No Brainer?
 

I watched one of our more experienced umpires not react to a situation today and was kind of shocked. Bottom of the 7th inning home team down 6 runs. 2 outs. Batter strikes out swinging. He slings his bat all the way to the backstop in disgust and flings his helmet from the batters box all the way back to the dugout steps. I was in A position and was just waiting to see the big finger come out. He didn't say a word to this player.


After the game I asked him why he didn't run the player and he said it was too damn hot and he didn't have the energy to do it. The he said that since the team probably wouldn't advance out of pool play in the seniors tournament, this was more than likely their last game of the season anyway. In my mind it was a complete no brainer ejection. I would have ejected him just on principle even if I was sure it was his last game ever!


Tim.

I worked two yesterday, the first on bases, 2.5 hours, the second behind the plate, 10 innings, 3.5 hours. Thankfully the late game was under lights from the 4th inning and the temps were down under 90, from 95 for the first game. While I was tired when it ended, very tired, I am never too tired to toss somebody.

Why didn't you eject him?

Bad form
 

What happens when the next batter strikes out to end the game and his thrown bat hits and injures someone?

If the BU sees the bat/helmet throwing, I would say pause, read and react:D

If your partner did nothing, give him the benefit of the doubt and assume he did not see it. YOU saw it so give him the heave ho!*

Joe



*The Heave Ho will hence forth be known as the "Bruce Dreckman".

Just curious here ... what rule did this fellow break that requires an ejection? PU's explanation of a reason for not tossing sucks... but seriously, is throwing the bat or helmet in anger at HIMSELF an automatic ejection?

I'm not one to eat my partners lunch. This happened right in front of him and I was over 100' feet away. There was no doubt that he saw it, and he confirmed as much after the game.


Tim.

It sure should be, Mike.


Tim.

What if he was disgusted with the umpire's call of strike 2 that put him in a hole, forcing him to protect the plate on strike 3? Maybe he wasn't angry with himself after all.

The rules in FED calls for ejection for any throwing of equipment in disgust, whether at himself or the umpire's call.

As far as OBR goes, the interpretation from the MLBUM includes ejection as one of the penalties for flagrant throwing of equipment, if in disgust with an umpire's call.

If this was in a youth ball game, I would eject him just for safety reasons, since his actions were potentially dangerous.

I understand your partner's rationale for the decision. If that was the only wrinkle in an otherwise peaceful day, then I'm already in the parking lot by the time the bat hits the ground. There's no reason to find trouble where there isn't any. On the other hand, if the game has been filled with rat-induced tension or if the player himself seems like he needs an attitude adjustment, then he's gone. It seems like a HTBT situation. Judging by what I read, I wouldn't be so quick to pull out the big finger--especially when ejections require paperwork. Unless the paper has green presidents on it, I'm not interested.

Maybe it should be, but it's not, not by rule.

Lacking a ruleset in the OP, I assumed OBR, and it's not automatic. If it was a FED game and my partner ignored it, yeah - I guess I'd have to go ahead and toss him - but if it's OBR, there's no way I'm guessing an ejection from 100 feet away if my partner, who was right there, didn't toss him.

(OTOH - if I'm PU, I'm probably tossing him anyway barring something extremely odd.)

I just don't see this as an automatic penalty that should be enforced from many miles away.

Maybe maybe maybe, what if, what if, what if... If I'm 100 feet away and my partner's right there, I'm not playing maybe what if and tossing him. And I think that if you are, you are wrong in doing so (even if it turns out in retrospect that your partner was just being lazy and didn't have a valid reason for not tossing him).

Valid point - but he didn't say which set. I assumed OBR.
Yes, but from 100 feet away I can't see making that leap. In fact, I'd assume it was in disgust at missing the ball, not some previous umpire-related disgust.
Me too - but probably not as BU.

mcrowder, where did I say the BU should throw the guy? I was talking about the PU doing the tossing. I'm not playing what-if either. That very well may have been the case that he was mad at the umpire. They usually are, even when the umpire had nothing to do with them striking out. I'm just saying we don't know the mind of the batter, and why he was disgusted.

The only way I'm ejecting him from 100 feet away is if I'm certain that the PU did not see the offense, like the PU ringing up strike 3 turning away from the batter. I have documented this very situation (slinging the bat at the dugout) happening to me, in a previous post. Only it was the first batter of the game, the team was down to 8 players with the ejection, and we got to go home early. Very Early.

[QUOTE=BigUmp56]

After the game I asked him why he didn't run the player and he said it was too damn hot and he didn't have the energy to do it.

