We've been discussing using the "no catch" verbal mechanic in the last couple of days and I thought I would ask what other verbal announcements you use. Of course I'm not asking about the obvious ones, just the little extra ones used in certain situations.

Things like:

"Off the bag"

"On the tag"

"Show me the ball"

"Safe, Ball's on the ground"

Do you use some of these?

What others do you use?

Tim.

A really helpful "non verbal" signal is the "thats nothing" signal, like the safe sign, closed fists.

For example, a base runner is stealing second, catcher raises up and "double pumps", as the batter is moving in the box. You might want to give the "thats nothing" signal, telling everyone that 1) yes you saw it, and 2) its not intereference. Saves a few arguments, just a few.

Bob

"Off the bag" - I do this with hand signals

"On the tag" - I generally point to where the tag was made with left hand while calling the out with the right.

"Show me the ball" - I have used this one, if unsure that the fielder still has it.

"Safe, Ball's on the ground" = I generally signal the safe and point at the ball on the ground.

Verbals I use:

"Yes he did" - on a check swing that wasn't (while pointing with my left hand and banging a strike with the right)

"No catch" - while signaling a safe, anytime it matters

"That's obsruction" - while pointing

That's about all the verbals I can think of.

Hand held in the universal "stop" signal, "thats enough coach".

bob

Not many do I use
 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by DG
[B][QUOTE]Originally posted by BigUmp56
</b>

I used DG's post and added my take:

"Off the bag" - only need at first base and done with hand signals

"On the tag" - I like the non-verbal signals on this play

"Show me the ball" - only needed if doing what I call "small ball" - kids that don't shave

"Safe, Ball's on the ground" = I simplify this to SAFE! Then if needed I pont to the ball

Verbals I use:

"Yes he did" - I like to say "he went"

"No catch" - while signaling a safe, anytime it matters (good mechanic)

"That's obstruction" - while pointing. I know some guys don't like to use a signal but I like to use the obstruction signal still.

thanks
David

"No catch" - while signaling a safe, anytime it matters (good mechanic)

I humbly disagree. "Catch" and "No Catch" sounds very similar - there is no need to say this. I was watching a high school ball game a year or two ago. The back end of the double header had the better umpire on the bases. He was being critiqued by one of the state evaluators when I we both saw him do this mechanic. R1 and R3, ball hit to right-center field for a decent sacrifice fly. He drops back and lines up R1 with the fielder and yells "Catch" when the ball was caught. He doesn't signal anything and immediately starts moving with the runner for the play at second. The game ends and we are all walking through the parking lot - Illinois' best locker rooms - and the evaluator asks him why he announces the catch. He says that he does it to let his partner know and for the timing of the tag. I ask him if he does this on every sacrifice and he proudly says that it is his habit. That habit kept him from getting a decent evaluation.

I've worked with guys who will say "Ball's down partner" loud enough to let me know that a catch has not been made. The calling umpire always uses the "safe" signal to indicate that no catch has been made. In a heated game and a lot going on, I enjoy this banter more than trying to figure out whether he said "Catch" or "No Catch".

I've also witnessed high school umpires say "Ball Four - Take your base." or some such nonsense. I always ask them, "Do you say, 'Strike three - go sit down.'?" It makes as much sense to tell them what to do then.

"i got 3" or "i got third," the communication with a base umpire, is one i assume will pop up in this thread, but id like to hear from some people about their thoughts on this.

im pretty sure something along the lines of "i'm up, john" or just "i'm up" was the better option coming from a few discussions i've read on this. what do you people use?

thats what i used for a while, but working older levels of baseball, talking about third can get confused in the heat of a play as a player-to-player conversation. ive had a few partners early on not realize i'm covering third when using that line. i mean they know the coverage (most of the time), but they cheated over towards 3B and looked surprised i was there. since my change to saying "i'm up, [name]" there hasnt been anything wrong or any mix ups.

also, i forgot about the first comment about pre-game. even when i mentioned "i got third" as the communication, it was sometimes still not heard/interpreted with fan noise and lots of people yelling "third." maybe its just me, but i feel that i am definitely loud enough on the field and it still caused troubles here and there.

