Arguing balls and strikes

[LDUB]

Originally Posted by Justme

Arguing balls/strikes is not allowed in any level of baseball.

That is the point of my question. The NF does not prohibit arguing balls and strikes like the other rule codes do, coming out to argue about a pitch is the same as coming out to argue about a tag play at second base. I was wondering if anyone allows more arguing in Federation games than in an OBR/NCAA game because of the way the rule is written.

Originally Posted by Justme

The word ‘final” in the FED means that arguing judgment calls is not allowed.

That may be what it means, but that is not how it is enforced. The manager/head coach is allowed on to the field to argue a judgement call and hold up the game for a reasonable ammount of time.

Originally Posted by Justme

All you have to do is provide me with the reference in the rule book (any rule book) stating that a coach can come out of the dugout and argue strikes/balls with the PU.

Unlike the OBR and NCAA rules there is no wording in the NF book which specifically prohibits arguing balls and strikes.

NCAA - After a warning, any player or coach who continues to argue balls, strikes, or checked swings, shall be ejected from the game.

OBR - Players leaving their position in the field or on base, or managers or coaches leaving the bench or coaches box, to argue on BALLS AND STRIKES will not be permitted. They should be warned if they start for the plate to protest the call. If they continue, they will be ejected from the game.

Federation - Nothing about the topic

I really do not understand why you are arguing with me, all I did was state a fact that the NF rule book does not specifically prohibit the arguing of balls and strikes and then asked a question how people handel the arguing of balls and strikes in games played under different rule codes.

[Justme]

Originally Posted by LDUB

That is the point of my question. The NF does not prohibit arguing balls and strikes like the other rule codes do, coming out to argue about a pitch is the same as coming out to argue about a tag play at second base. I was wondering if anyone allows more arguing in Federation games than in an OBR/NCAA game because of the way the rule is written.

That may be what it means, but that is not how it is enforced. The manager/head coach is allowed on to the field to argue a judgement call and hold up the game for a reasonable ammount of time.

Actually FED rules do prohibit arguing balls/strikes but you don't seem to understand that...that's okay.

There is a difference, IMO, between a manager/coach arguing balls/strikes and questioning a tag at second. An example: Thursday night I was the BU working 2-man in an Adult League game. Possible double play situation but the throw was bad and caused F4 to be pulled off 2B. F4 and R1 made contact but R1 made it safely to 2B. The defensive manager "asked" for time and came out to talk with me about the play.

Coach to me: "Al I know he was off the bag, but he tagged him"
Me to coach: "No coach, he ran into him but there was no tag. I was in perfect position on the play and saw it all the way."
Coach to me: "Okay Al, thanks"

I'll admit that not all conversations with coaches go this smoothly but I have a reputation for busting my butt to get into position and making good calls (now patting myself on the back ). Also I've worked dozens of games for this coach so he knows that if I weren't 100% sure I would go for help.

Bottom line: I'll talk with a coach occasionally on close plays. Sometimes a coach has to come out and question a call. There are times when he wants to hear your explanation for making a call. Some umpires may not allow this but I do. What I will not allow is a coach to come out to the plate and question my strike zone.

[mbyron]

I believe that Luke's point was about the rules, not their enforcement.

If the point is simply that FED does not have the same words as 9.02, then I agree. As I read 10-1-4, however, it prohibits arguing judgment calls.

We might allow coaches to come out on a close play at 2B to inquire whether we saw everything, but once we say the magic words, "In my judgment..." the conversation is over. If the coach stays now he risks violating the 3 P's and an ejection. Why? Because judgment calls are final.

In other words, we don't allow coaches to come out to question our judgment, we allow them to come out to discuss whether we saw everything that happened (which should inform our judgment).

We never allow that for ball/strike calls because (we assume) the PU always sees the pitch. But the principle is the same: judgment calls are final.

[SAump]

Originally Posted by Justme

Actually FED rules do prohibit arguing balls/strikes but you don't seem to understand that...that's okay.

There is a difference, IMO, between a manager/coach arguing balls/strikes and questioning a tag at second. An example: Thursday night I was the BU working 2-man in an Adult League game. Possible double play situation but the throw was bad and caused F4 to be pulled off 2B. F4 and R1 made contact but R1 made it safely to 2B. The defensive manager "asked" for time and came out to talk with me about the play.

