Is bailing a checked swing?

[Paul L]

My main question is whether PU should (must?) go for help on a checked swing appeal if requested by the defense even though PU does not think there was a swing (an attempt to strike at the pitch) at all. In other words, can there be a checked swing when there is no swing at all? And if there is no checked swing, can the defense make a checked-swing appeal? Should PU refuse to go to his partner and simply say there was no swing to appeal?

By "independent judgment", I meant should BU assume that there was a checked swing if PU asks for help (remember the PU's question was "Did he go?") and simply rule on whether the assumed swing was checked in time. So far, the answer seems to be no, that BU must perceive an attempt to hit the pitch, and not break the question into an initial attempt to hit the pitch and then a successful interruption of that attempt before going too far.

[ctblu40]

Originally Posted by Paul L

My main question is whether PU should (must?) go for help on a checked swing appeal if requested by the defense even though PU does not think there was a swing (an attempt to strike at the pitch) at all. In other words, can there be a checked swing when there is no swing at all? And if there is no checked swing, can the defense make a checked-swing appeal? Should PU refuse to go to his partner and simply say there was no swing to appeal?

LMan gave you the correct answer to this in his post. In OBR, if requested, PU must ask for help on a check swing appeal. In FED it's not required, but it's a good idea to go ahead and ask for help.

I don't understand why you wouldn't go for help. Go for help, and if BU rules a strike, we're that much closer to refreshments after the game!

I was on the plate Sunday and had waist high slider come in on a lefty on a 2-2 pitch. I followed the pitch in, because it was VERY close to being a strike, and thought that I also had the checked swing covered well. I said ball. Catcher asked for an appeal. I went right away, still thinking there was NO WAY he went after it.

BU rang it up (long time Pac 10 ump). After the game, I asked him how close it was, he said "Not close at all, he obviously offered at it".

The moral of the story is, I ALWAYS go for help when the defense asks. I can be so sure I have it right, but obviously, I don't always!

I go regardless of what rule book I am umping under. It is a curteous thing to do, and provided that it doesn't make a mockery of the game, I see no harm in "getting some help".

I should add that when I am working with a somewhat "weak" partner who I may or may not trust to make the right call, I cover check swings in my pre-game with them, and tell them how I want it called! I explain that they can call it any way they want with other partners, but would prefer for this game for them to call it the way I do. This sort of get's around the problem of them thinking that somebody else's interpretation is the proper one.

[ctblu40]

Originally Posted by rei

I should add that when I am working with a somewhat "weak" partner who I may or may not trust to make the right call, I cover check swings in my pre-game with them, and tell them how I want it called! I explain that they can call it any way they want with other partners, but would prefer for this game for them to call it the way I do. This sort of get's around the problem of them thinking that somebody else's interpretation is the proper one.

Now you have me a little curious. You tell them how you want a checked swing called? Could you clarify this? Do you tell them, "Just agree with what I called if they ask for an appeal," or do you explain what constitutes a checked swing?

If it's the first, I would have to disagree with that advice/ request. I've had partners say that to me, and my form response has become, "If you ask me for help, I'll give you what I got. If you don't want my opinion, don't ask."

I've seen crews get into trouble when they had an agreement to 'just agree' with the PU.

[DonInKansas]

Originally Posted by ctblu40

Now you have me a little curious. You tell them how you want a checked swing called? Could you clarify this? Do you tell them, "Just agree with what I called if they ask for an appeal," or do you explain what constitutes a checked swing?

If it's the first, I would have to disagree with that advice/ request. I've had partners say that to me, and my form response has become, "If you ask me for help, I'll give you what I got. If you don't want my opinion, don't ask."

I've seen crews get into trouble when they had an agreement to 'just agree' with the PU.

Amen to that. I had a couple partners who have given me different mechanics according to whether he really wants my opinion or not. Somewhere along the lines of "palm up and no voice signal, just agree with me. I point and verbalize "did he go", then I need your opinion." This is crap, and I told them so. I have no issue with getting help when needed/warranted, and don't take it as a blow to your damn ego if I call a strike on it.

As someone else on this board has beautifully put it, "Strikes, Outs, Beer."

[Clint Lawson]

In the ncaa did they not change the rule to that if the bat crosses the front of the plate it is a swing? So that would be a swing in the ncaa. I don't agree but am i wrong there?

Originally Posted by ctblu40

Now you have me a little curious. You tell them how you want a checked swing called? Could you clarify this? Do you tell them, "Just agree with what I called if they ask for an appeal," or do you explain what constitutes a checked swing?

If it's the first, I would have to disagree with that advice/ request. I've had partners say that to me, and my form response has become, "If you ask me for help, I'll give you what I got. If you don't want my opinion, don't ask."

I've seen crews get into trouble when they had an agreement to 'just agree' with the PU.

I explain what I believe constitutes a check swing. I simply look for the hands getting out in front of the body, and that is how I expect them to determine it.

If I go to my partner for help, I expect help. I don't need him to agree with my initial call. I would have never made college ball working that way.