[Edited by briancurtin on Jan 19th, 2006 at 12:41 AM]

Maybe there's hope for me after all. I'm actually going to agree with PWL. You need to let your partner know when your taking third if a runner comes. I would also add to his statement that you should announce where you will be in a run down with something along the lines of "I've got this end."


I also agree with Windy. You should just say something like "That's down, or it's down." In expanding on that thought, I also believe you should choose your words carfully when you go out to cover a fly ball while on the bases when working a three or four man rotation. If you feel the need to announce that you're going out, you should just say "That's me."

You don't want to anounce something like, "I'm out, or that's mine." Both of these announcements have the potential to confuse the defense.

The last thing two outfielders need when their bearing down on a fly ball is an umpire clouding the play by yelling "That's mine."

Tim.

Hmmm,
 

We no longer say "I've got third" . . .

We use "I'm up!" and that eliminates, in our opinion, any confusing reference to the defense.

ANY verbal comments by the BU from "A" (when he is gpoing out) are never heard by anyone but maybe F9. We follow CCA mechanics and the BU is simply supposed to raise one arm into the air.

BTW, anytime I have a verbal signal (ex: "I got the line or I'm staying home!") I have never been smart enough to include my partner's name. As we do not have "crews" that work together more than once or twice a year I am not good enough to first remember who my partner is, then remember his name and then include him in my call-out.

Tee

[Edited by Tim C on Jan 19th, 2006 at 09:55 AM]

Re: Hmmm,
 

But Tim, these guys are still young and can get up...

They are up...?

get it up...?

Where are they? Who are they? They're up though! ;)

I sometimes take ibuprofen before my game. Sounds like they may have gotten viagra in their ibuprofen bottle.
:D

Players probably stay clear of you when you're yelling "I'm up, Bill!" Don't let that guy get behind you.

Just adding a little humor. Tony

Just a small point of clarification -- you shouldn't (imo) announce where you will be in a rundown, you should annouonce where you are when you first get there.

good point
 

Was doing an evaluation last year and the PU was coming to third (on a rundown) and saying I've got third, when runner going to third made a great hook slide going to third.

PU was stuck making a call from 50 feet while BU had a great angle on the play and should have made the call.

PU missed the call.

Thanks
David

PWL wrote:

"Why was he leaving home uncovered?"

Tee queries:

"What is the difference between the PU taking this play at third compared to the PU rotating up to take R1 into third on a normal base hit coverage . . . it appears that, according to you, the plate would be 'uncovered' in both examples?"

Tee

Its not uncovered!
 

Uncovered, not quite, when PU takes third, BU easily moves to back of the mound, prepared to take home if needed.

Once BU takes home, PU moves out to the infield for any other plays.

Anyway, I don't want my PU covering up the plate anyway, I want him doing something useful ... (g)

Thanks
David

PWL,

Statements like that one make me wonder how in the world you can insult the good folks at the new OU site, when every last one of them would know the mechanic for this play. You, on the other hand, must like to stay at home tending your little garden, while expecting the base umpire to do your job for you.

From what information you have provided on this forum, you must be absolutely horrific. 20 wrong calls a game ....yeah, right. That might have amused some people, but it really must have been closer to a description of yourself.

Let's review:

1) you never have ejected anyone. Everyone agrees, you haven't done your job properly.

2) you give "make-up" calls in order to even up bad calls.

3) you make intentional wrong calls in close games, because you want to go take off your gear and rest up for the second game of a double-header.

4) you don't go to first or third in rundown situations when you are supposed to do so.

I am sure there are more things you do wrong than these, as they are probably just the tip of the iceberg.

I wouldn't have even brought this up, but you seem to think you are better than the umpires on the new forum, and it is perfectly obvious that you are not.

Methinks PWL is simply a man who gets jollies from stirring things up. Either he is suggesting we all use extremely poor habits and mechanics, or he's just a troll who KNOWS what he's saying is wrong.

Either that or he's a coach!

