Babe Ruth Follies

[BigUmp56]

Originally Posted by Rich Fronheiser

Arguing with a clinician at a clinic is not bright, no matter how wrong the clinician is. Shut your piehole and let the idiot blabber on. Do you expect the clinician to say, "You know, Tim, you're right. I'm wrong, everyone." ?

No, but I expect him to be reasonable and allow things to be discussed. You'll notice in my post that I only pointed out one of his mistakes during the class. The appeal play was pointed out by a friend of mine I work HS game with and the dead ball appeal ruling was questioned by someone I didn't know. I don't know what we're supposed to get out of a clinic if we all just go as "yes men."
Seems like a waste of valuable time and good money if we aren't there to interact and learn something of value.


Tim.

[LMan]

Originally Posted by BigUmp56

Seems like a waste of valuable time and good money if we aren't there to interact and learn something of value.

...but Lance will tell ya, if you keep this up, you'll never get the "Big Game"

...so check six!

[Rich]

Originally Posted by BigUmp56

No, but I expect him to be reasonable and allow things to be discussed. You'll notice in my post that I only pointed out one of his mistakes during the class. The appeal play was pointed out by a friend of mine I work HS game with and the dead ball appeal ruling was questioned by someone I didn't know. I don't know what we're supposed to get out of a clinic if we all just go as "yes men."
Seems like a waste of valuable time and good money if we aren't there to interact and learn something of value.


Tim.

Some clinics are meant to give you value. Some clinics are meant to be a stage for the clinician(s). This is obviously one of the latter clinics and you figure this out pretty quickly, in my experience.

If this is a clinic where you have no future ties with the clinicians, go nuts -- argue and debate all you want. But if you're hoping for future assignments and this guy is involved, do you want to be known as "that guy?"

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by mcrowder

The reason you don't understand is that you were at a makeup store when the rest of the umpires were at a clinic. This explains it all.

ROTFLMAO!!!

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

The mechanic on this play is often described as "The umpire signals safe ...". I think this is wrong. The mechanic should be, "The umpire does whatever he would do if the runner had touched the bag." Now, it's consistent with the runner going to 2B, etc -- we're not tipping off either side, nor calling something that doesn't need to be called.

In practice, the play at first is "close enough" that we'd normally give a "relaxed" safe signal -- so that's what we should do when the runner misses the bag.

I think BigUmp56 already gave the professional interpretation, which is the same one I use in all of my games. Why do you disagree with the authoritative opinion and accepted mechanic?

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

I think BigUmp56 already gave the professional interpretation, which is the same one I use in all of my games. Why do you disagree with the authoritative opinion and accepted mechanic?

I already explained my opinion on this -- whenever a runner misses a base, we should act just as we would have acted had the runner touched the base (with the exception of a tag play at home when both the tag and the touch are missed). That way, we avoid telling either side that there was a missed base.

Some umpires get in the habit of pointing at the base (especially home) when a runner touches it. When they don't point, it tips off the defense. So we (I think all of us) would try to get the umpire to break the habit.

On a close play at first, where BR beats the throw, I signal safe. So, I'd signal safe if BR misses the base (but beats the throw).

On a not-close play at first (maybe F3 celarly drops the ball), we (at least I) don't signal safe. So, if BR misses the base, I won't change to signal safe.

[LMan]

Originally Posted by SAump

[CENTER] I cannot understand option B when the runner continues safely to 2B or 3B or home.

If the runner continued 'safely' to 2B or farther, you obviously didnt have a PLAY at 1B, so NO signal would be necessary, whether he stepped on the bag or not.

You dont have time to signal there, anyway. You better be hustling to beat him to the next bag where a play is developing.

[LMan]

Originally Posted by Tim C

I do not think that SAump can state a clear statement.

I cannot follow his sentance structure, much less his discussions.

I must be in a "user error" moment since I simply do not understand his points.

That is not rare, by the way.

He has no 'point.' Give him 3 more paragraphs and he'll convince himself that Steve Bartman hit the series-winning single in the 2004 World Series.

[SAump]

I try to listen for the ball in the mitt while I watch both the runner and first baseman legally touch. I have been taught not to signal safe or out right away. I have been taught to set, read, pause and allow the "dust to settle." I don't signal safe or out unless I am damn sure it's a SAFE or OUT call. Afterall, I am in no hurry to hang myself. You could be sure that my call would be made prior to the baserunner reversing direction after sprinting long past first base.

I have been told its okay to take even more time if its a bangor. It helps sell the proper safe or out call. I try to gather as much info as possible. No one has ever asked me to rule if he is safe or out before. If they do ask, then I would probably signal safe. Now if the first words I hear are "He missed the bag." That would lead me to another entirely different CALL. Now if the runner indicated that he missed the bag by quickly returning to the bag, I don't need to wait for an appeal. It's like self-incriminating evidence. The defense is holding the ball and touching the bag. VERDICT for the DEFENSE.

[BigUmp56]

Originally Posted by SAump

If they do ask, then I would probably signal safe. Now if the first words I hear are "He missed the bag." That would lead me to another entirely different CALL.

Well, it should lead to a different call. If the fielder has posession of the ball and is touching the bag and announces "he missed the bag" before the runner has corrected his error, he has just made an unmistakeable appeal.

Originally Posted by SAump

Now if the runner indicated that he missed the bag by quickly returning to the bag, I don't need to wait for an appeal. It's like self-incriminating evidence. The defense is holding the ball and touching the bag. VERDICT for the DEFENSE.

I think you should consider changing your moinker from SAump to MakeItump. You tend to make it up as you go along. Even when told what the exact professional interpretation is you still have to try to defend the indefensible.


Tim.

[PABlue]

lol

[SAump]

I read what you had to say and I agree with most of it. I may consider it now that I have been made aware of it. No one can expect any more.

I really liked the detailed explanation. I expect you to see that we are not that far apart. I hope you recognize that some of us may have been taught the very same things in school. But each person has a unique interpretation on precisely what was said.

I never try to put any words in from my pro-clinic. I certainly didn't carry a tape recorder out there. I may have been too tired and too sore and too sleepy and too hungover too hang on every word out of the pro-instructors mouth. I do remember the THIRST though.

If you do signal safe, and the defense properly appeals, and you signal out; please let me know the results from your evaluators -> the half that disagrees with your version of pro-mechanics.

[SAump]

You're OUT works fine.

You get HOME faster.

The End!