Coach to me: "Al I know he was off the bag, but he tagged him"
Me to coach: "No coach, he ran into him but there was no tag. I was in perfect position on the play and saw it all the way."
Coach to me: "Okay Al, thanks"

I'll admit that not all conversations with coaches go this smoothly but I have a reputation for busting my butt to get into position and making good calls (now patting myself on the back ). Also I've worked dozens of games for this coach so he knows that if I weren't 100% sure I would go for help.

Bottom line: I'll talk with a coach occasionally on close plays. Sometimes a coach has to come out and question a call. There are times when he wants to hear your explanation for making a call. Some umpires may not allow this but I do. What I will not allow is a coach to come out to the plate and question my strike zone.

Was this obstruction or interference?

[BigUmp56]

Originally Posted by SAump

Was this obstruction or interfernce?

Sounds like a train wreck to me.


Tim.

[Justme]

Originally Posted by SAump

Was this obstruction or interfernce?

Neither...just a train wreck.

[Chris_Hickman]

This will be my last post on this subject. My point has always been that I only break up a trip if I feel the coach is taking too long. I have gone through several games where I have never walked to the mound because the coaches make it quick. I do not believe a trip is a teaching tool. Teaching is at practices. A trip, IMO, is to talk stragity. And it should not take longer than 15-20 mississippi's + or - a little. If you are on the dish and the coach is chirpin about pitches...then decides to walks to the mound to talk to his pitcher, he probually wants to talk to you too. What are you going to do if he is out there for 1-2 minutes waitin' on you? Are you going to ignore him? Don't let him dictate how long he will stay out there? Just break up the trip if he takes too long....Chris

[Carl Childress]

Originally Posted by Chris_Hickman

This will be my last post on this subject. My point has always been that I only break up a trip if I feel the coach is taking too long. I have gone through several games where I have never walked to the mound because the coaches make it quick. I do not believe a trip is a teaching tool. Teaching is at practices. A trip, IMO, is to talk stragity. And it should not take longer than 15-20 mississippi's + or - a little. If you are on the dish and the coach is chirpin about pitches...then decides to walks to the mound to talk to his pitcher, he probually wants to talk to you too. What are you going to do if he is out there for 1-2 minutes waitin' on you? Are you going to ignore him? Don't let him dictate how long he will stay out there? Just break up the trip if he takes too long....Chris

Blaine Gallant did an article for Officiating.com that teaches us several ways to handle the "conference on the mound." It's titled "Bawls and Strikes," and we published it on 3 October, 2006. Try it. You'll find it appealing, entertaining, and instructive.

[Justme]

Originally Posted by SAump

Was a throw to 1B prevented? Was this obstruction or interference?

No, the throw was so far off that F4 was lucky to even catch the ball, he had no chance to make a play at 1B. If anything, and this would be pretty 'nitpicky', F4 obstructed R1...except that R1 made it safely to 2B.

[Dave Hensley]

Nothing looks worse, to me, than everybody, including PU, standing around twiddling their thumbs for an extended period while a coach and his battery (and maybe others) stand there and figure out what to get Millie for her wedding present and where they can find a live rooster to take the curse off Jose's glove.

I have been taught, and follow religiously, an established protocol for how long I allow a visit to last. As the coach is going towards the mound, I observe and make note of the visit on my lineup card. When he gets to the mound, I immediately go brush the plate. Upon completing the plate brush, I turn and begin walking out to the mound. 90% of the time, the visit has concluded or concludes before I get there, in which case I turn and walk (I used to trot, but I saw Jim Joyce walking with authority, and I thought it looked cool) back to the plate. If I make it to the mound, I stand there next to the coach for 5-10 seconds, and then ask if he's going to make a change. Sometimes I suggest that candlesticks always make a nice gift. If he has been waiting for the opportunity of a face to face to whine about balls and strikes, I warn and eject, and I think that has actually happened to me maybe once in my career.

This is something of a hot button issue for me because I tend to have partners who manage these time-outs so badly it's like fingernails on a chalkboard to me. Coach sets up a temporary residence out on the mound, and partner just stands there, then after a minute or so, hollers out "let's go!"

It looks (and sounds) horrible. If the coach is out there looking for an opportunity to argue balls and strikes, then refraining from going out there just looks like you're afraid to. The issue should be confronted, not avoided.