Or an announcer.

(Edit for spelling).

Is this the same crowd where a global moderator wants to send R2 back to third on an outfield hit because the catcher is knocked out?

Yes, that was the discussion. If any of you would like to take a look at what was actually being discussed instead of giving credence to Luke's ambiguous statement, here it is.

http://www.officials-unlimited.com/f...hp?topic=130.0

Tim.

Sorry Tim, that discussion is off limits to guests.

I've opened it up in the "situations" category.

Try this one.


http://www.officials-unlimited.com/f...hp?topic=130.0


Tim.

OK,
 

There is no chance that I would ever do what SDS suggests:

Play continues under all codes with shaving aged players.

As always, I don't give a freak about LL.

At umpire school you are taught:

"As the BR rounds first base on a clean single . . . as he turns he breaks his "pjuckimming" leg . . . as he lies in a puddle F3 requests the ball and tags him out for being off the base. What do you do!"

I call him "out."

No matter what SDS "wants" to do I call games by the rules.

Nuff' said.

There is no rule nor logic that allows SDS to make his call.

That is why, I guess, that he thinks he "could have been an MLB umpire."

I guess this play alone shows that to be incorrect.

Tee

I like Tee's mechanic about rundown or moving coverage situations. Rookies should pay attention to the fact that the umpire is saying that he is there, not that he is going there. I don't really worry about the defense hearing me say, "I'm at third, partner." or "I'm here, Jim." Both ways let my partner(s) know that I have moved, not that I'm in the process of it. In other words, be there before opening your mouth - it should only take a second or two to move the necessary amount.

There certainly is a rule that would allow this.

NFHS Section 2 Suspension of play.

Article 1 Time shall be called by the umpire and play is suspended when-

(d)An umpire or player in incapacitated, exept that if an injury occurs during a live ball, time shall not be called until no further advance or put out is possible:

Exception

If there is a medical emergency or if, in the umpires judgement further play could jeapordize the injured players safety, "Time" shall be called.

In the play we were discussing we had a catcher hit in the back of the head with a bat, lying down on the plate. There was R2 rounding third bearing down on the plate. There's no way in Hades I'm going to let the play continue with the catcher down on the plate like this.

Of course this all about personal judgement. My judgement is that the welfare of the player superceeds the welfare of the game. I'm not going to be a phsycic out there and try to guess what will happen. I feel it's best to err on the side of safety and protect that player.

Tim.

Good Lord!!
 

PWL, do you post just to hear yourself type?

edit below:

When I originally wrote this, PWL had five unresponded to posts in a row, all submitted within about a 45 minute timeframe.

Now, it appears that someone has deleted three of them.

[Edited by dddunn3d on Jan 22nd, 2006 at 05:53 AM]

It's no wonder why no one wants to post here anymore. Just look at you all nitpicking to each other and vomiting on the board. It's becoming a joke!

How about this. If you don't like us - go to another board.

If you don't like each other - use email or IM but keep this crap to yourselves.

If you don't like what I am saying here, tough $hit!

Stop acting like a bunch of little jacka$$es!

You've completely changed the plays
 

Read the posts correctly in order and you won't get so confused.

My comments about the PU was in response to Bob Jenkins - PU needs to be at 3rd base, that's his responsibility - but don't say anything until you are there and <b> in position> </b>to make a call.

In the play I referenced seeing, the PU was <b>NOT in position to make a call</b> thus the BU should have taken the play, and why the PU missed the call.

Once PU is in position then he can communicate "I've got 3rd" and BU knows how to react etc.,

If you're hanging around the plate, you're not going to get many games in our associations except for JV and below.

Thanks
David

Re: OK,
 

Well, of course you are good enough for the majors, Tee!

We weren't discussing LL as you have stated, we were discussing both Fed and OBR at a Youth Ball level. There are other youth organizations besides Little League. Actual youth leagues with shaving age people. Why do you feel that every discussion involves adults? Most people on all of these forums work some form of 18 and younger baseball.

Tim cited the Fed rule on this, which allows for the play to be killed in the event of the possibility of a serious injury.

