Kind of like the three bears.

Too close?

Too far?

Just right?


Tim.

http://us.a2.yahoofs.com/groups/g_22...g1LqDB3RVtwcTg

Way too far away on a tag play, gotta get your nose into it. 3BLX probably better for this play anyhoo.

[Edited by SanDiegoSteve on Dec 20th, 2005 at 07:11 PM]

Biggie,

Where'd you find the picture?

D

D-Man:

That's a picture by Bob Larson from the Yahoo LL umpires group.


Bunch~a~Smitty's anyway. Just look at them all trying to look like real umpires!http://www.officialforum.com/images/icons/icon12.gif



Tim.

Hard to tell when they're just standing there. They might be real umpires trying to look like Smitty's.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by SanDiegoSteve
Way too far away on a tag play, gotta get your nose into it. 3BLX probably better for this play anyhoo.

With the catcher drawn that far into the infield, you'd never see a swipe tag of the back of the runner from 3BLX.

Edited due to mistakes from too much Sangiovese, but what the hey. it's vacation.

[Edited by GarthB on Dec 21st, 2005 at 01:44 AM]

What's a wipe tag of a bag of a runner?

LOL

Tim.

Picture? What Picture? I got a picture of a little red 'X'.

Dave
****

Consider yourself lucky.

Hehehe,
 

PWL, now that's funny.

T

I think you guys are joking around here...this is a classic example of how NOT to take this play at the plate. The picture shows the instructor getting straight-lined and basically having no angle to see whether or not the runner is being tagged.

A classic rule of umpiring is NEVER put anything between yourself and the play. Obviously, the runner is in a direct line between the umpire and the catcher(tag) - Big NO NO. This play should definitely be taken 3BLX.

[Edited by Sal Giaco on Dec 21st, 2005 at 05:00 PM]

Same here - a little red X. I use AOL, which is a problem sometimes, but then I tried it in internet explorer without AOL and had the same problem. Any ideas how to get around it?

Mike

Personally, I disagree. At 3BLX if there were a swipe, you'd never see the contact.

I would have started at the point and when the catcher moved that far into the infield, I'd have moved to 1BLX and then taken a step or more if needed to my left to avoid being straight lined. But that's just me.

Perspective vs. Context
 

I could not see the picture posted, so I went to the source. Let's be fair, Tim. The title of the picture is "1blx vs. 3blx" and it is one of two pictures. The other shows the fielder and runner in the same position with the umpire in the 3blx instead of 1blx position. Viewed in context, it is obvious that the purpose is to show why 3blx is the way to make this call.

Bob Larson posted the picture, but I don't think he is in it. Maybe. I know from other posts that he annually attends a professional clinic on the East Coast. Your reference to a bunch of smittys seems misplaced. Shouldn't you save your criticism for the wannabee umpires who don't seek advanced training?

Mike

This picture does NOT show a swipe tag but rather a tag actually being applied on the inside shoulder of the runner - which is impossible to see if you are positioned 1BLX. That's probably why the instructor has his arms out to his side suggesting that he can't tell whether or not the tag has been applied. If you position yourself 3BLX (the same angle from which the picture was taken), you can clearly see that the runner was tagged.

Now, if the play developed further, perhaps into a swipe tag on the runner's back, then you would have to adjust a couple of steps towards fair territory (yes, like Bruce Froeming does) to see the tag. It's a basterd (sp) play but what else can you do??

Sal,

If what they are telling the umpire is that it is absolutely guaranteed that the only play that will be made on the runner by a catcher in fair territory is a tag on the side of the runner, and not to prepare for any other possibility, then yes, 3BLX is the place to be.

I never have been trained that way. In all the clinics I've attended, including the desert classic, we were taught to be positioned to see what ever could happen given the positions of the catcher, the runner and the quality of the throw. I am very poor at one dimensional questions. I'll refrain from joining in on them in the future.

WHAT PICTURE? The placemat or link is gone!

Oh never mind - it's in regard to LL so it's not important! :p

Re: Perspective vs. Context
 

Mike,

Tim was making a joke about the Smitties, because someone we all know made a remark that all the umpires on Tim's board at Yahoo were a bunch of Smitties, to which I'm sure the fine umpires there took offense.

Smitty #12

Mike:

My comment about the "Smitty's" was completely sarcastic. I get tired of hearing how all LL umpires are untrained or unkempt, "Smitty's."

Some of us that work LL games ( notice that's a real baseball field they're training on ) take great pride in educating and improving ourselves.

The guys in the picture look professional and interested in what's going on with the play. I hope this help's dismiss the image some of the members have of LL umpires with no uniform, equipment outside their clothing, hat's backward, etc...