[LDUB]

Originally Posted by Justme

Actually FED rules do prohibit arguing balls/strikes but you don't seem to understand that...that's okay.

I showed a question from a NFHS test question which said that "questioning a ball or strike" is not a reason for ejection. The rule book has several pages about field behavior. There is a section about warn then eject situations, warn or eject situations, and eject situations. Nowhere in any of those sections is arguing balls and strikes listed. While I have the rule book and a exam question on my side, you have not come up with any support for saying that NF rules do not allow arguing balls and strikes.

[Justme]

Originally Posted by LDUB

I showed a question from a NFHS test question which said that "questioning a ball or strike" is not a reason for ejection. The rule book has several pages about field behavior. There is a section about warn then eject situations, warn or eject situations, and eject situations. Nowhere in any of those sections is arguing balls and strikes listed. While I have the rule book and a exam question on my side, you have not come up with any support for saying that NF rules do not allow arguing balls and strikes.

Okay LDUB, you win......... but I'll keep doing it the wrong way by not allowing coaches to argue my strike zone.

I'd still love to see one of your games where you allow the coaches to come out to the plate to "question a ball or strike" call any time that they want (wouldn't want to work it with you though). I hope that your games have time limits. Where do you umpire?

Another question, when the the coaches come out to "question a ball or strike" do you change your call? That would really be fun to see

I have an idea for you......at the pre-game meeting with the coaches just ask them what they'd like the strike zone to be, that way no arguing

[Carl Childress]

Originally Posted by Justme

Okay LDUB, you win......... but I'll keep doing it the wrong way by not allowing coaches to argue my strike zone.

I'd still love to see one of your games where you allow the coaches to come out to the plate to "question a ball or strike" call any time that they want (wouldn't want to work it with you though). I hope that your games have time limits. Where do you umpire?

Another question, when the the coaches come out to "question a ball or strike" do you change your call? That would really be fun to see

I have an idea for you......at the pre-game meeting with the coaches just ask them what they'd like the strike zone to be, that way no arguing

Wait up, please. No one is saying that the umpire should permit coaches to argue balls and strikes. The only issue — a tiny one, at that — is whether such arguing rates an automatic ejection.

In the OBR a coach is ejected immediately if he "leaves his position" to argue balls and strikes.

There's no similar language in the NFHS, and the 1993 national test question emphasized that point.

[Justme]

Originally Posted by Carl Childress

Wait up, please. No one is saying that the umpire should permit coaches to argue balls and strikes. The only issue — a tiny one, at that — is whether such arguing rates an automatic ejection.

In the OBR a coach is ejected immediately if he "leaves his position" to argue balls and strikes.

There's no similar language in the NFHS, and the 1993 national test question emphasized that point.

I don't remember seeing that question on the 2005/2006 test.

I didn't say it was an automatic ejection. I said that I'd warn them then and if they continued I would eject them.

So Carl, what do you do to prevent it from happening if you don't eject them?

How many trips to the plate to argue balls/strikes do you allow? How about team captains, do you allow them to argue balls/strikes? And the other players? Do the FED rules specifically state that they can’t argue balls/strike?

[Carl Childress]

Originally Posted by Justme

I don't remember seeing that question on the 2005/2006 test.

I didn't say it was an automatic ejection. I said that I'd warn them then and if they continued I would eject them.

So Carl, what do you do to prevent it from happening if you don't eject them?

How many trips to the plate to argue balls/strikes do you allow? How about team captains, do you allow them to argue balls/strikes? And the other players? Do the FED rules specifically state that they can’t argue balls/strike?

I'm obviously not making myself plain.

How do I keep them from arguing balls and strikes? Well, to start with, I don't miss many pitches. The most a coach might say is, on his way to the third base box: "How far is he missing?" I'm not kidding.

But I teach other umpires what to do.

Stay with me, now: If you're an average umpire (and most umpires are average 'cause that's what "average" means) and the coach comes (leaves his position) to bark about balls and strikes: Throw the bum out!

I don't recall anyone saying the umpire should allow that nonsense.

But in an NFHS game, if he wants to give the coach a chance to shut up and behave, he may do so in the sure and certain knowledge that he is NOT ignoring a rule.

I hope I've clarified this.

In OBR, you MUST eject.
In NFHS, you don't have to unless you want to.

Obviously, you've a "want to" guy.

My feeling: If I have to stay out there in that heat, hs's gonna stay, too.