Yes, the professional interpretation is that regardless of the severity of the injury, play is to continue until the ball is returned to the infield, and no runners are in jeopardy of being put out. But that's the thing: We aren't dealing with professionals, we are dealing with kids. Safety is a big concern in youth ball games, and I am not going to let the play continue when the catcher is laid out across home plate. I will stretch 5.10(c) and use 9.01(c). In adult baseball, play on!

Tee, I wouldn't put too much stock in what the Posse says. They have their own little agenda when it comes to evaluation, and they have never evaluated me. They are not even in my association, and haven't been for years. I can give you much better references than that bunch upon request. Oh, and just like you, I like my name spelled right, too.

Oh yeah, I also understand that you actually like me! You sure have a funny way of showing it.

Re: Re: OK,
 

Why are you sending R2 back to third? How can you explain to the offensive coach that R2 would not have scored when there is no one at the plate to catch a throw?

I think it's going to be pretty easy to explain to the offensive coach.

Coach: "Why didn't you score the run, there was no one there to field the throw?"

Me: "Well, Skip, if your batter didn't clock him in the back of the head then the catcher wouldn't be on the ground unable to field the throw."

Tim.

How about you join SDS in the list of guys who go around making up rules. There are rules that deal with what to do if B1 intentionally hits F2. In the play described, that was not the case. F2 got hurt. It is not your job to penalize the offense because a defensive player got injured.

I provided you with the rule. Now you're sounding like a rat. After the play is killed it's up to the judgement of the umpire to place the runners. There's no rule defining judgement.

Tim.

There is no rule defining judgement, but your judgement sucks.

Here is what is happened:

F2 laying face down.
No one else near plate.
R2 rounding third base.

How is R2 not going to score? Who is going to tag him out?

Also...You are the rat like one, you called time to protect a player, who may or may not have been in jeapordy.

I wish you two would find a room.

Time can, and should be called in this situation. Common sense and fair play (which you lack) would dictate that you wouldn't reward the offense on this play by advancing R2 after you killed the play.

If trying to protect a teenager from futher injury makes me a rat, then I will gladly accept the title.

Tim.

[Edited by BigUmp56 on Jan 20th, 2006 at 02:48 PM]

In the words of the infamous Tee:

PWL= WOBW

Tim.

Hmm,
 

I cannot picture any experienced "FED" umpire not scoring the run.

Period.

What a crock!

Tee

I can't picture an "experienced" Fed umpire not knowing there was a rule allowing the play to be killed.

Tim.

Luke,

How do you equate protecting a player's safety to being a coach. You shouldn't swear at people like that!

And Tim, you shouldn't call Luke a rat either. Gentlemen, please!

Here is what happened:

F2 was hit on the head with the full force of the follow-through of the bat. He is laying on top of home plate, and is not getting up.

This happened when R2 was leading off from 2nd base, not as he was rounding third. Sitch was not worded accurately to start with.

F8 possibly had a play on R2 at the plate, as he was coming up throwing as R2 rounded third.

F2 was still down, many seconds after originally going down, so he appears to be possibly unconscious.

At this point I kill the ball, with the rules backing me up in a high school game, and with 9.01(c) in an OBR based youth game.

When the paramedics come and take the catcher away with a cerebral hemmorage or other serious injury, I don't want his mother jumping my *** for letting the play continue. What if F3 cuts the throw off and puts the BR in a run-down between 1st and 2nd, and it goes on for a bit longer? Meanwhile, the catcher is getting no medical attention, which he may very well need at this point.

This is not pro ball, and you can't umpire amateur youth ball games as though it were.

It sounds to me like F2 is blocking the plate while not in posession of the ball (or about to recieve a throw) -- I'd rule obstruction and award the run.

Now, change the play so R2 rounds third just as the F3 fields the throw from the outfield. F2 and F3 converge on the plate and the injured F2. Here, I'd be more likely to kill the play and return R2 to third.

Bob,

The runner was rounding third as F8 was throwing the ball. What makes you think there wasn't going to be a train wreck at the plate. I can picture F1 trying to pull F2 off the plate to make a play.

