Clearing equipment at the plate..

[bobbybanaduck]

does it need to be cleared out of there? i.e. is it in the way?

is it within your reach?

is it possible for you to clear it out of the way without infringing upon any of your other responsibilities?

if you answer "no" to any of these questions, leave it there. if you have three yeses, clear it out of there.

[lawump]

They actually taught at the UDP (PBUC) camp to clear the bat away if you had time. We were taught to bend over (while keeping our head up to see the action on the field), and with our right hand (since our mask is in our left hand!) slide the bat between our legs. In otherwords, like a football center, we "snapped" the bat between our legs, only instead of snapping it up into a quarterback's hands, we just lift it a few inches off the ground and give in a little chuck backwards. (Note I said "a little chuck". That is: enough to get it out of the way, but not enough that it goes flying into a dugout or on-deck circle.)

Personally, I think its kind of cool when a batter hits an easy stand-up extra-base hit and an R2 or R3 is able to trot home, to pick up the bat, if its in the way, and hand it to the runner as they trot by to score.

Of course, I have to be absolutely sure that the runner is going to make it home trotting...I've never seen it, nor have I ever come close, but it would be awful to have a runner slow up to take the bat from me (or any home plate umpire) only to have him thrown out at the plate.

I don't know, maybe that is an advanced mechanic and I shouldn't do it, but I do. If y'all want to get all over me, that's fine.

[Dave Hensley]

Just as Rich posted elsewhere that he's not a groundskeeper, I am not a bat-boy. Unless the bat is right on the line and there is time to clear it, I never touch a bat. It's a pet peeve of mine to see umpires playing bat boy, picking up bats and taking them over to the dugout after an inning change, and the like.

If a catcher is deliberately placing his headgear on or in front of the plate, I will kick it out of the way. Hard. To the backstop. I've never had to do it more than once in a game.

[voiceoflg]

Originally Posted by Dave Hensley

Just as Rich posted elsewhere that he's not a groundskeeper, I am not a bat-boy. Unless the bat is right on the line and there is time to clear it, I never touch a bat. It's a pet peeve of mine to see umpires playing bat boy, picking up bats and taking them over to the dugout after an inning change, and the like.

If a catcher is deliberately placing his headgear on or in front of the plate, I will kick it out of the way. Hard. To the backstop. I've never had to do it more than once in a game.

Say there is less than two outs and a runner on third. Easy ground ball to the shortstop. The catcher throws his mask up the third baseline a few feet. Runner comes home, throw comes home, runner has to dodge the headgear. Could interference be called on the catcher?

[Tim C]

Many, many great coaches (managers) have taught catchers to toss thier mask into the base line hoping to cause a runner to break stride. Does it work? Doubtful.

I am firmly behind clearing the bat. If done correctly it is a simple task that allows the UMPIRE less to worry about during a play at the plate.

Rich and Dave have continued their position consistently over the years and I respect that -- when you go to a professional umpire school you're trained and expected to clear the bat -- after awhile it simply becomes second nature.

I would never consider "even thinking" of attaching a penalty to the placement of a mask . . . it would make me rival Kreskin in knowing the "intent" of F2.

Regards,

[lawump]

Originally Posted by Tim C

-- when you go to a professional umpire school you're trained and expected to clear the bat -- after awhile it simply becomes second nature.

Very true.

[ctblu40]

I always clear the bat if there is time.

When clearing a bat, make every attempt to use lawump's method. As an extra, try to grasp the barrel when sliding the bat away as the bat will be less likely to flip into the air.

I am with Dave on becoming a bat boy as well. After the third out of a half inning, I get up the line and stay there. I try to stay as far away from the dugouts as possible, taking a bat over there seems like it would only invite comments from the rats.

[kylejt]

Originally Posted by voiceoflg

Say there is less than two outs and a runner on third. Easy ground ball to the shortstop. The catcher throws his mask up the third baseline a few feet. Runner comes home, throw comes home, runner has to dodge the headgear. Could interference be called on the catcher?

Interference? No, but you've got a heck of a case for obstruction.

As for clearing the bat, I'll say what the rest of you won't. Many umpires can't clear the bat because they're unable to bend over to do so. Case in point: Just watch some of the blimps working the Little League World Series. We sometimes forget that baseball is an athletic event. And the fact that some of these rotund fellows are tilting the field, well, you might was well put a Pall Mall in their mouth and set them up in a Barkalounger. Mix in a West Vest Gold, and there's no way on Earth that these guys are seeing a bat, much less picking it up off the ground.

I suspect that's the reason some here won't stoop to being a "grounds keeper" or "bat boy". They can't stoop.

[Tim C]

Hooray for kylejet!

Regards,

[WhatWuzThatBlue]

Apparently when you can't argue the point well, you need to take a cheap shot...okay T., you win.

