes from Ozzy and laugh. I'm sure he can appreciate a sense of humor. The Bob Lyle reference was accurate and steeped in history. Again, you wouldn't understand that I have no intention of swimming in his toilet. Aside from TAC and Garth saying that they were bored by the topic, the same two guys keep trying to show this board that they are smart. Wake up, none of those guys answered my recent question because they know it makes sense! Even J.Rutledge stayed away from it and he doesn't keep quiet about much.

With all due respect for J. Rutledge, this is a baseball forum, so that is what we will continue to talk about here, despite the fact that it is football/basketball/other season.

One guy that keeps trying to show the board how smart he is you! Everyone else seems confident in their own abilities, and they don't seek, nor expect, your approval.

You'll think I'm picking on you, but you spend so much time and energy focusing on my words. Try to do the same with these; if you call verbal obstruction on a runner for diving back to the base when an infielder yells "Back", do you also call it when the runner is caught stealing after the infielder yells "Go"?

This was not your original point, at least not the way you introduced it. Some folks like Tee and Garth realized immediately where you were going with it. I'm just a stupid rube, on the other hand, and responded.

This is a baseball site after all and a couple of you are shaping this into a tabloid. Please answer the question and I'll know that you are capable of understanding the hypocrisy of your previous ruling.

My previous ruling is that I don't call Verbal Obstruction at all, because there has never been a need to. I tell the fielder to knock it off, that takes care of it. No problem. I don't know about you, but if a player I tell to knock it off doesn't, I eject said player. But I've never called Verbal Obstruction ever, so where is the hypocrisy? If I ever really need to call it, however, I will.

Lastly, a buddy of mine lives in Evansville. While we argue about baseball BS, that Indiana town was rocked by a November tornado. His house was destroyed and twenty two people lost their lives - I'd rather think about them tonight. Pardon my lack of rebuttals but I'm tired of this nonsense. There are bigger issues in the world.

As soon as I heard of the tornados in Indiana, I thought of my friend, BigUmp56, who lives in Indiana, and hoped for his safety. I am very sorry that your friend lost his home, and that people lost their lives. That is very sad.

Steve

http://media.theinsiders.com/Media/O...4853_argue.GIF

[Edited by SanDiegoSteve on Nov 7th, 2005 at 06:40 PM]

I realize this is the baseball forum, but leave my name out of this particular discussion at this time of the year. If I wanted to debate this issue, I would have thrown my hat in.

If you have not noticed most umpires are not here anyway. You cannot say the same on the other football or basketball boards right now. ;)

Peace

Damn me . . .
 

I'll pay for this:

Windy I did not answer your initial question because, even with my limited intellect, I saw you setting a bear trap.

Ya'll (as written at the Texas Speedway) do what ever you want.

I guess a number of us were silly to even think you would leave this ONE TOPIC. It is your windmill and that will not change.

¡ (in case you're wondering what that icon means: it is the tear dripping from my eye when I did not make your "respected list.")

Have a good off season and our thoughts are with all the people of Indiana.

T

You're tired? Now you know how the rest of us feel! Does this mean we can find a totally different topic to discuss?

TAC,
I was about to apologize for leaving you off the list when I read your post. You didn't answer the question because you knew that I was right, admit it! Yes it was a loaded question, but it just plays out the hypocrisy involved in making this type of call. Our last few exchanges have found you taking jabs. I have not reciprocated because I like to think that adults should be able to have differing opinions without caustic digressions. Why not just answer the question or ignore it altogether? Those jibes and digs are beneath you and you know it.

I find it amusing that Jeff can post on the baseball site when it is about Rosa Parks or the Cubs/Sox but not about how he would handle this call. It requires no thinking, how is it called where you live? I know, since I live here nearby. It takes longer to say that you don't intend to talk about baseball then it does to just answer the question.

SDS, I do have that experence in my back pocket. I understand your annoyance but it is true. Like I said, I've been at this quite a while and have been here for a few years (minus the hiatus for bad behavior). I appreciate the kind words about southern Indiana (BigUmp is nowhere near it, he's up by the Michigan border). My friend did lose his house, along with many others. Houses can be replaced, people can't.

[Edited by WhatWuzThatBlue on Nov 7th, 2005 at 10:54 PM]

One of the topics are about something that is interesting (to me), the other issue is not interesting (to me). I personally do not care how you handle the situation. If I give my opinion the next thing you or others will try to say is what I do not know or why I do not work higher level ball. I have found in baseball you can do whatever you want and no one is really going to care. Not assignor, not coaches or even fellow umpires. The rules are clear, the casebook is clear. After that you have to decide what you are willing to take heat for. No go ahead and tell me what I have not accomplished and the respect I will not ever achieve. ;)

Peace

No Jeff, I've been quite nice to you lately. I only asked for our readers to answer the question not become defensive.

Wow, I should feel so privileged that you were nice to me. I guess I should bow down to the big timer baseball umpire that you are. :rolleyes: Now tell me why I should care that you are nice to me or anyone for that matter?

Peace

Because Santa Claus is watching.