Like I said if this was adult league baseball, I let the play continue. I sure don't want the liability of letting the play go on with a minor child possibly seriously injured sprawled across the plate.

And how could that be obstruction when R2 is still rounding third? Are you awarding "imaginary obstruction" because there may be a play at the plate? I would think you would have to wait and see if F2 hasn't been rolled out of the way.

Killing the play and putting the runners at first and third just makes more sense. If the play had read, "the catcher was hit in the head, but got up as R2 was rounding 3rd" then I would let the play continue.

Hmmm,
 

Excuse me Tim, where did I ever say anything about not knowing a rule that for safety the ball can be killed?

Direct me to that post, please.

As I said, I cannot believe that an experienced FED umpire would not score the run. It is that simple.

Tee

You are setting up conditions that do not necessarily exist. Scoring the run doesn't mean one doesn't know that a rule exists allowing the play to be killed. It means, simply, scoring the run.

1. A TEENAGE baserunner will see that F2 is knocked out and covering up the plate. He will also see that F2 does not have the ball. Do you think R2 is going to do some sort of slide right into the catcher's face?

2. Common sense says R2 will score when there is no one at the plate to make a play on him.

Re: OK,
 

I guess I misunderstood when I read what you had written.

Tim.

I have no problem with an umpire killing this play. I would not, myself, unless this was 14U or less, but I won't fault an umpire that does.

But I cannot fathom not scoring the run. Is there even the slightest doubt that he would not have scored had you let the play continue?

(Now... throw in a pitcher seeing the catcher down and coming in to field the throw at home, and we have A) potential for additional injury should a collision occur near F2, and B) reasonable chance that the runner would not score - in that case, kill it and leave him at 3rd)

Tell me what is so much different in the play we've been discussing, than the play HHH posted in this thread.


http://www.officialforum.com/showthr...5&pagenumber=3


Tim.

It is not hard to figure out.

There is a big difference between a wacker and a play where the ball is in the outfield.

it has to be a personal matter
 

Yes, we misunderstood that Tee would never call any play the way I would, cuz I is jist sum dum sum betch don no nuthin'. But then in a very similar hypothetical situation, he is quoted as being in favor of killing the play, sending the runner back to second, and not killing it at the pro level.

So, to recap:

Tee would kill the play in a high school game if it were a serious injury.

Steve said that if he felt the injury was serious he would kill the play.

Tee said he would not kill the play at shaving age/pro ball, which is basically 18 and over.

Steve said he would not kill the play for adult leagues as well.

I see no difference in opinion here. If there is a serious, life threatening injury, or you cannot ascertain as to the extent of said injuries, then you kill the play immediately in youth ball games.

Also, Luke, the play in our situation could very easily be a wacker, and R2 sure doesn't deserve to score automatically when he started at 2B, and had barely arrived at 3B as F8 was coming up throwing. Had he been at third at the time of the pitch, I would kill the play and award home plate to the runner, and stop the BR at first base.

As evidenced by the responses in the other thread, I am not alone in my opinion.

Edited for correction

[Edited by SanDiegoSteve on Jan 20th, 2006 at 09:59 PM]

Re: it has to be a personal matter
 

The plays are not similar.

It is pretty hard to have a wacker when there is no defensive player around to catch the ball.

Re: Re: it has to be a personal matter
 

What is so hard about envisioning the pitcher covering the plate, since he should be backing up the plate on this play anyway?

And the situations are at least remotely similar. They involve a catcher with undetermined injuries, which may or may not be serious.

Until ther's a more imminent train wreck, I let the play continue. With a runner rounding third and F8 just releasing the thorw, there's no imminent danger to F2.

Quote:

And how could that be obstruction when R2 is still rounding third? Are you awarding "imaginary obstruction" because there may be a play at the plate? I would think you would have to wait and see if F2 hasn't been rolled out of the way.

Agreed. It's not obstruction until, well, R2 is obstructed. The play in my mind didn't match what was written -- I had R2 approaching the plate.