With this info from the poster, it apparently comfirms that the PU was in fact, aware to the actions of the batter. With this information, I find the PU remarks to his partner pretty lame. Without us knowing which league rules were being used, it makes it harder for us to rendere the correct decision.

Me and I'm working the bases and without knowing the real reason the kids tossed his equipment, you've got a first base coach, why not mention it to him what you saw and ask him to discuss the situation with the batter. If he declines, as the kid comes out onto the field, make your way casually to him and discuss it with him, short and sweet.

It's what we don't know that gets us into trouble!

Steve, I was responding to blue's question asking OP why he (as BU) didn't eject him. Implying that this was an automatic thing, when in OBR it's not.

We have fellow umpires aguring about a no-brainer ejection. This is a total sportsmanship issue, this person must be tossed. It is our job to enforce all sportmanship issues and hold the player accoutable. Mcrowder, stop being a rule book tommy and do the right thing, grow some balls and toss the kid. What message are we sending if there are other kids in the stands watching this young man toss his helmet and bat and the umpires don't do anything about it, let's noy be our own worst enemies!

Ronref, you are completely out of line.

Let me restate my position, since you obviously didn't understand me the first time.

If I was PU in this sitch, I guarantee I toss the kid - FED, OBR, LL, Dixie, NIAI, NCAA, ASA, USSSA, whatever alphabet soup you choose, I toss the kid. I suppose there is some 1 in a thousand situation (outside of FED, obviously), where I would not, but I cannot think of what the extenuating circumstance might be right now.

My issue was with the admonition on the OP, who was the BASE umpire. People were asking him why HE didn't toss the batter, from 100 feet away, when PU, right on the spot, failed to do so. I point out that it is NOT an automatic ejection except in FED, and this is not BU's ejection to poach, so to speak, in other jurisdictions. Since it's not automatic, and PU did not eject, I'm assuming until proven differently that PU had reason not to eject. (I also grant that in retrospect, this particular PU was being lazy - not a good reason not to eject - but BU didn't know that until later). I'm not about to step all over my partner in a sitch like this where such an ejection is not automatic and he made (supposedly) the conscious decision not to toss him.

Wholeheartedly agree with Mcrowder here. My partner and I are going to have some real problems if he is across the diamond and dumps someone on a play that I am covering. You're not my daddy, I don't need you looking over my shoulder.

A good principle but not an absolute.

How far do you take this?

If the pitcher punches a runner in the face after covering home on a passed ball and the home plate ump does not eject?

I would risk the wrath of my partner on this one. It is a very dangerous situation for a kid to be throwing bats and helmets around. I have seen two injuries that required ambulances because of this kind of behavior. No way am I going to see that and let it go. Can anyone think of any reason other than laziness or ignorance that would cause the PU NOT to eject?

Joe

Sorry, JW. I just don't see a time where I would run all the way down the line to eject a player who committed an unsportsmanlike act right in front of my partner, unless I was working with a rookie. If he had his back to the incident, then sure, I would issue the ejection. Along those lines I would be pretty pissed if my partner came running out from behind the plate to eject a runner for MC at second base if it was my call to make.


There wasn't a good reason for him not to eject this idiot, but that still doesn't make it my call.


Tim.

If he hits my partner with a bat and my partner is unconscious, can I eject him then?

No, but you are entitled under rule 16.4 to hit him with the bat in retaliation.


Tim.

In a situation like this, after the play is over I would probably conference with my partner and ask him if he did in fact see a punch. Or in the original situation, before leaving the field ask him what's going on and if he couldn't give me something better than the I don't want to deal with it excuse, I'd probably say fine then I'll deal with it. I just don't think you can let that kind of behavior go without punishment. If my partner doesn't like that, well too bad, I gave him the chance to do it himself and I am positive my assignor and the rest of the guys in my association would back me on it.

Well said gsf.

You don't have to run down the line. Just yell really loud from where you are. Everyone will hear you.:) It sure worked for Angel Hernandez yesterday!:D

Absolutely!

Unless I mis-read the original post, the actions of this player occured AFTER the last out of the game?? Maybe that affected the PU's decision to just "get out of dodge" while he had the chance?

I don't agree with not ejecting this player if the game is still in progress, but I might agree to let it go if it is the last out of the game.

I only disagree with you in that it encourages this sort of behavior in future games. If you don't eject in this situation, they will think it's okay to do it after every game. It could lead to more problems if they think they can get away with anything post-game.

