Dropped third strike
 

What is the mechanic for a dropped third strike when they have to throw the guy out at first?

The PU signals the strike and the BU does his thing as needed.

I believe ..................................
 

One cannot advance on a dropped third strike in Little League, can one ?

Thus, no need for a "mechanic".

Ok,
 

Dan let's assume that you still have failed to invest in a RULE BOOK. Let's assume that again rather than doing your own research you are asking for us to "teach" you the rule.

The rule is simple and yet complicated.

The rule is simple the mechanic can be much more difficult.

Regards,

Annnnnnd
 

It is easy to assume that you are a paragon of pomposity.

In your haste to be cute, you murdered the English language.

"ONE" cannot be a "THEY".

joe

Junior division on up they play with that.

Tim, I know and understand what the rule is. I'm not 100% what the mechanic was for that, what to call, etc.

If you've followed the posting history of LLDan, you'd see that Tee might also be considered showing great restraint.

And ............................
 

I stand humbly corrected.

That comes from an expert in the subject.

My advice to Tee:

Answer his question if you want to.

Ignore his question if you like.

Pretend not to be a jerk in the process.

Joe

Here is the "Pierzynski" thread from the ALCS last year dealing with the dropped thrid strike mechanic.

Joe

Please see the following threads for an example of what Garth is referring to.

"First Game Experience"

"Funny Question"

Clearly Tee has indeed "turned a new leaf."

Hahahaha,
 

"My advice to Tee:

"Answer his question if you want to.

"Ignore his question if you like.

"Pretend not to be a jerk in the process."

Why would I take advice from the peanut gallery?

Joe, don't get me started. Go back to your small diamond game . . . they are calling for a baby sitter.

Regards,

Good idea, I will.

http://ndc.shockwave.com/images/pico...ine_mini_2.png I LOVE this game!

Why I am going to seriously try to understand you, I do not know...here is a try.

I think it is a bad idea to be a jerk to a young umpire so, you think that means I only umpire on a "small diamond"? That makes no sense.

A lot of us guys that umpire on "big diamonds" like to be friendly and help out young guys. Furthermore, I like to not be a jerk to young guys whether they are umpires or not. I am so sorry that I have let you down, Tee.

Joe

Oh my!
 

Joe;

I just hate dealing with the uninitiated:

"A Slam" is unsuccessful if you ignore it . . . good for you.

However, I just think you're dumb and didn't recognize it.

Regards,

Some fine English there, Shakespeare.

If by "uninitiated", you must mean someone that sees you for the pompous jerk that you are. Yep...that's me! Uninitiated!

Joe

What a putz!
 

Joe:

All you have done is an an additional adjective to my resume . . . it is strange no one, before you, has called be pompous . . .

Add that to condesending, etc. and I am a league leader.

Joe, you can't come close to being a threat . . . you're obviously a small diamond baby sitter.

Regards,

A "threat"? What the heck are you talking about? Too much Jim Beam tonight?

Tee, it would seem JWash thinks you should add sot to that list, also. :D

Tee? Drink Jim Beam? I know he has better taste than that.

When all you paragons of virtue are done sniping at each other, please note, there is no such thing as a dropped third strike. The proper terminology is, a third strike not caught.

Also, rule books don't include mechanics. There is no specific mechanic for a third strike not caught.

1..The B/R attempts to reach 1B.

2..The catcher retrieves the ball, and throws to 1B in an attempt to retire the B/R.

3..The BU makes a 'safe' or 'out' call.

Fairly simple.

Bob

Okay,

Dan asked a legitimate question, one for which the answer lies not in the rule book.

He did not ask "what is an uncaught 3rd strike," but rather asked for the proper mechanic.

He was then told by someone that there is no such thing in Little League baseball. That person was wrong.

Then he was told by the Grand Puba Of All Who Umpire that he should go invest in a rule book, where, of course, he cannot possibly find the answer to his question.

Perhaps maybe he would like just a good example of an accepted mechanic for this play. Hmmmmmmm?????

Dan,

Just give the physical strike 3 mechanic of your choosing, then make a safe motion with your arms while saying, "No Catch!" Then, if there is no R3, trail the play up the 1st base line (straddling the grass/dirt) and watch for swipe tag/pulled foot. On uncaught 3rd strikes with 1st base occupied with less than 2 outs, simply give the physical strike 3 signal, with a verbal "batter's out" or "he's out" to avoid confusion.

Now, this is probably not the "official" mechanic, and other umpires will do it differently, and no doubt tell me I'm full of crap, etc. This is but one good method that works, and will not end up like the Eddings fiasco of 2005.

Tonight, Eddie Rap did the "no catch" mechanic after signaling a swing on strike three. He did it it swiftly and compactly. IMHO, it was good, crisp communication.

