Never reward a bad Defensive Play !

[TussAgee11]

I care what my assignors, evaluators, etc. think of me. But if it is neccessary to make percieved calls rather than correct ones, then I guess I won't be moving up. And I will not submit to simply pleasing coaches and compromising the integrity of the games I work for my future betterment.

I call balls and strikes as an art, how the catcher catches the ball etc.

I will call an OUT if the tag is down in front of the base before the runner slides in.

But. I will not take outside considerations to making bang bang, coin-flip calls because "the defense made a bad throw". Didn't F3 make a nice catch to get the bad throw, and get back to the base?

Doesn't matter to me, which one happened first?

And your dergogatory remark towards LL Umpires was uncalled for, some of the best umpires I have ever played or worked with do solely LL ball. Do you think MLB umps look down at HS umpires? I sure wouldn't think so, so stop doing the equivelent. They are your brothers.

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by Dave Hensley

That is simply your way of reconciling the inability to distinguish which came first, an arbitrary decision that "same time = out."

The "benefit of the doubt" concept that I and some others advocate is simply an alternative manner of making the decision on the coin-flip call. It's a concept I endorse because it is not arbitrary and it has a logical and understandable rationale behind it. It is a concept that finds the umpire more often making "the expected call" and therefore has implications for smoother game management and the development of the perception among other game participants that you're a consistent and competent umpire.

It is a bit more nuanced than "call what you see, and if it's a tie then call "out," so I do have to give your system credit for perfectly adhering to the KISS principle, no doubt about that.

What are you talking about? You lost me, pal. A way of reconciling the inability to distinguish which came first? No, by rule, the runner has to beat the play. Ties do not go to the runner. Same time = out has nothing to do with guesswork, or keeping things simple. The runner didn't beat the ball, so he is out. That is the way it's supposed to be called.

I think the "expected call" concept is full of hooey. Smoother game management? I get the calls right, and game participants know this, and I rarely have to explain my calls. I am known as a very consistent and competent umpire by the vast majority of area HS coaches.

I also never said that I "call what I see, and if it's a tie then call out." I call them the way they are, either safe or out.

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by Dave Hensley

Then explore your exception - why do you dress professionally, but otherwise don't care what others think about your performance as an umpire?

I would submit that most of us want to be perceived by our subordinates, superiors, peers, and others as good at what we do. For those with ambition to move up the ladder, such perceptions are necessary, or at least helpful.

The 60' Little League fields are littered with one-year 25 times veterans who have never learned that.

There are also umpires with solid 20+ year experience working these games. I am one of them. I would feel comfortable going to a collegiate wood bat game in the morning, and turning right around and doing a LL Majors game in the afternoon. Baseball is baseball. I don't know why people make it out to be so damn difficult. I also value what subordinates, superiors, and peers think of me. I don't care so much what coaches think, but most of them like me just fine too.

[GarthB]

Originally Posted by Dave Hensley

Good lord, boy, where did you get your education?

Education? "Proposterous."

[GarthB]

Originally Posted by TussAgee11

I


And your dergogatory remark towards LL Umpires was uncalled for, some of the best umpires I have ever played or worked with do solely LL ball. Do you think MLB umps look down at HS umpires? I sure wouldn't think so, so stop doing the equivelent. They are your brothers.

Your reading skills approach your spelling skills. Dave never made a "dergogatory" (sic) remark about LL umpires. He made a reference to umpires who don't learn what they need to learn to progress.

As an aside, what I have seen over the years is that there are Little League umpires and there are umpires who work Little League. Dave is an umpire who also works Little League. There is no need to jump on a soapbox when speaking with Dave about Little League.

Oh, and regarding pro umpires and their opinion of HS umpires...where were you during the strike?

[Dave Hensley]

Originally Posted by TussAgee11

I call balls and strikes as an art, how the catcher catches the ball etc.

I will call an OUT if the tag is down in front of the base before the runner slides in.

Then you are employing the techniques I'm describing, whether you admit it or not.

But. I will not take outside considerations to making bang bang, coin-flip calls because "the defense made a bad throw". Didn't F3 make a nice catch to get the bad throw, and get back to the base?

Doesn't matter to me, which one happened first

"Which one happened first" begs the question. In a "coin-flip" call, you don't really know which happened first, that's why it's called a "coin-flip". To the greatest extent of your perception, you can't tell which happened first. So, you can (1) flip a coin, (2) always call them out, like Sandiego Steve does, or (3) base your judgment on which side earned the call.

I endorse Door # 3.

And your dergogatory remark towards LL Umpires was uncalled for, some of the best umpires I have ever played or worked with do solely LL ball. Do you think MLB umps look down at HS umpires? I sure wouldn't think so, so stop doing the equivelent. They are your brothers.

What Garth said. Among other things, I umpire Little League and conduct umpire training clinics for local leagues in my district. My reference to the 60' Little League field was simply an acknowledgment that that's where most everbody starts out. My point was that some guys never go beyond that level because of their unwillingness to accept concepts that contradict their own homegrown ideas.

