"Tail Wagging The Dog"

[BigUmp56]

I thought this excerpt from one of Carls articles is worthy of some discussion.


"That’s why some umpires are moving to the C side of the diamond with a runner on first only. They have a far easier time calling the steal of second; in addition, studies seem to show the angle for the first-base pick-off play is better in C than in B. Lots of umpires resist that innovation, though, because the coaches claim C is too far away. But isn’t that the tail wagging the dog?"


Any thoughts?

Tim.

[bob jenkins]

"They" might have a far easier time calling the steal, but I don't. The swipe tag is too easy to miss from C, imo.

What "studies" seem to show that the angle from C is better? (I'm not disputing the conclusion, btw)

C is farther than B. If (and I don't know that this is true), the angle is about the same, then closer (up until about 10' or so) is better.

[David B]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

"They" might have a far easier time calling the steal, but I don't. The swipe tag is too easy to miss from C, imo.

What "studies" seem to show that the angle from C is better? (I'm not disputing the conclusion, btw)

C is farther than B. If (and I don't know that this is true), the angle is about the same, then closer (up until about 10' or so) is better.

I agree with Bob here. There's going to be many more plays made at first than second (we want to stay closer to first) and I see the tag much better from B than C.


Thanks
David

[mcrowder]

Count me as agreeing with this change.

Yes, there are more calls at 1st than at 2nd, but the degree to which my ability to make the call at 1st diminishes when changing to C from B is small, while the degree to which my ability to make the call at 2nd increases when making this change is well worth it.

The last coach that questioned my mechanics got to watch the rest of my mechanics from the parking lot. So I really don't much care how an individual coach may feel about whether I'm in B or C. No dog-wagging here.

[Durham]

While it is nice to discuss thoughts and changes to mechanics, the changes have to make sense and put us in a better position on most calls. Also, I would like to read about these studies, are they real or just someone’s observations in which we are not fully aware of all the things that went into them?

With a runner on first working 2 man, 3 man, or 4 man, the base umpire inside would be looking for a steal play, double play, and FPSR interference at second. In 2 man we add the pickoff at first.

For all 4 plays, it has been my experience that B is the best place to be, and deep B is better for all except the pickoff. When I work 3 man, most weekends, and I am forced to go to deep C, left handed hitter, I will more times than not swing back into the dirt to see the steal play, because C is just a bad place to be for the steal. A bad throw and you are blocked-out; all you can really see is the fielders back.

In 2 man with the pickoff, if you are half way between the mound and second then you will not have a better angle in C than in B. However, if you are someone that works deep, then you quite possibly could, but if you make the adjustment and move up you will be fine.

Thoughts?

[Tim C]

"When I work 3 man, most weekends, and I am forced to go to deep C, left handed hitter, . . . "

Are you saying that the handedness of the hitter dictates where you locate yourself as a base umpire?

If that is what you are saying could you direct me to a place in either the NAPL manual, the CCA Mechanics Manual, or the NFHS Umpire manual that offer this as an accepted mechanic?

Thanks,

[WhatWuzThatBlue]

Originally Posted by mcrowder

Count me as agreeing with this change.

Yes, there are more calls at 1st than at 2nd, but the degree to which my ability to make the call at 1st diminishes when changing to C from B is small, while the degree to which my ability to make the call at 2nd increases when making this change is well worth it.

The last coach that questioned my mechanics got to watch the rest of my mechanics from the parking lot. So I really don't much care how an individual coach may feel about whether I'm in B or C. No dog-wagging here.

Many umpires that have made this move are the same ones that can't run fast enough to get into position for the call. I'm certain that I'm old enough to be your father, but I learned game management a long time ago. Anticipating plays and being prepared for them is part of any good umpire's routine.

Your last paragraph just strikes me as arrogant and sad. If you work a college schedule, you would certainly care what a coach thinks about your mechanics and attitude. SInce they have a say in your evaluation, you'd better believe that their opinions count. Unorthodox mechanics may suit your game, but that doesn't mean that you are correct.

I'll echo Bob's sentiments, the angle is almost the same, but the distance is greater. The swipe tag at first is far more crucial than the banger at second. If the kid is out going back to first, he'll never have a chance to show his speed. Even the pro school robots know that they should work the deep "B" for runners on first. Those guys are quick and aware.

Tossing coaches for questioning such unique positioning shows lack of confidence and smacks of being an OOO.

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by WhatWuzThatBlue

Many umpires that have made this move are the same ones that can't run fast enough to get into position for the call. I'm certain that I'm old enough to be your father, but I learned game management a long time ago. Anticipating plays and being prepared for them is part of any good umpire's routine.

I think if an umpire can't run fast enough from B, then he probably can't run fast enough from C. I don't think that speed is the reason anybody switches. I stay in B with a runner at 1st because of the rundown possibility, not because of the pickoff. I don't think the extra distance is that big of a deal, unless you have extemely poor vision.