I am biased here, but I thought Rap did a superb plate job on Sunday's NYY/BOS marathon.

Ace

Gee, I feel left out. I gave the answer to the poor guy and all you people can do is talk about each other! Tisk-tisk-tisk! That's not being nice!!

:D :D

You didn't give him the answer; you just said the PU signals strike and the BU "does his thing."

San Diego Steve is the one who, FINALLY, gave the kid an actual answer to his actual question.

I note that you didn't explain the 'mechanic' to our buddy either...too busy getting your skirt in knots over Tee?

(and posting the Eddings clip doesn't count....Dan won't have any idea what went wrong).

Tee has never shyed away from accusations of 'pompous' and 'arrogant'. They are a badge of honor.

Why waste bandwidth on something everyone already knows? Why not spend your time mentoring this other lost soul?

You're right. I should have answered Young Dan's question. The JIC made me angry the way he jumped on the kid.

SDSteve has done a fine job answering the question.

Joe

I would not give a safe signal in this situation. I would do anything. I also do not like the punch or "out" mechanic as my strike. I think the safe mechanic puts you in a bind. I would let the play go and if I clearly do not have a catch I will not "out" the batter. If a catcher is unsure, they should tag the batter and most of this is over. The Edding's situation was much more about what the catcher did than what the umpire called. If the catcher would have just tagged the batter, much of what had happen would have never taken place.

Peace

better not, I dont wanna earn the nick name Doug Eddings :D

Yeah, like I said, there are other ways. Rut has just given another. But, the safe signal was used by Ed Rapuano, as Ace pointed out, so at least it's getting some play in the bigs.

The mechanic advised by Steve is taught at the pro scholls and is expeted in MiLB and in most NCAA conferences. (The older mechanic was to raise the right are horizontal and verbalize "no catch")

The signals, in my opinion, are important but not as important as the verbal. The catcher and batter should get a verbal OUT when there is an out or no out.

This is a similar situation, is it not? A pulled foot at 2nd base at the beginning of an apparent double play. The BU should make a safe signal AND verbalize something. Would anyone suggest to remain mute in this situation?

Joe

Joe,

Good points! The pro schools and most clinics teach to verbalize anything out of the ordinary or when something unexpected happens. I have found this to be very good advise over the years.

Not in the ones I've attended ... and neither has the other fake mechanic mentioned above.

As an aside to LLDan - isn't it interesting that even your supporters assume you are about 12 years old (calling you kid and new umpire, etc, despite some of the assertions to your own experience you've made elsewhere.) That tell you anything?

Dan - what's the proper mechanic for signaling that the 2nd baseman is about to field the ball. That's the same mechanic you should signal for a dropped 3rd strike, if you are PU.

The signal is made up. Use it if you like. I'll ding you if I'm evaluating...

I agree, however, on the verbal. If it's close, call it an out verbally. If it's not an out, or it's not close, say nothing.

And just what pro school did you attend? I've read many of your posts, and nothing in them indicated the knowledge acquired at a pro school.

JE - twice. Last year and 2003. Thanks for asking.

And you telling me I'm wrong is the highest compliment I can get.

Its funny you mention a ding at an evaluation because just this past spring, I was dinged on an eval during an NCAA game for not using the mechanic described by Steve. I was told that the reason we do this is to avoid confusion on the field. I guess it must depend on what your evaluator wants.

I equate this to giving a 'safe' mechanic when a batted ball passes close to a runner but there is no interference. By initiating these mechanics, don't you think it heads off any questions like, "He caught that pitch." and "That's interference."

2005 and 2003. Hmmmmm. Aren't both of these years' school sessions prior to the Doug Eddings debacle, which has changed the way the mechanic is taught? No wonder it wasn't taught, there was not yet the need to teach it! Don't try to say that SoCal is wrong now, based on what you didn't get taught in '03 and '05.

And,

For anyone interested in Jim Evans' thoughts on the subject, you can find them in the thread linked below:

http://forum.officiating.com/showthread.php?t=24238

Personally, I'd be inclined to go with what he said.

JM

And this is pretty damn close to what SoCal and I said is the way it's being taught since the Eddings caper.

A fair point.

So ... who here went this year - did they actually teach this? It hasn't yet filtered down to anything I've attended ... but I'm not TOO old a dog to learn new tricks though.

Personally, I think the Eddings Debacle was more along the lines of his ambiguous signal - his actual signal didn't look like what he'd been using earlier. And also personally, I think "He's Out!" works just fine in borderline sitches like this.

I have found that SoCalBlue has his ear to the ground when it comes to what's going on in umpiring, so I just trust that the info he supplies is accurate.