[Dave Hensley]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

Baseball is baseball. I don't know why people make it out to be so damn difficult.

OK, then, we get it. Call what you see, period.

It's a simple game, yada yada.

Your work is done here. We can shut the board down and free up some bandwidth.

[Dave Hensley]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

What are you talking about? You lost me, pal. A way of reconciling the inability to distinguish which came first? No, by rule, the runner has to beat the play. Ties do not go to the runner. Same time = out has nothing to do with guesswork, or keeping things simple. The runner didn't beat the ball, so he is out. That is the way it's supposed to be called.

So you're going with rulebook literal, eh? Then I suggest you read the different rulebook references to batter runner at first base, and other runners on force plays. It's not consistent. Some references endorse the "same time = out," and others reduce, literally read, to "same time = safe."

You could look it up.

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by Dave Hensley

"Which one happened first" begs the question. In a "coin-flip" call, you don't really know which happened first, that's why it's called a "coin-flip". To the greatest extent of your perception, you can't tell which happened first. So, you can (1) flip a coin, (2) always call them out, like Sandiego Steve does, or (3) base your judgment on which side earned the call.

I endorse Door # 3.

I didn't say that I always call them out on a coin-flip. I did say that if the runner does not beat the play, he is out. No flipping involved. Leave me out of the flipping. If the runner's foot arrives before the ball, well then, he's safe. I don't see the gray area here at all.

"But Blue, how could you call him OUT???"

"Coach, did you see that pretty play he made. He went deep in the hole and threw it from his knees."

"Yeah, Blue, but the runner was safe!!!"

"Doesn't matter, coach, on really close plays, the pretty play wins."

[GarthB]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

"But Blue, how could you call him OUT???"

"Coach, did you see that pretty play he made. He went deep in the hole and threw it from his knees."

"Yeah, Blue, but the runner was safe!!!"

"Doesn't matter, coach, on really close plays, the pretty play wins."

Isn't the imagination a wonderful thing? I would never have thought of attributing such a conversation to Dave, but then, I'm limited by knowing he's not stupid.

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by Dave Hensley

So you're going with rulebook literal, eh? Then I suggest you read the different rulebook references to batter runner at first base, and other runners on force plays. It's not consistent. Some references endorse the "same time = out," and others reduce, literally read, to "same time = safe."

You could look it up.

Read it, been there, done that. I don't subscribe to the contradictory rule theory. I use 7.08(e), 7.01, and 6.05(j) for my "Runner is out" decisions:

7.08(e) - Any runner is out when he fails to touch the next base before a fielder tags him or the base, after he has been forced to advance by reason of the batter becoming a runner.

Rule 7.01 says basically the same thing: A runner aquires the right to an unoccupied base when he touches it before he's out.

Rule 6.05(j) says pretty much the same thing too, in dealing with the B/R: A batter is out when after a third strike or after he hits a fair ball, he or first base is tagged before he touches first base. (I find the distinction so minute, and not at all contradictory, that it still requires the runner to beat the play.)

So, to summarize: A runner is out if he does not clearly beat the play. A runner is safe, if he acquires the base before he is out, and he's out if he fails to acquire the base before he or the base is tagged.

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by GarthB

Isn't the imagination a wonderful thing? I would never have thought of attributing such a conversation to Dave, but then, I'm limited by knowing he's not stupid.

Oh, I can't illustrate absurdity by being absurd, but it's okay for Rush Limbaugh to do it, huh?

I'm making a point that going by what a play looks like is not the best way to make a close call.

Dave was attributing things to me which I did not say, so I was merely giving my opinion on the subject.

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by Dave Hensley

OK, then, we get it. Call what you see, period.

It's a simple game, yada yada.

Your work is done here. We can shut the board down and free up some bandwidth.

No, I don't think you do get it. "I'm Dave Hensley, and by God I'm always right." I get that! Uh, Dave....no your not.

Why do you continue to use the phrase "call what you see" when referring to me?

I'm frankly getting a little tired of having to correct you. I call the plays the way they "are," not how I "see them." What is so hard about this to comprehend?

And maybe to you it isn't a simple game. Then again, I've been involved in the game for about 45 years now, and it's still the same game I learned back then. I didn't say to shut down the board, that I had some "final word." I just said that to me, there isn't any major distinction between levels of baseball. The higher the level, the better the players. Big deal. Don't you feel the same way? You work high and low levels as well, right? That is all I was saying.

There is no shortage of bandwidth, and even if there was, you ain't paying for it anyway.

[Dave Hensley]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

(I find the distinction so minute, and not at all contradictory, that it still requires the runner to beat the play.)

On that note, and your followup post that shows I've upset you to the point that you're getting personal, I conclude there's nothing to be gained by further dialogue.

[GarthB]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

Oh, I can't illustrate absurdity by being absurd, but it's okay for Rush Limbaugh to do it, huh?

Well, that explains a lot.