Your last paragraph just strikes me as arrogant and sad. If you work a college schedule, you would certainly care what a coach thinks about your mechanics and attitude. SInce they have a say in your evaluation, you'd better believe that their opinions count. Unorthodox mechanics may suit your game, but that doesn't mean that you are correct.

Yes, this is probably true at the college level, because many of the coaches know a little more about umpiring than the HS coaches do. However, since the majority of HS coaches don't know their a$$ from umpiring, their comments are certainly unwelcome. I have had Varsity coaches tell me I'm supposed to go out on fly balls to the outfield.....from B or C. I've had them tell me that an infield fly can't be called when the ball is in the outfield, or caught by an outfielder. So I give very little value to coaches opinions of my mechanics. I have forgotten more about mechanics than any coaches even know.

I'll echo Bob's sentiments, the angle is almost the same, but the distance is greater. The swipe tag at first is far more crucial than the banger at second. If the kid is out going back to first, he'll never have a chance to show his speed. Even the pro school robots know that they should work the deep "B" for runners on first. Those guys are quick and aware.

Once again, not really that different. I don't think that one call is more important to the offense, they probably would place equal value on them. The coaches aren't going to like it when you kick either one.

Tossing coaches for questioning such unique positioning shows lack of confidence and smacks of being an OOO.

Agreed. But they should be worrying about their own team, and let the umpires worry about their positioning. I'm not afraid to let a coach know this when they spout off. Coaches normally have no idea what the correct mechanics or positions are, so they should keep their yaps shut.

[ManInBlue]

I believe Carl also says that you should only get the out on the pick off from B if R1, falls down getting back to the bag - and from C, only if he falls over dead. May not be exact wording, but the point is the same.

I don't agree with the mechainc simply because the 2 man crew is a series of compromises, why create one that is unnecessary? You are introducing things that may effect your calls, why? Get in the best position, and use THAT position. Hustle if needed, but don't move to another position and open up contraversy (from coaches, et al), or create another set of compromises.

JMHO - for what it's worth. The "normal" mechanics have also been studied and have been tried and perfected for years. Ask any MLB ump why they work in any given position, question it - the answer will be that "we" have used these mechanics and have tried various different mechanics, these work best.

[GarthB]

Originally Posted by mcrowder

Count me as agreeing with this change.

Yes, there are more calls at 1st than at 2nd, but the degree to which my ability to make the call at 1st diminishes when changing to C from B is small, while the degree to which my ability to make the call at 2nd increases when making this change is well worth it.

The last coach that questioned my mechanics got to watch the rest of my mechanics from the parking lot. So I really don't much care how an individual coach may feel about whether I'm in B or C. No dog-wagging here.

When I first read of this positioning, maybe seven years ago or so, I tried it out as did some other members of my association. Just one of the shortcomings we discovered was that it limited the adjustment one could make when the play at first called for one. With plays at first far outnumbering the plays at second ,we decided to go with the studies by MLB and PBUC that resulted in the pro positioning.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

"They" might have a far easier time calling the steal, but I don't. The swipe tag is too easy to miss from C, imo.

What "studies" seem to show that the angle from C is better? (I'm not disputing the conclusion, btw)

C is farther than B. If (and I don't know that this is true), the angle is about the same, then closer (up until about 10' or so) is better.

Bob, it's clear an umpire has to work a bit harder in B on a steal of second. That may be the rub for some people. I don't know.

(Even in 4-man, I prefer deep B on a steal. In 3-man, I slide into deep C, though, since it looks odd having both base umpires on the first base side of second.)

[PeteBooth]

[QUOTE=BigUmp56]I thought this excerpt from one of Carls articles is worthy of some discussion.


"That’s why some umpires are moving to the C side of the diamond with a runner on first only. They have a far easier time calling the steal of second; in addition, studies seem to show the angle for the first-base pick-off play is better in C than in B. Lots of umpires resist that innovation, though, because the coaches claim C is too far away. But isn’t that the tail wagging the dog?"

The "B" "C" Preference will almost always generate good discussion. IMO, the point of Papa C's article is that some umpires do not want to change mechanics simply because they are worried about what the coach is going to say, hence the phrase the tail wagging the dog.
One of the reasons for doing Pre-Season games is not only to get comfortable with the zone (we have been off for a while) but to try new things. Be open minded and try it and see if you like it.

As for me, I'm in "C" with R2 or R2/R3 LESS than 2 outs because the tag-up at second belongs to the BU and I can line myself up better in the "C" position. If there are 2 outs I go to "B" unless we only have R2.

With R1 or R1/R3 I prefer "B" because of the DP. For me I can get in much better position from the "B" slot for the back end of the DP which is usually a banger than from the C position.

Botton Line in Pre-Season Experiment with things such as a new plate stance. "B" Position vs. "C" position, etc.

IMO, the point of Papa C's article was that "Coaches should not govern where we position ourselves". That's up to our evaluator.

Pete Booth