On the play itself, I posted the picture to spark an actual baseball officiating discussion. As you can see, there are differing opinions on how best to see the tag here. I think that's what makes these forums interesting to read. I enjoy hearing how others would call a play when faced with the same situation.

Personally, I would call this from 3BXL a few steps to the right of the plate. But that's not saying anyone who would call it from a different position is wrong in their approach. I think the play can be called from 1BLX without being straightlined if the PU gets a good lean and look, but I wouldn't recommend it.

Tim.

Garth,
There is nothing wrong with starting at the point of the plate extended and then adjusting either to 1BLX or 3BLX, depending on the cather's positioning, the angle of the throw and/or how the entire play is developing. That's how we've all been taught over the years. However...

I have noticed, especially at the big league level, that umpires are now using 3BLX as their starting point (so that you can see swipe tags on EITHER side of the runner) and then moving towards fair territory, sometimes as far as in front to the plate, for collison plays.

As I mentioned earlier, this is different from what we've have been taught, however, this ADVANCED positioning mechanic has it's merits. In fact, I have been using it the last year or so and it has really given me some great views of some tough plays at the plate.

For the majority of umpires, using the point of the plate extended as a starting point is definitely the way to go. As you gain more and more experience and feel comfortable reading how plays at the plate develop, don't be afraid to try this new positioning - you might be surprised by what you actually "see". Take care

Sal,

I'll be the first to admit that I tend to fall back on "what works" for me. When I see a catcher move that far away from the line. my fisrt thought is "swipe tag" and I begin to prepare for that.

I am not opposed to moving into fair territory if it will give me the look I need and if I will not present any hazard to the throw, be it a good throw, or potentially a bad throw.

I've done that at the D-1 level as well as high school with no grief from a supervisor.

Glad to hear you are open to new ideas, different mechanics, etc. I think that's what we are all here for - to exchange ideas that we've enocountered through our own experiences.

As a side note, I wish more threads would play out like our exchange did. Both of us are niether wrong nor right in our opinions yet I feel like we've learned from just stating our view points in a positive/respectful manner. Hopefully, others will follow in a similar fashion. Happy Holidays!

looks like a fake one to me. wheres the grass?

huh?
 

So, fields that use artificial turf are fake baseball fields?

yes


i will type it for you: "haha brian that was a good one"

it was a joke. fake grass -> fake field -> fake baseball

from one brian to another
 

I still believe like Crash Davis does that astroturf and the designated hit should be banned. But that's just my opinion.

Brian

I thought
 

I thought that since BigUmp56 posted it, and the subject looks like an I instead of a 1, that it meant I Be Extra Large. lol

I had no picture either...

I'm wondering why some of you are unable to see the picture.
I can see it using IE at work, or Firefox at home. Is it just my pictures that neglect to show up, or are there others you're unable to view?

I be extra large.........Good one!!! http://www.officialforum.com/images/icons/icon14.gif



Tim.

I get the picture sometimes, and sometimes I get the little X. I am not a computer expert, so I don't understand why it is doing it. Same thing with the umpire shirts, sometimes I get 3 X's.

Tim, when I first saw IBXL, I thought the same thing!:D

I've never heard of IBX Root Beer, but we have IBC Root Beer and Cream Soda in glass bottles. It's the best. My dad used to buy Dad's by the gallon bottle. A & W Cream Soda is not as tasty as Safeway/Vons/Pavillions (all the same) Diet Cream Soda. Their root beer, and in fact all their sodas are surprisingly very good.

Man it's easy to tell you two aren't from the Midwest!


Here, we call it "pop."


I remember once when I was working in Missisippi, I sat down at the counter in a little cafe. The man next to me asked for a "Coke." The lady tending the counter replied, "what flavor Coke you want?" The man told her, "I want me an Orange Coke."

This was in the early 80's before Coke came out with all the different flavors.

Tim.

My mom and dad were from Minnesota, and they called it "pop" too. I grew up calling it "pop" as well, even though I lived here, and other kids said "soda."

Having traveled the country a bit, I have heard the following terminology for flavored carbonated non-alcoholic beverages:

Soda
Pop
Tonic
Sody
Fizzie water
Coke
Soda pop
Seltzer

I probably left out somebody's word for it. Any more?

Great, Tim. I'm sorry I misread your intent. I also agree with your sentiment, although I'm not inclined to think this will fix the problem. LL will always have that stigma because LL is so big and all-inclusive and, for most umpires calling the games, it is their initial foray into umpiring. As a result, there will always be lots of smittys. Peoiple see them, and all LL umps are branded.

As I mentioned earlier in this thread, the clinic was professional, and attended by umps from all different levels, including LL.

