Never reward a bad Defensive Play !
 

LAA vs. BRS

Batter hits into a DB, but the second throw to F3 is off-line and pulls F3 off the bag. F3 struggles to get his foot back to the bag, and does so at the same time the runner touches the bag. Umpire calls safe ! BRS coach comes out to talk about it.

Good call in my opinion. If it had been a good throw, just close, yes ring up an out. But when it was a sloppy defensive play like this one, give it to the offense.

If F3 gets his foot back on the base before the runner touches the base, I call him out, whether it's sloppy or not. If the runner beats F3, he's safe. There are no ties, the runner must beat the play in order to be safe. I would say the Red Sox manager had a good beef on that one, if the BR and F3 touched the base at the exact same time.

Too much unnecessary thought.

If he's out, he out. If he's safe, he's safe. Instead of worrying who made what play, determine if the runner's really out or not and make the right call.

ditto to every word that rich just said

I don't know how some guys can think about so much stuff before making the call!

Me? I see the play, determine safe/out, then make the call. I will mess it all up if I think about anything else! :(

In college ball, I DO however require that the catcher "stick" the pitch to give him a strike. If the pitch is breaking low and/or outside, if the catcher cannot stick it, I don't care a rats booty where that pitch crossed the plate. If he cannot hold it in a place that looks somewhat like a strike, I ain't calling it. I will do this in a good high school level game too IF the pitchers are pretty good. But this is really a different standard than the subject at hand in my opinion.

Well I guess we're done, then. We can shut the officiating.com down and the discussion board down.

"Just call what you see."

Case closed, everybody knows everything there is to know about umpiring.

I saw the play in question; the umpire made the right call. He made it because the actual result was a coin-flip in which the "benefit of the doubt" clearly should have been weighted against the - yes, that's right - sloppy defensive play.

You guys of the "just call what you see" persuasion are perfectly within your rights, but I don't understand what you're doing in these discussions. Call what you see. Right. We get it.

I hear umpires say "I call 'em like I see 'em" all the time. My response to them is, "I call them like they are."

Steve - both feet hit the bag at the same time. Proposterous.

Two independent events don't happen at the same time. Either he was out or safe. Ties don't exist! :)

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

Event 1 occurs at 1:24:06pm, Central Daylight Time.

Are you saying it is impossible for Event 2, 3, 4, 5, etc. to happen at exactly that same point in time?

To any level of precision short of infinity, two events most assuredly CAN occur at EXACTLY the same time. To the human eye, even the best of them, the level of precision is far short of infinity.

The whole point is, you have to make either a safe or and out call. You can't tell the coach that both events happened at the same time.

Yes, there are times that the way the play was made enters in to the out/safe decision. But the bottom line is that the runner has to beat the play in order to be safe. The onus is on him to actually get there before the tag, not arrive at the same time. Same time = out.

If you read my post carefully, you will see that I said there are no ties. I don't believe in ties, even if the ball and runner happened to arrive at exactly the same time. Ties do not go to the runner. That is on the myth list, for sure.

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.

Time doesn't exist "short of infinity". Just because you saw things happen at the same time doesn't mean they happened at the same time. There hasn't been any tool that can back up what I'm saying, my theory is based off of philosophy rather than science :)

Just joggling ya'lls brain, nothing more.

With all due respect, I don't care about my perception, other than my uniform, to other game participants and worrying about what teams think about my umpiring abilities.

I will call what I got, not make calls to make games go more smoothly. And I'm sure the head hanchos will commend me for this.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Education? "Proposterous."

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?

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

"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.

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.

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.

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.

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."

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Well, that explains a lot.

I took me several years to understand the concept, and it's still pretty hard to teach to some folks. Black and white is easy. Fuzzy logic is tough.

We have coin-flippers all the time. I liken these calls to having a three way toggle switch in your head. D makes a terrific stop, I throw the switch to "OUT". D kicks the ball around before gloving it, I've got it in "SAFE". On coin flippers, I go to the switch for the call.

COIN-FLIPPER: Where a human being can not decipher if the ball beat the runner.

Look, both you and Garth have been basically insinuating that I'm stupid, so I think it got personal way before my post.

