How about you?

[WhatWuzThatBlue]

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?

[Tim C]

And the one note samba starts all over again.

~Sigh~

t

[WhatWuzThatBlue]

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.

[SanDiegoSteve]

What would you call, Windy?

[WhatWuzThatBlue]

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]

[SanDiegoSteve]

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

[RPatrino]

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.

[WhatWuzThatBlue]

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?

[GarthB]

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

[WhatWuzThatBlue]

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?

[Tim C]

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]

[GarthB]

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]

[MrUmpire]

Originally posted by GarthB
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

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!"

[WhatWuzThatBlue]

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?

[SanDiegoSteve]

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.



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

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