Mike

Well,
 

I read this thread for the first time today. The reason I had not read it as the picture did not show up for me. I went to the thread with two separate computers both running diffeent bases. No picture.

Now TODAY, I open the thread and the picture is sitting there nice and purty!!!

So:

SanDiegoSteve wrote:

"Way too far away on a tag play, gotta get your nose into it."

Wrong, wrong, wrong. That is not true for EVERY single clinic and school I went to.

When you "stick your nose in it" that is when a play can "blow up".

Please ignore the advice to "stick your nose in it."

No clinician will EVER give you that advice. Keep 10' to 15' from plays (force or slide and tag) and get the bigger picture.

Tee

Re: Well,
 

Tee, you have got to be kidding. I have been instructed from day one to get as close as possible to a tag play. I don't mean literally get in the way of the play, but you do need to be on top of tag plays. I received this advice from many pro school graduates, my instructors, columns in Referee Magazine (I can't remember which author, either Carl or Jon Bible,) and from watching how major league umpires do it. I never see them farther than 10 feet from a tag play, and more often, they are right on top of it.

I have heard the axiom of "closer to a tag play, farther from a force play," in one form or the other, for as long as I can remember.

Please don't disparage the experience I bring to the table. You do it the way you want to, but quit acting like you are some big expert, and any other method is wrong. Maybe no clinician you know would give this advice, but you certainly don't know every clinician.

I do wish I still had my back issues of Referee Magazine from 1986 or 1987. I remember the exact wording. It was "stick your nose in a tag play."

Well, naturally it was referring to a close tag play, and that's what they meant: A tag play! And the sure, you want to step or lean into it to get a better look. That is what "sticking your nose into it" means. It doesn't mean to stick your nose in between the glove and the runner. Jeez, is that what people really thought I meant? Sure a literal crowd!

15' is way too far away for a tag play, if you can get closer. If 15' is as close as you can get, fine. But if you have a close play on the way, and you can get in closer with a good angle, chances are you are going to see the play better than if you were far away.

I don't care for 3BLX much myself, except for plays like the one illustrated here. You screen yourself off from the tag in 1BLX when the catcher moves too far into fair territory. My main concern is seeing the whole play, and being ready to move to whatever spot gives me the best look at it, whether it is 1BLX, 3BLX, or somewhere in between or to the outside.

Re: Re: Well,
 

1. I know of no reputable clinic that teaches "stick your nose in" on a tag play, but then I've only been to ones taught by the likes of Jim Evans, Gerry Davis, Doug Harvey, Gus Rodriquez, Dave Yeast and Dick Runchey.

2. I know of no published source that has been incorrect on rulings and mechanics more then Referee Magazine.

3. One doesn't have to know every clinician who exists to know the correct mechanic. Heck, I've only met five astronomers in person, but I know the earth revolves around the sun.

4. Steve, you need to step back and reflect when someone posts a correction to one of your beliefs. You have a knee jerk reaction that you can't possibly be wrong. You can be, and in this instance, you are.

...and right or wrong please don't be so sensitive. I hope your skin gets thicker when you hit the field.

And don't take someone else's credible opinion as the diametric opposite of yours. Nobody ever thought you would place your nose between the glove and the runner. There very well be a time where getting a closer look is not a bad tactic, but how close is too close. When the tag happens you need to be far enough away to see the continuing action following the tag. One may have to "get their nose in" on a play but if you are inside 6 (IMO, an absolute minimum) feet you are way too close. What can't one see from 6 feet away?

D

Garth,

So you are saying that you should be absolutely no closer on a tag play than on a force?

That goes against everything I was ever taught. I have never seen any umpire take a tag play from 15' or more away. Ever. At any level. You always see in close up photos of MLB plays at the plate, the catcher, the runner and the umpire in the same frame. If the umpire wasn't fairly close to the play he wouldn't be in the picture.

I didn't mean to LITERALLY put your face between the glove and the runner and make an umpire sandwich. Just get in closer than on a force! 6 to 10 feet, depending on the type of play, is just fine. As long as you can see the whole play develop. It's like using a zoom lens...you don't want to cut out part of the picture, so you can't get TOO close. But you don't need a wide-angle lens like you need on a force play.

The quote didn't come from the makers of Referee Magazine itself. It came from either A)Carl Childress or B)Jon Bible, the major contributors of the day.

The article said that you should get closer to a tag play, and back away from a force force play. That is what the general idea was behind the "stick your nose into it" reference.

If I am able to get in closer for a tag play, I do. If not, then I take what I can get. But if you have the time to get a better look, by all means you should do it.