I thought that the purpose of our beloved board was to impart knowledge and correct mistakes. T. seems to take great pride in his journalistic abilities, so I suggest a column is in order. The title "Doing the Batboy's Job" seems appropriate. I've provided the counterpoint already...what happens when you don't choose to remove a bat from the field of play? As all of us know, 'nothing' would be the correct answer. Picking up a bat when it is of no consequence, just smacks of brown nosing. Maybe you can tell us all what the penalty would be if the umpire moves the bat out of the way, only to have the ball deflect off of its new position and out of play. You could follow it up with a query about legal coverage when you slide the bat out of the runner's way, only to have the on deck batter trip on it and break his ankle; ahhh, that would be splendid reading indeed.

I never questioned what level of ball he works or how he umpires. On the contrary, I complimented him and stated that I know him to be competent. At the level of ball I work, I can ask the catcher to move the bat if it poses a problem for him or ignore it. At youth ball, you may not have that luxury and may feel the need to create more liability for yourself by handling playing equipment during a live ball situation. You know what? That would be a great summary...how do I get insurance for acting recklessly?

I have friends at the two major schools and they don't teach the umpire to do the bat boy's job. They also don't instruct umpire's to pick up the catcher's mask. Do you do that too?

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by kylejt

Interference? No, but you've got a heck of a case for obstruction.

As for clearing the bat, I'll say what the rest of you won't. Many umpires can't clear the bat because they're unable to bend over to do so. Case in point: Just watch some of the blimps working the Little League World Series. We sometimes forget that baseball is an athletic event. And the fact that some of these rotund fellows are tilting the field, well, you might was well put a Pall Mall in their mouth and set them up in a Barkalounger. Mix in a West Vest Gold, and there's no way on Earth that these guys are seeing a bat, much less picking it up off the ground.

I suspect that's the reason some here won't stoop to being a "grounds keeper" or "bat boy". They can't stoop.

That is one of the most asinine and totally bigoted things I've ever read. One out of 3 Americans are overweight.

I'm a stout fella myself. I have degenerated discs from L-2 to S-1 from a bad car wreck in 1981. I have a hard time bending, but I have no trouble reaching down to the ground to clear a bat, dust the plate, or pull weeds. Plus, I can run around a ball field just as quickly as a little skinny Nancy boy can. What you said is patently false. And I'm quite certain that any fat umpire can see just fine over his West Vest.

Big people can be athletic. Haven't you ever watched pro softball or the softball HR hitters that tour the country. These guys are very athletic. How about all the tubby pitchers in MLB. Bartolo Colon comes to mind, and there are many fatties at the F1 position all around the league.

I like what John Kruk once said, "Hey lady, I ain't no athlete, I'm a ball player."

Way too much emphasis is being placed on being thin in this society, all due to the ideal "Hollywood" perception of what a person should look like. There was a time in the not-too-distant past where a man of girth was considered handsome and even sexy. This was before the big push towards anorexia we have seen in the past 30 years.

I will say it again. I am sick of people taking cheap pot-shots at overweight people. It's the moral equivalent to making racist or anti-semitic comments, and should not be tolerated.

[PWL]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

That is one of the most asinine and totally bigoted things I've ever read.

I can run around a ball field just as quickly as a little skinny Nancy boy can.

I will say it again. I am sick of people taking cheap pot-shots at overweight people. It's the moral equivalent to making racist or anti-semitic comments, and should not be tolerated.

So taking pot shots at skinny little Nancy boys isn't the moral equivalent to making racist or anti-Semitic comments.

Would that be one of the all time ASSinine and totally bigoted things you ever read.

What we have here is an OXy-MORON........Lose the weight or deal with it.

[LMan]

SDS, one of the dumbest posts ever. "Moral equivalent of racism"


Just ridiculous.

[ctblu40]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

Way too much emphasis is being placed on being thin in this society, all due to the ideal "Hollywood" perception of what a person should look like. There was a time in the not-too-distant past where a man of girth was considered handsome and even sexy. This was before the big push towards anorexia we have seen in the past 30 years.

Steve,

I consider you one of my allies on this board, so I hope you don't take offense to this reply to you're quote above.

I agree with you to a point that there is alot of emphasis placed on being thin in today's society. However, it's the reason that the emphasis is there that is the problem. What I mean to say is that people shouldn't try to lose weight in order to conform to what society deems is attractive or acceptable, instead, the goal of any diet or weight loss program should be overall health improvement.

[PWL]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

Way too much emphasis is being placed on being thin in this society, all due to the ideal "Hollywood" perception of what a person should look like. There was a time in the not-too-distant past where a man of girth was considered handsome and even sexy.

All right, time to play the Dating Game. Ladies and gentlemen, let's meet bachelor number one. His name is Steve, he's a Gemini, enjoys walks in the rain and big bags of pork rinds.