While I have heard infielders say "back", I have
not encountered one saying "go". I must agree with
the idea of telling said fielder(s) to knock it off.
I have yet to have one continue after an admonishment
about it. I did have one high school coach come to
me about it, and ask why I told his fielder that
he could not use such terminology toward the
baserunner. I informed him that it could be considered
"verbal obstruction", thereby awarding a base to
the runner. He politely thanked me, told the player
in question to cut it out, and all was well.

simple way to solve this
 

The answer to this is simple,

Peg that first baseman when he comes to bat and it ends.

Thank you, your response was polite and interesting.
It is amazing that high school coaches will believe almost anything, as long as we say it with conviction. It happens on the college ball field too.

Your columnar writing style looks familiar.

Re: simple way to solve this
 

That reminds me of what I tell the leadoff batters when they stand by the batters box timing the pitcher while he warms up. I tell them "you never see them do that in the big leagues, the pitcher would put one in their ear!" This always results in the batter retreating into his on-deck circle, where he belongs.http://media.scout.com/media/image/19/190049.gif

I recall doing a college game where the RUNNER on first base, after the pitcher came set and was just breaking to pitch, would bluff stealing but would yell, "HE'S GOING", trying to break the pitcher's concentration on the pitch. It was evidently ineffective, because the team tried it for one season and I've never seen it since. Nobody complained, so the umpires weren't put on the "do something about it" hotseat. Odds are in a college situation nobody WOULD have complained - someone would have been "buzzed" to send the message that what they were doing wasn't in the spirit of the game at that level. That coach is habitually in the CWS.

JJ

My True Answer,
 

WCB:

In an attempt to be part of the answer and not part of the problem I offer my view of your original post:

When I read your post I knew (contrary to your thoughts) that you were simply setting a situation that would lead to the end outcome. That is why I answered as I did . . . I respectfully request that you do not try to fill in what "I really meant".

Your situation must have rules for me to answer so here they are:

1) If I were in "A" with r1 then, for me, this could only be a Federation High School Playoff Game. That is the only "three man mechanic" games I work.

2) Since I work a rather "Deep A" with r1 I would have to first hear the entire conversation. I wouldn't "guess" what is being said or the motive behind the conversation.

3) So let's now all agree that the conversaion is EXACTLY as you portray it: "F3 is "encouraging r1 to run." IF I was interested enough to listen and decided that it wasn't in the spirit of FED sportsmanship rules I would simply step between the fielder and the runner, while touching the base (acting as if I am putting the base back into position) I would tell F3 to desist in no uncertain terms.

4) Since I am a veteran umpire I would say this to the level I was interested and to the level I thought important.

5) By injecting myself into the situation we are now in a position, and I hope you agree, that I am no longer worried about the "verbal obstruction" issue -- I am now directly involved so it elevates to an issue that if F3 says it again I have placed myself in a position that I must eject the perp.

This situation is FAR different than saying "Back!" by a middle infielder and should be handled differently.

Windy, I have plenty of resume fodder to convince even the most anal that I have a strong understanding of the letter and the intent of National Federation Rules . . . if pressed I would freely admit that I probably understand Fedlandia better than you after working it for 37 years and studying the processes they use.

Oh BTW, I would definitely call a guy out at the dish on an over the fence homerun if I saw him miss the plate by ANY measurement.

I notice that EVERY MLB umpire closely monitors all runners and the batter during a walk off home run and I do the same.

AND I believe in umpire's getting their own calls and living with them and an elimination of "group hug" umpiring. Let's get a little personal responsibility back into officiating.

Let's make umpiring a little less coach friendly and little more involved in getting our own calls and living with the outcome.

Thanks for reading,

Tee

JJ and Tee,
Thank you for responding to the query. We deal in hypotheticals all of the time here and on the field. This was just another example of that possibility. I appreciate your candor Tee, I was happy to see that you would agree about the plate call. (WHERE WERE YOU WHEN PAPA C. WAS DOGGING ME ABOUT WHAT ALL EXPERIENCED UMPIRES CALL?) I knew that I wasn't the only one that calls them the way they are supposed to be called. :)

I've said it before and I'll say it again; this rule stinks and that is why I hate umpiring Fed ruled baseball. You would get laughed off of most college fields for even hinting that you would call something like this. Tee's comment about injecting himself into the game is what I've preached all along. Call what is easily supported by the books. (Yes, I was careful with the wording, since some of you are still on the newsletter bandwagon and no one actually has one.) That's is what the coach will look up when the game is over.

I may just have to put you back on that list, Tee! I'm sure that you lost sleep over it. ;)

Thank you again for the courteous reply.

Watch Out!
 

WCB wrote:

(Yes, I was careful with the wording, since some of you are still on the newsletter bandwagon and no one actually has one.)

I am not sure who you are referring to here. I have all the spring newsletters back as far as 1978. FED will also send you copies if you ask for them.

Tee

Correction:

Tee has one, Papa C. probably does too.

If you need one to support this call, write to Fed or have Tee or Papa C. send you theirs. I would try Tee first, he has it handy.


[Sorry Tee, but you asked for it. I'm a stickler for details. Do the ones from the late 70's come in handy or are you waiting for the magic moment on eBay? :)]