If you think I am going to sit back and reflect about someone telling me I've been taught wrong, and have been doing it wrong (and getting good ratings, making request lists, etc.) all these years, you need to think again. It gets real old to always be "corrected," as if I need the approval of certain people here. I've never had any evaluator come up to me and say, "Steve, you get too close on those tag plays, you might want to back up some!"

I know what I have read, who I learned from, and what I have made a study of over the last 20 years, not to mention the many games I have worked. I have always been a real stickler for proper mechanics. I have worked hard on developing and honing my skills, and I am open to learning new things. But I don't like getting dismissed as "wrong" out of hand. I learned differently perhaps, but I wouldn't go so far as to say that I'm wrong. I have never had any trouble getting my calls right, and I get in excellent position to see them.

Now, Garth, this was a calm, well thought out response, and not a "knee-jerk" reaction.

D-Man,

When I hit the field, I don't have a group of nit-picky, overly critical, totally literal umpires bashing everything I do or say. So my skin is comfortably thick.

I objected to the way Tee chose to give his "credible opinion." It was given by telling everyone to ignore what I said, as if I was a poisonous snake about to bite them.
Certain people who post here have a way of coming off like fingernails on a blackboard. He is one of them.

If you read my last post, you will see that what I meant by "sticking your nose into it" was that 6' to 10' is good for a tag, depending on the situation. Not "10' to 15' (same as a force play)" like Tee said. That is what I disagreed with, and with the way it was said.

Cripes,
 

Let me make my comment clear . . . "crystal".

I have never been, nor do I ever PLAN to be closer than 10' from ANY call.

We are taught over-and-over to not get to close to calls and let them "blow up" . . . if an umpire is properly trained and believes in "angle over distance" there really shouldn't be a disagreement with the distance from the play.

No real trainer would ever tell an umpire to "stick his nose" into the play.

You are simply wrong in your view . . . I can accept that but doubt seriously that an umpire that claims he is "good enough" to be an MLB umpire would ever "stick his nose into a play."

Sorry, you lost yardage on this one, mate.

Tee

PS, if you don't like the way I post . . . tough cookies!

T

So, simply put, you're just not going to listen or take seriously anyone telling you that you are wrong or were trained wrong.

In consideration of that, a friendly word of caution: Do not attend proschool or even a week-long "Evans Classic". If you are not open to criticism and correction, you will be ignored and you will have wasted your time and money.

You have made it plain that there is no reason to post to you, Steve. You have admitted having a closed mind.

<B>"Now, Garth, this was a calm, well thought out response, and not a "knee-jerk" reaction."</B>

That makes it all the more disturbing. You find refusing to ever consider that you might be wrong as "well thought out".

Enjoy your season.

P.S. I never get closer than 10 t0 12' to any play. Tag plays can explode on you and 6' is just too close. When my eyesight gets so I can't see the ball from 12' to 15' away, I'll quit.

[Edited by GarthB on Dec 27th, 2005 at 01:18 AM]

Too close ....
 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by GarthB
[B][QUOTE]Originally posted by SanDiegoSteve
Garth,


If you think I am going to sit back and reflect about someone telling me I've been taught wrong, and have been doing it wrong (and getting good ratings, making request lists, etc.) all these years, you need to think again. QUOTE]

So, simply put, you're just not going to listen or take seriously anyone telling you that you are wrong or were trained wrong.

In consideration of that, a friendly word of caution: Do not attend proschool or even a week-long "Evans Classic". If you are not open to criticism and correction, you will be ignored and you will have wasted your time and money.

You have made it plain that there is no reason to post to you, Steve. You have admitted having a closed mind.

Now, Garth, this was a calm, well thought out response, and not a "knee-jerk" reaction."</B>

What Tee and Garth said ... You are only looking for trouble if you are ever closer than 10' to a call as described.

Personally, I like about 15' - you get a much better picture of the action.

Thanks
David

THen how will you ever learn something?

I don't doubt that you were taught "get your nose into the middle of the play." I accept that Carl or Jon wrote an article expounding that theory. I also think that most of us recognize that theories and teachings change over the years, and this might be one of those instances.

Steve, when you work 3-umpire (or more) mechanics, and you are U1, how far from first do you stand with R1? This is one play that gives you plenty of time to be in the right position (you take the position well before any "play"), so I think that would give you guidance for *about* where you'd want to be on any other tag play. (Recognizing, of course, that you might not want to move closer because of the potentil for getting hit with a ball that gets by F3, but recognzing as well that this is as "repeatable" a situation you will find -- there's unlikely to be a collision, a swipe tag, a hurdle, an attempt to dislodge the ball, a late cut-off, .... -- all the potential items you see on other tag plays.)