You know Steve I agree with you. My mind was not totally made up on this one, that's why I said I "might" let it go if it occured after the last out of the game. Upon further review, I would have ejected this player, in this situation, because this is both a sportsmanship and safety issue.

I have ejected coach's after the game was over for unacceptable behavior, so why make an exception in this case??

Let's try to keep this based in reality. Trust me, if someone throws a punch in front of me I'll have him tossed before you could flinch.

And I'm not making an arguement that a player who throws his equipment should not be tossed. But unless you're standing there with me you have no idea of what just happened or what was said. I may have already dumped him for saying something to me and his throwing of the helmet could be in reaction to that. Are you now going to come and throw him out a second time?

If you have a question about what just transpired come and talk to me. If you feel I missed something tell me and we'll straighten it out.

Part of me feels like it's MORE important to toss him (assuming I'm PU) if he does it at the end. Players can't feel like the second the game is over all decorum is moot and they are free to do whatever they want.

BINGO!

Joe

If there is some sort of magical troll, similar to the one in Harry Potter, raging through the dugout, I would allow helmets and bats to be tossed at him in the dugout.

Thats actually the most likely situation I could think of. Everything else, wind it up on your right hand, hop twice on the right foot, transfer the weight, and bring the arm quickly through the zone with a slight flick of the wrist at the end :)

You obviously would. But, seriously, if you are the BU and your partner ignores a punch being thrown-What do you do?


Joe

Just what is your ejection count up to now? Inquiring minds want to know!

Speaking of obsession, you seem to have an obsession for responding to Tim and me, and not so much to anyone else. Using the third person singular does not disguise your intent of a personal attack.

TussAgee11, I believe I have located your magical troll.:rolleyes:

Reminds me of Sgt. Shultz on Hogan's Heroes. "I see nothing"....

ya know Steve, I try to put a guy on my ignore list and then you people keep quoting him.

Weight is down, cholesterol never been up, shape I'm in irrelevant. I have health conditions which have nothing to do with weight. I do not drool. You are a fool and a tool. If I saw you in person I'd kick your really in great shape, 200 crunches a$s all over the place.

I'll answer the ejection count question: Still 0.

Yeah, I tried putting him on my list too, then he started being a normal person for a few days, and I took him off. Now it appears he's back to throwing insults around. He likes to talk about my weight and health, and he doesn't have a clue of what he's talking about. I guarantee he wouldn't say these things to me face to face, because I would squash him like a bug.

Now he's going back on the ignore list, since he obviously wants me to drop over dead. What a nice guy.

How did you know he was being normal if he was on your ignore? :D

I peeked!:o

Good grief. Throw this one on the top of the pile. If this unwarranted personal attack is not enough to get PWL out of here, I suppose we should all simply leave on our own accord. Haven't we had enough of this drivel yet?

Moderators?

It's obviously not about control or I would have done as you suggest and run down the baseline to eject him myself. It's about maintaining a little respect for a long time official who, in my opinion, didn't handle the situation well at all. It's also something that wasn't completely ignored on my part. I addressed my partner after the game about it and told him what I thought should have been done. From some of your past posts where you seem to encourage throwing your partners under the bus it's apparent that you don't understand how a team works. We live and die as a team on the diamond. When the @hit hits the fans it's not an umpire who blew the call, it's the umpires who blew the call. We have to support each other while we're out there. It's often been said that your partner is the only friend you have on the diamond. In the case of those of us who are competent officials this holds true. However, for those who throw their partners under the bus and spend their time playing kiss kiss with the rats, they soon find themselves on everyones scratch list instead of making any friends. Kind of like acting like a jerk on the Internet it leaves you friendless and solo.
I didn't realize that sharing experiences here was "obsessing" over something. I thought it was something used as a learning tool for not just myself, but for others. With the exception of your nonsense, this thread has once again provided a decent discussion on how different umpires manage their games, more specifically, a post game ejection or non ejection. While I still maintain that it wouldn't have been a good idea for me to step on my partners non call here, I certainly appreciate those whose opinions differ on the situation.
Of course this is how you handle it. You still don't have the balls to issue an ejection for fear of getting on a rats bad side. This doesn't come from years of being involved in the game as an official. It comes from being involved in the game as a semi-rat yourself. It is much painless on everyone, especially on the coward who is afraid to pull the trigger.


Tim.

[QUOTE=BigUmp56]I watched one of our more experienced umpires not react to a situation today and was kind of shocked. Bottom of the 7th inning home team down 6 runs. 2 outs. Batter strikes out swinging. He slings his bat all the way to the backstop in disgust and flings his helmet from the batters box all the way back to the dugout steps. I was in A position and was just waiting to see the big finger come out. He didn't say a word to this player.