This is a interesting thread! I find some of the responses to be quite entertaining. This being said, it's time for my opinion, I guess.

Umpiring is not rocket science, it is simply knowing the rules, seeing the play and making a call. If the ball cuts the strike zone, it's a strike! If the runner touches the base before the ball arrives, the runner is safe! It's that simple, the runner is safe or out. An umpire sees the play, applies the rules regarding the play, and makes a call! The runner is either safe or out - there is no such thing as a tie.

Along the same lines, trying to digest all the information presented in a play as simple as B1 trying to beat out a throw at first should not be clouded with the presentation of the defense. Simply put, if the defense drops the ball 5 times, throws a two hopper to first and F3 bobbles the throw securing it a moment before B1 touches the bag, B1 is out! There is no discussion or weighing of the incompetence of the defense - the runner is out!

If, on the other hand, B1 runs like a gazelle and F6 throws a bullet but B1 hits the bag first, would you consider B1 out because F6 snagged the ball and threw a rocket to F3? Of course not! The mere thought of considering outside forces to the play becomes a bit scary! So many things happen during a play that an umpire could need a PC to determine the outcome!

That is why we focus on the the play and only the play. The ball comes and the fielder touches the bag or tags the runner. The runner touches the bag either before the ball arrives or after - the runner is either safe or out!

I've said it before, an umpire that focuses on the efforts of the defense to make a call is nothing but a spectator on the field - and spectators don't belong on the field of play!

Please, show me.

Well, I could offer a mathematical proof that ties don't exist, but the human eye couldn't discern such a difference anyway.

I didn't know Rush was a participant in this discussion board.

There's a solution to that problem.

How an individual "sees" a play is how it "is" according to them. I don't follow this statement at all.

OTOH, if you mean "I call the plays based on what I see happen at the moment of safe / out and not what happened prior" then that's simple to understand. It's just as simple to understand that some do consider what happened prior when making a call.

I read 7.08(e) and 6.05(j) as completely contradictory -- the former says the runner is out if he fails to get there first (ties go to the defense); the latter says the (batter-)runner is out if the base is tagged first (ties go to the runner).

"Batter hits into a DB..."

What's a 'DB'?

Bob

The statement that you don't follow was a quotation from a famous MLB umpire, whos name escapes me, who said this in response to the "call 'em as you see 'em" line, infering that many umpires "see" it one way, when in reality the opposite call would be the correct one.

So, according to your interpretation of 6.05(j), the tie goes to the runner, which contradicts one of your 40 myths of baseball:confused:

# 15. Tie goes to the runner.

# 15. There is no such thing in the world of umpiring. The runner is either out or safe.

So, it sounds to me like you use 7.08(e) as the standard way of judging non-tag plays.

Oh, and what is the solution to the problem of continually needing to correct his misinterpretation of what I was trying to say? Don't just tell me there is a solution, and leave it like that. Go ahead, tell me the solution. What is it, quit trying to correct that person?

This discussion is very similar to the one about the unhittable curve ball that dives over the outside corner and the catcher catches it while falling to his knees. It clearly was a strike when it crossed but no one calls it because it did not look like a strike to anyone present, even the umpire who saw the catcher falling down to catch it.

A booted ground ball that the fielder has to retrieve and then make a play at any bag that's a banger, a tie even to the human eye, is not normally expected to be an out by anyone present, so why complicate issues. On the other hand, a defensive gem that ends in a tie, belongs to the umpire, ie an out.

Throw a fastball an inch off the black belt high and the catcher sticks it and see what I call.

F-----g A!

Exactly.

Smack Thump--OUT!
Thump Smack--SAFE!

Coin Flip--OUT!

I have never seen a "tie" at first base.

NEVER.

This may sound siimplistic, but I call outs at first.

Unless B1 clearly demonstrates that he beat the throw, he is out, in my book.

In 29 years, I have never been involved in an argument over a call at first, unless something hinkey happened (e.g., bad feets, double-clutch by F3, etc.)

Sometimes you can let the players guide this call.

IMHO, it's not about "rewards," it's about getting into a good position, following the ball, then using proper timing and mechanics.

Or should I say "than"?

Ace

Pause, read react. That simple. Don't think or talk to much.