The reason I even brought it up is because so many guys have really silly ways about trying to determine a check swing. For me, where the barrel of the bat winds up isn't as important as where the hands went! Once the hands get out away from the body, in my mind, that is an offer at the pitch. It is also the easiest way to come up with a standard if you will for consistently call check swings! I think consistency in what appears to happen is the most important thing in check swings, and the BU will be very consistent calling it with that standard.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by rei

I explain what I believe constitutes a check swing. I simply look for the hands getting out in front of the body, and that is how I expect them to determine it.

If I go to my partner for help, I expect help. I don't need him to agree with my initial call. I would have never made college ball working that way.

The reason I even brought it up is because so many guys have really silly ways about trying to determine a check swing. For me, where the barrel of the bat winds up isn't as important as where the hands went! Once the hands get out away from the body, in my mind, that is an offer at the pitch. It is also the easiest way to come up with a standard if you will for consistently call check swings! I think consistency in what appears to happen is the most important thing in check swings, and the BU will be very consistent calling it with that standard.

Who died and made you boss? Partner comes to me on a check swing, he gets my judgment. Always. I don't care how he wants it "handled."

[Dave Hensley]

Originally Posted by rei

I explain what I believe constitutes a check swing. I simply look for the hands getting out in front of the body, and that is how I expect them to determine it.

The part of your quote I've put in boldface is where you're in trouble. Nobody on this board is going to agree with you that there's EVER a time when you can legitimately demand that your partner interpret something the way YOU tell him to interpret it.

The judgment to be made is did the batter successfully check his swing. One man's guideline is the next man's "really silly way to try to determine a check swing."

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by rei

I explain what I believe constitutes a check swing. I simply look for the hands getting out in front of the body, and that is how I expect them to determine it.

If I go to my partner for help, I expect help. I don't need him to agree with my initial call. I would have never made college ball working that way.

The reason I even brought it up is because so many guys have really silly ways about trying to determine a check swing. For me, where the barrel of the bat winds up isn't as important as where the hands went! Once the hands get out away from the body, in my mind, that is an offer at the pitch. It is also the easiest way to come up with a standard if you will for consistently call check swings! I think consistency in what appears to happen is the most important thing in check swings, and the BU will be very consistent calling it with that standard.

Frankly, I think your way of determining a check swing sucks, and if you tried to tell me how to call a check swing during our pre-game, I'd tell you to have fun calling the game by yourself, and leave.

Check swings do not fall into consistent categories, and should be taken on a case-by-case basis, and the determining factor should always be "did the batter offer at the pitch, or was he successful in checking his swing by not offering." That's the crux of the issue.

[Justme]

Originally Posted by rei

I would have never made college ball working that way.

You made it to college ball? But not as an umpire right?

[ozzy6900]

Originally Posted by rei

I explain what I believe constitutes a check swing. I simply look for the hands getting out in front of the body, and that is how I expect them to determine it.

If I go to my partner for help, I expect help. I don't need him to agree with my initial call. I would have never made college ball working that way.

The reason I even brought it up is because so many guys have really silly ways about trying to determine a check swing. For me, where the barrel of the bat winds up isn't as important as where the hands went! Once the hands get out away from the body, in my mind, that is an offer at the pitch. It is also the easiest way to come up with a standard if you will for consistently call check swings! I think consistency in what appears to happen is the most important thing in check swings, and the BU will be very consistent calling it with that standard.

Why is there so much yammering about this? REI is absolutely correct in "training" his partners this way. Many of you would do well with paying attention to this advice because you are probably still calling strikes because the barrel of the bat is here or there or somewhere! An umpire must conclude that the batter did indeed offer at the pitch!

Nice explanation REI and welcome!

Regards
Ozzy

[Rich]

Originally Posted by rei

I explain what I believe constitutes a check swing. I simply look for the hands getting out in front of the body, and that is how I expect them to determine it.

If I go to my partner for help, I expect help. I don't need him to agree with my initial call. I would have never made college ball working that way.

The reason I even brought it up is because so many guys have really silly ways about trying to determine a check swing. For me, where the barrel of the bat winds up isn't as important as where the hands went! Once the hands get out away from the body, in my mind, that is an offer at the pitch. It is also the easiest way to come up with a standard if you will for consistently call check swings! I think consistency in what appears to happen is the most important thing in check swings, and the BU will be very consistent calling it with that standard.

The NCAA is the only code that has directly written how a check swing is to be determined. If you are talking solely about college baseball, then yes, you should expect your partner to use the NCAA's guideline in this area.

FWIW, I find the NCAA's guideline to be quite reasonable and it encourages consistency. However, I still don't think that it means I should "agree" with the PU in that situation. There are occasions where angle is better than distance and sometimes the PU is just too damned close (or gets blocked) to make a reasonable judgment on the check swing.

Besides, who gets the heat if I ring one up and it's not really an offer? Not you, the plate umpire.

In my world there are still coaches that piss and whine about umpires calling strike from the inside of the diamond. It's easy to turn off the ears in that situation. I simply don't care if the coaches like those calls or not.