Two wrongs making a right?

[Bob Proctor]

I cannot believe an official with Phil Gawthrop's credential's would make a statement as he did in his article in the current "Official's Quarterly". After a long discussion about a situation that isn't covered in the book, his final statement is, "..., and look for any close pitch to call a strike." Under the worst of circumstances, shouldn't we all be looking for balls that are in the zone to call strikes? As he isn't sure that his suggested method for handling the situation is the best way, wouldn't he then be making two mistakes instead of one, or at least making that infamous "make-up" call? I've been officiating football for 25 years and if that were done in a football game we'd be shot ... twice!

[BigUmp56]

Umpires are conditioned to think strikes. I was taught that every pitch that leaves F1's hand is a strike until proven otherwise. This makes calling those borderline pitches strikes a heck of a lot easier.

Tim.

[Bob Proctor]

You missed the point. The real point is that a 35 year umpire with stellar credentials would tarnish his reputation by admitting that he would intentinally call a strike on a pitch that was outside the strike zone. One thing that officials in all sports are taught from day one is that two wrongs DO NOT make a right. You call what you see, not what you want to see. Looking for a pitch that is only close to the strike zone to call a strike ... with the express purpose only to teach a lesson is what has gotten umpires in trouble for ages. Haven't we learned anything by our predecessors' mistakes? Not to mention the fact that intentionally miss-calling a play is the same as a player intentionally breaking the rules. Lastly, aren't the umpires supposed to be the bastion of integrity, the keystone to keeping the game in order and played fairly? There is no such thing as a make-up call. All that does is give you two blows instead of one.

[briancurtin]

Originally posted by Bob Proctor
I've been officiating football for 25 years and if that were done in a football game we'd be shot ... twice!

thats why we wear chest protectors.

[Carl Childress]

Originally posted by Bob Proctor
You missed the point. The real point is that a 35 year umpire with stellar credentials would tarnish his reputation by admitting that he would intentinally call a strike on a pitch that was outside the strike zone. One thing that officials in all sports are taught from day one is that two wrongs DO NOT make a right. You call what you see, not what you want to see. Looking for a pitch that is only close to the strike zone to call a strike ... with the express purpose only to teach a lesson is what has gotten umpires in trouble for ages. Haven't we learned anything by our predecessors' mistakes? Not to mention the fact that intentionally miss-calling a play is the same as a player intentionally breaking the rules. Lastly, aren't the umpires supposed to be the bastion of integrity, the keystone to keeping the game in order and played fairly? There is no such thing as a make-up call. All that does is give you two blows instead of one.

FYI there is the FYC.

[BigUmp56]

You didn't mention anything about making the call to teach someone a lesson. From the limited information you provided you only mentioned that he was advocating looking to call close pitches strikes. That's what we're supposed to do, look to call borderline (close) pitches strikes.


Tim.

[TussAgee11]

No such thing as borderline in any part of our jobs.

A piece of the ball has either gone through a piece of the strikezone, or it hasn't. Don't call the ones that haven't. Regardless of how close they were, they don't fit the criteria.

If you want to do that, don't ever tell a coach it was close enough, say it was there.

[Carl Childress]

Originally posted by BigUmp56
You didn't mention anything about making the call to teach someone a lesson. From the limited information you provided you only mentioned that he was advocating looking to call close pitches strikes. That's what we're supposed to do, look to call borderline (close) pitches strikes.


Tim.

Tim: I am one of those who hate the phrase "looking for strikes." I have a 20-minute tirade on a tape I did for RightSports. It's "Working the Plate."

Briefly:

If you look for strikes, you will inevitably call pitches strikes that ain't and do a disservice to the game and the players.

Don't expand your strike zone to get batters to hit. It creates irrevocable dissonance for disciplied, well-coached hitters.

To paraphrase "God," (Doug Harvey), the batter has as much right to make a living in this game as the pitcher.

I hope you're not offended, but I've never met a really good umpire who said he went out looking to call strikes.

Never, not in over 50 years.

Good umpires go out looking to call pitches right, whether strikes or balls.

[BigUmp56]

Thanks for your candor, Carl. No, I'm not offended at all.

I will say this though, has it not been driven into us as umpires time and time again to think strikes and outs?

I've always been one to believe in Jim Porters idea of "The Strike Zone of Least Resistance."

Using his philosophy of finding different indicators to help call those borderline pitches strikes has always been helpful to me. I'm not talking about pitches that are obviously out of the zone. I'm talking about borderline pitches only. I look to call borderline pitches strikes whenever possible.


Then again I also believe in using the concept of an oval strike zone so as not to call a pitch that's marginal in two dimensions a strike. In other words if a pitch is borderline on the outside corner at the mid-thigh to the waist, I call the strike. However if the pitch is borderline on the outside corner below or above that I'm going to call it a ball.

I know other umpires that think the idea of using an oval is absurd. To each his own I suppose.

Tim.

[ozzy6900]

Two wrongs do not make a right -

But three rights make a left!

[PeteBooth]

Originally posted by Bob Proctor

I've been officiating football for 25 years and if that were done in a football game we'd be shot ... twice!

Bob you are missing the point.

In certain circumstances and umpire will make the FYC call. It's done on rare occassions and only on balls / strikes not on the bases.