This is all great, but who cares what the pros teach. This was a Little League game and what is taught at the pro level is involving a much smaller number of people. I would not suggest you do anything the pros do unless you have confirmed this from the people you work for. Now this is just an opinion and you should feel free to do your own thing. The Eddings situation seemed to be caused by a signal that I have never seen used. I just know as a PU, I never say anything on a close play. I look for help from my partners (with a non-verbal signal) to tell me if the ball hit the ground or not. I have a catch. Not sure we are going to have video replay to review 100 times to see if the ball hit the ground or not.

Peace

Jeff,

I could not disagree with you more. The mechanic is taught by both pro schools and every clinic I have attended.

The reasoning behind the mechanic is sound - ensure everyone is on the same page in regard to an uncaught third strike.

It's your choice, but I know for a fact that the NCAA region & super region umpires were evaluated on this mechanic in 2006.

In our association, only pro school mechanics are taught, so we do the things the pros do, and we use the mechanics at every applicable level.

Is the mechanic in the book? If it is not in the book then you will have different points of view on this. Also when I talked to Minor League guys and fellow college guys, I did not ever hear of "one size fits all" mechanic with a ringing consensus. Now I am not disputing this was an issue on the NCAA playoff level, but I did not read anywhere where something was adopted across the board. Guys that work playoffs get a different set of directives sometimes than everyone else. Also, what works for NCAA does not necessarily apply for all other levels. I know in my state we do things differently than what is stated in the NF book on purpose. So what you just described might go completely out of the window if you are not working an NCAA game. I also know what happens in one conference can greatly be different from another conference. There is an NCAA conference that requires one of the base umpires to use an indicator along with the PU and you know how that subject gets thrown around here. ;)

Peace

Jeff,

Agreed for the most part. However, many HS groups STILL use the outdated Fed mechanics.

PBUC is about ready to release a new Red Book (May be out now). Hopefully they have included more of the evaluation course mechanics into the book or will release them on the web site at some point. I would look for this to be updated in the 2007 or 2008 CCA guide (Tim C may have input on that).

Use what you want. I can tell you from experience that using this mechanic one should NEVER have a crew mechanic issue with an uncaught third strike. It works - why are you fighting it?

The state I live in uses many of their own mechanics outside of what the NF uses. Actually a lot of mechanics are NCAA mechanics to make things easier or simple. The powers that be made those decisions; I just do what I am told.

Once again you are coming at this from a different perspective than I am on this issue. I did not make the point because of what works, I am saying to you what I think because it might not fit everyone's conference or level they work. Who cares if it works if the powers that be do not give you assignments because you are using a "pro mechanic?" If you were a football official you would know that the SEC used certain mechanics for years (completely outside of the CCA Mechanics BTW). If you wanted to work in the SEC, you did what you were told or you sat at home. I would rather have a job using a mechanic that does not work as than sitting completely at home trying to use a mechanic that is perceived to be the best. So this is not about fighting anything, this is about what you suggested might not apply to every jurisdiction whether you or I like it or not. Also I do not know that it “works.” What you said I should not do has worked very well for me and the umpires I work with.

Peace

I just spoke with my friend in the Texas League - they do not use the mechanic you mention. Spoke with both of my assignors and they both recommended not using it at the NAIA or NCAA level until consensus is reached (which it has not yet - leading me to wonder about the comments on the Super-Regionals above), although one of the two suspects SOME uniform mechanic will be in place at NCAA level by next year and probably by NAIA either next year or soon.

Simply repeating what was told to me by two umpires that did region/super region in 2006

See my comments regarding CCA mechanics book.

No real need to argue. IMO the real issue is that crews need to pre-game and use the same mechanic at all times there is or may be an uncaught third strike.

A close friend in AA is being evaluated this week. I will ask him to see if he can get clarification on enforcement accross all MiLB.

Damn, Dave! What foul wind blew up your skirt? Man I was just having a little fun with the thread!

:eek:

Gentlemen,

While not unsympathetic to those who express a reluctance to modify their "third strike uncaught" mechanics for fear it might hurt their chances of advancement due to the evaluation criteria of their association/league, I feel that the reluctance leaves an important issue "begging".

In those situations where a batter DOES become a runner on an uncaught third strike, I would suggest that the PLAYERS have a RIGHT to know whether or not the batter did, in fact, become a runner on the pitch. In my experience, in the majority of such situations, it is quite obvious to the players whether or not the third strike was caught and, therefore, whether or not the batter became a runner.

However, in a "significant minority" of such cases, it is NOT obvious to the players whether or not the third strike was legally caught. More to the point, it is not obvious to the players whether or not the umpire JUDGED that the third strike was caught - which is actually the more relevant question.