IMO, Post game Ejections mainly occur because a coach or player has directed some deroggatory or personal remarks at the umpire. Since it is the end of the game some players / coaches think they have 'carte blanch" and can say and do whatever they want when the game is over. In the scenario given, You didn't mention that the kid said something to the umpire or not. All that was mentioned is that he flung the bat and the helmet after strike 3.

In reality, after I drop the baseballs at or near home plate I am not even around by the time his helmet hits the ground. IMO, this falls under "Looking for Boogers". When the game is OVER It's OVER. Unless the kid said "hey Blue that was the worst F*****g call ever or something similiar It's time for a cold one.

Pete Booth

You're gone before he throws the helmet and bat? Horse hockey!

So, throwing equipment around that can put people in the hospital is not as bad as yelling something at you? Good Grief!

Your responsilbity starts when you get on the field and ends when you leave the field. I have to deal with players who get worse because guys like you don't deal with them.

Joe

Pete, I think we are discussing a Little League kid throwing equipment. Much different if shaving age players throw equipment. Then you are looking for boogers. I would more likely do a post-game ejection for equipment in a little kid game than I would for telling me about my call. Nobody would be potentially maimed due to his verbal outburst, but the bat can be deadly if thrown just right.

Just a small clarification in case you missed it. This was a seniors tournament game. They shave at that level.


Tim.

Probably, but these were the obvious ones.


Tim.

Joe, if we don't quote him, he erases his posts to make us look as if we are talking to ourselves, the old "who, me?" innocent act. When we quote him, his attacks are permanent record, and all his deleting of posts won't help. He is now safely back on my ignore list, but I don't mind seeing his asinine comments quoted if it's going to help rid us of him.

The only way that this board will be rid of his incessant attacks and nonsense is for more people to lodge a complaint. I know he's warned PWL several times to stop the nonsense and probably has him on a short leash anyway. Personally I don't want to see him go. I just wish he would grow up and try to learn something from the board instead of acting like a child all the time. Then again, I'm a perpetual optomist...........


Tim.

I don't need to launch a smear campain against you. You do a good enough job of smearing yourself when you post. As for Brad, I'll take his word over yours all week long and twice on Sunday.


Tim.

Please rein it in, folks.
mick

Yeah, perhaps PWL could rein it in. God knows he's the damn problem here.

No, Steve, apparently we're the problem. This would be because we don't take lightly having our names defamed, our family lives mocked, our employment history berated, our health and physical welfare made issue of, our mental faculties questioned, or any other such nonsense that this child had posted because we dare to question his competence as an official. In my opinion this forum is supposed to be for pointing out differences of opinion on sticky rulings and game management techniques. The vast majority of the members of this forum seem to understand that and have learned that a difference of opinion does not equate to a personnal attack.

This individual, for whatever reason, is so insecure in his officiating competence that in his mind to disagree with him is to attack him. I've never attacked this individual personally, except to point out that he has a child like maturity level. I have pointed out, or tried to point out to him that he needs a lot of work to become a better official, as we all do. It's sad that he cannot or will not accept criticism from anyone here. I suppose I could re-post some of the messages he's left and then deleted where he's made just the most ridiculous of comments directed at others who've tried to help him, but it wouldn't matter. He'll just think I'm picking on him and go back to his petty name calling.


Tim.

threads like this make me love the internet more and more.

Thank God I went to a Catholic grade school where we didn't have "junior high"!

Maybe if you'd post something of value instead of trying to cause trouble I wouldn't have to put you in your place. Haven't you noticed in this thread that you were the one who started in about me having an obsessive control problem. No, you just wanted to stir the pot again and then try to play the poor victim when I responded to your tripe.


Tim.

I concur. Your life would really be more fulfilling and meaningful if you would just do something else everyday, all day.

Then who would keep you in check? I don't know why it bothers you that I have the freedom in my profession to spend time on the Internet. There's no reason for all the envy. The world needs ditch diggers too.



Tim.

Hey Tim,

Should we tell him what I have to do all day, every day? You know, the reason I have to break from talking to you at times? I'll bet he wouldn't have the patience or the care for others inside of him to do what I do. He thinks all I do is sit around and post on the Internet. If he only knew. But he'd probably make fun of me for that too, come to think of it.

Suffice it to say that he would only try to turn your laudable undertaking into something perverse. You and I both know that you'll one day reap great rewards for your dedication to your family.


Tim.