Football and Basketball are different in that there is no need for the FYC call. If a player in either of those sports commits an unsportsmanlike act, the TEAM suffers. In your sport a 15 yard penalty and if it's the defense who committed the act an automatic first down for the offense. The offesne could have had 3rd and a mile, but because of a "bonehhead play" by the defense they now have a new set of downs.

In basketball, there is a Technical Foul issued and if a Foul is considered Flagrant or Intentional, the offense in addition to shooting free throws, gets the ball back again.

In baseball we have no such rule to enforce. We cannot give the defense an automatic out or give the offense 4 outs instead of 3. All we can do is eject the player or SEND A MESSAGE

Your sport as well as baskeball also "send messages" meaning this.

If the players are going to be "chippy" then EVERYTHING gets called. I remember when the Knicks (were a good team) played the Miami Heat (before Shak) the games were called TIGHT because those 2 teams had a HISTORY of fighting and the officials didn't want the game to get out of hand.

Sending Messages is prevealent in every sport but to different degrees.

In baseball IMO it serves a useful purpose. Let me give you an example;

I was umpiring a mens league game. These guys pay pretty good bucks to join and play once maybe twice a week. In this one at bat, B1 was fooled by a Curve ball and wanted to blame me for calling it a strike. He said "I would need a tree trunk to hit it" and starting drawing lines around the plate.

Now I have 2 choices. Eject Immediately or try to keep him in the game. I chose to try and keep him in the game. Since B1 wasn't ejected for his Unsportsmanlike behavior F2 KNEW what I was going to do next. He called for a pitch 8 inches off the outside edge. I rung B1 up on a called strike 3. Even his own teammates knew what I was doing.

The next time he came up to bat he said "Hey Blue can we start over". I said sure and no problem from that point on.

Therefore, depending upon the situation, Umpires do SEND MESSAGES. ASlso, IMO, it's not making a mockery of the game but trying to keep a player in the game who otherwise would be ejected. Also, the MESSGAE is not SENT all game long. It's a ONE Time MESSAGE for ALL participants.

Do not try to compare officiating Football to baseball. It's like Oil and water

Pete Booth

[Edited by PeteBooth on Mar 6th, 2006 at 10:06 AM]

[Bob Proctor]

First: Did anyone responding read the article I quoted?

Second: The author states that he 1) stopped the contest, 2) spoke to both coaches, and then 3) spoke to the batter. Do you still think there's a need for a fourth step, or might you be inclined to believe that all of the uniformed personnel on both teams might have it figured out by now ... thus eliminating the need to extend it further by calling the next ball out of the zone a strike? Besides being against the rules, doesn't this sound a little like overkill to you? By now everyone knows who's in charge! The ump has taken 10 minutes out of the playing time to prove it.

Third: Talk to some long time football officials before you make statements. Every senior football official will tell you the same thing. We all have given warnings and made "corrective" comments to both players and coaches thousands of times over the years. Usually the response from a coach results in better communication, more cooperation, and better coaches ratings. Football officials who run a situation into the ground generally don't last long (...and we never have to threaten a player or "make-up" a call). Maybe that's why baseball umpires find themselves being confronted on the playing field so much more often that football officials.

In 25 years I've rung up only 2 coaches, one AD, a newspaper reporter, and a cheerleader's mom ... not to mention several players for first offense flagrant personal and unsportsmanlike fouls. Though I have made warning statements to many players, I have never invented a foul just to prove a point. That would give one team an unfair advantage now, wouldn't it?

[WhatWuzThatBlue]

Good morning lads...Skilling promises 50-60 degrees soon, so I'm getting itchy. (Drove by one of my favorite schools and saw the team practicing in the parking lot last week, then we get snow!) It shant be long before we are treading the frozen tundra.

This topic falls smack dab in the 'get the call right' department. I don't screw a kid over on a base call and I don't hunt for strikes. Even when I've shrouded myself in UA, turtleneck, chest protector and plate coat to ward off the cold, my zone stays the same. That's pretty much the entire Spring in these parts!

A good strike zone will get you farther than excellent base mechanics. Calling close pitches strikes is bad karma. If it's a strike call it, if it's not - you'd better let it go. The cock-high fastball is easy to call; the best umpires can call a ball on one that's just outside and not hear a peep. Learn how to be consistent and sell the close balls.

Coaches know that if you are calling it two balls out for them, you are also taking the bat out of their hands when you 'call it both ways' (grin). I'm not saying that your strike zone needs to be a teacup, but the rules clearly allow the seams to barely nibble a corner and your call of "Strike". I know there are a few proponents of finding strikes when you need them, but that is amateur umpiring at its' worst. You aren't helping the game or yourself by calling lots of strikes that aren't truly there. In fact, you are teaching batters to swing at bad pitches and showing the world that you don't care.

The best teams are supposed to win. Pitchers don't get better when they see you call a strike that is three balls outsde either. Unless you've got a bet on the game, stick to the rules or stay home.

As an aside, I was lucky enough to be able to call a few games when Kirby Puckett played at Triton College years ago. He was a good kid who didn't deserve to go that quickly. The last few years were unfair to him but he was somethng else to watch on the field.

[Edited by WhatWuzThatBlue on Mar 7th, 2006 at 05:39 AM]