So, if there is the possibility of ambiguity as to whether or not the 3rd strike had been judged legally caught, and whether the batter had become a runner or not, it seems that the mechanics endorsed by Evans and others are clearly "better umpiring" in such situations. It seems to me that an umpire who chooses not to clarify the ambiguity through his use of inferior mechanics is derelict in his duty as an umpire. Does anyone disagree?

JM

I think you are completely wrong. The players need to know the situation. The players need to act as they would without a call.

If we use your point of view on this, then anytime a dropped third strike happens, we should go out of our way to tell the player not to throw the ball around the diamond. For example, yelling over and over again that the batter is out on a caught third strike when the batter is not sure or is not by rule allowed to run (runner occupying first as an example). It is always easier to come back and make a call rather than make an uninformed call that is completely wrong then let the play go out. Players need to act always as if nothing is ever called.

Peace

Jeff,

While I would agree that the players' bear a responsibility for understanding the situation (and their coaches bear the responsibility of teaching them), I don't understand how the players can be held responsible for reading the umpire's mind.

For example, R2, 1 out, two strikes on the batter. Next pitch is a breaking ball that the batter takes a mighty swing at and misses. The catcher comes up with the ball, along with a mittful of dirt. The umpire indicates the strike and nothing else.

What play should the catcher make?

To make it interesting, the R2 got a good jump towards 3B and it's going to take a great throw to get him. The batter is a slow runner and is "easy meat" at 1B. The catcher "thinks" he caught the pitch before it touched the ground.

Is the batter out, or is he a runner? Should the catcher try to throw out the R3, or take the "sure out" at 1B?

Only the umpire knows for sure, and if he ain't tellin', NOBODY else does. Even when they DO know the situation.

On a "trouble ball" in the outfield, the umpire is going to clarify whether the ball was caught or trapped. The players need to know in order to know what play to make. Why should this be treated any differently?

JM

Sorry, missed the humor.

I won't take issue with this topic since Jim (SoCalBlue1) has already stated what I believe...use what you've been instructed to use, do it well and teach others.

I do have a problem with this statement:
Most coaches teach their players to keep acting on the play until they hear otherwise. Foul balls, foul tips, missed bases, etc - they are all part of waiting for the appropriate call to be made. Don't you insist that a player keeps running until he hears an umpire yell foul? That runner on second should have his head down and be looking to score on a shot down the right field line...he's not waiting to read a mind. Sorry, but that just kind of irked me.

WWTB,

The situation I posed is materially different than waiting to hear if a batted ball is going to be ruled foul or not. In that case, there is no "better" thing to be doing, even if the ball eventually proves itself foul.

In the situation I posed, if the batter is already out, I want my catcher to take a shot at the R2 advancing to 3B. If the batter is not out and has become a runner, I want my catcher to take the "easy out" at 1B. I don't see why the umpire can't let everybody in on which it is. He's the only one who knows & he's not the only one with a legitimate reason to know.

I don't see any legitimate rationale for mechanics which keep this from the players when it's not obvious. I'm kind of "irked" by umpires who say "the players should know the situation" or "that's not how my evaluator does it".

MY players DO know the situation. They just don't know what YOU judged - because you didn't tell them and they can't read your mind. Maybe your evaluator should re-evaluate his mechanics.

JM

Put me down as with the Coach. Sheesh, so many are making this so hard just because there's no carved in stone, universally applied, black-and-white promulgated mechanic for filling the gap that was embarrassingly exposed with the Eddings incident.

What does a BU signal on a trouble fly ball that he judges to be uncaught? Safe signal, "no catch" verbal. Uncaught third strike is completely analogous, and the same mechanic works perfectly well. No muss, no fuss, no Eddings incident.

Thank you Dave - a perfect way to close this out.

Possible New Mechanic
 

Reading this thread over and wanted to introduce new info. Most readers have read about a new mechanic for a third strike not caught. Signal safe and verbalize no catch. Others disagree that a new signal is needed or that the new mechanic just hasn't gained universal acceptance.

I wanted to introduce a new and possible alternative. Hold 3 strikes up high with pinky ring and middle finger to alert both benches of the call and verbalize no catch. Let the resulting action lower your arm. It avoids the awkwardness of the safe signal after a strike. I like it.

You indicate three strikes with two fingers? How many do you use to indicate two strikes?

I think you have to infer a comma between "pinky" and "ring."

Ahhh. Being too literal again. My apologies.

C'mon, everyone knows what the swirl the pinky ring in the air mechanic is. It means that you want the ball boy to bring you another between-inning glass of chardonnay. Or maybe a nice riesling.

Had to slap a ballboy once cuz he only put one olive in my martini. Two olives, boy! And keep 'em coming!