Invisibility

[Shmuelg]

No, this has nothing to do with the famous ficitional British wizard, but everything to do with umpiring.

We are taught that a good blue is an invisible blue.

How far do you go to do that? I'm curious.

I'm asking this specifically, because there is an umpire here (Israel) whose calls I really like (his name is Yaniv). His "ball" and "strike" and "foul" and "time" all sound somewhat similar - he kind of grunts it and melts the word together, and you understand him because the word is a bit intelligible, and he uses hand signals. The advantage, I think, is that his personality is not imprinted on the game. Almost immediately, we ignore him, and pay attention to the ball, the runners, the players, in short, the game itself.

I, on the other hand, have been making very very clear calls. That is, "foul ball" sounds like "foul ball", "strike" like "strike", "ball" I rarely call at all (only ball four), but the point is that you can hear my voice, and right away you recognize that it is *me* making the call.

What do you guys think?


_________
ShmuelG
Israel

[mbyron]

My training was that invisibility is a standard Smitty principle (the term used by the pros was "Charlie," but you get the point), used by umpires who lack confidence and knowledge of rules and mechanics. Umpires have a role to play on the field, and they should adjust their volume and visibility as appropriate to the role. Close calls, for example, require selling.

BTW, I was trained always to verbalize "Ball," since failing to verbalize anything can interfere with your timing and can make you look indecisive. The only pitches on which I verbalize nothing are those so bad that the catcher fails or nearly fails to catch them.

[Tim C]

"We are taught that a good blue is an invisible blue."

Because I disagree with this basic statement I would not be a good person to answer your question.

I agree with this statement:

"One of the really wrong theories about officiating is that a good official is one you never notice. The umpire who made that statement was probably a real poor official who tried to get his paycheck and hide behind his partners and stay out of trouble all his life. Control of the ballgame is the difference between umpires that show up for the players and the managers." -

Umpire Bruce Froemming

[Shmuelg]

It's always amazing what you hear when you expand your circle of friends and acquaintances. We indeed were taught that a good umpire (bb and sb the same) is one you don't notice is there.

What I meant by "invisible" is that it's not as if the blue isn't there at all, but it's that the players, coaches, and fans are concentrating on the playing of the game, not on where the umpire is, what kind of call he's making, was is good or bad or "hey blue, ask for help" on too many instances.

My point was that perhaps I should change the way I make these calls, instead of enunciating the word, make it a bit more generic (yet still forceful), so the players and coaches won't say "Hey, that's Shmuel behind the plate there", they'll just know there's an ump there, and leave it at that.

Shmuel

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Shmuelg

It's always amazing what you hear when you expand your circle of friends and acquaintances. We indeed were taught that a good umpire (bb and sb the same) is one you don't notice is there.

What I meant by "invisible" is that it's not as if the blue isn't there at all, but it's that the players, coaches, and fans are concentrating on the playing of the game, not on where the umpire is, what kind of call he's making, was is good or bad or "hey blue, ask for help" on too many instances.

My point was that perhaps I should change the way I make these calls, instead of enunciating the word, make it a bit more generic (yet still forceful), so the players and coaches won't say "Hey, that's Shmuel behind the plate there", they'll just know there's an ump there, and leave it at that.

Shmuel

Maybe you should stop worrying about being invisible. Unless you are a terrible umpire, in which case it would be a fantastic idea.

[Shmuelg]

Perhaps you are right, and I'm worrying about the wrong thing.

Just get the call right, rules right, good mechanics, and everyone will be happy.

[GarthB]

Originally Posted by Shmuelg

Perhaps you are right, and I'm worrying about the wrong thing.

Just get the call right, rules right, good mechanics, and everyone will be happy.

Add: demonstrate good game management.

Even then, though, not everyone will be happy. After all, there will still be players, coaches and fans.

[UMP25]

Originally Posted by Tim C

"We are taught that a good blue is an invisible blue."

Because I disagree with this basic statement I would not be a good person to answer your question.

You are not the only one who disagrees with such a blanket statement, Tee.

I often wonder who believes this statement when the thorny situation arises that requires the intervention of an umpire who otherwise was going "unnoticed." Sometimes it is our job to inject ourselves into the game in a manner in which everyone notices us. You get a big obstruction call, some weird interference, intentionally hit batters, etc. and you're center stage. While I doubt many of us want this, it's expected when it occurs, and when it does, I handle it professionally and without concern for what people think.

[Jim Porter]

Invisible umpires should get paid with invisible money.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by UMP25

While I doubt many of us want this, it's expected when it occurs, and when it does, I handle it professionally and without concern for what people think.

I am one of those that want the tough call or the tough situation. I also want to be in that situation at the proper time. In other words I prepare myself so that when that time comes I can be on top of the situation. Having said that as someone that works other sports, baseball is not a sport that really puts you in situations where you have much of a choice. Umpiring baseball is often like a roller coaster ride and the tracks take you where they are going despite where you want to go. If a pitcher throws a ball near or on the corner and the batter does not swing, I still will have to make a call. If the batter swings I am off the hook.

Peace

[GarthB]

Originally Posted by Shmuelg

We are taught that a good blue is an invisible blue.

_________
ShmuelG
Israel

You were taught wrong.

Unless, of course, game management and making the correct call are of no importance.

Somebody over there needs to save some shekels and get some real training. Umpires from Europe, Australia and Asia show up in Florida or Arizona every year to learn the craft. Surely someone from Israel can make the trip.

[LilLeaguer]

Originally Posted by Shmuelg

No, this has nothing to do with the famous ficitional British wizard, but everything to do with umpiring.

We are taught that a good blue is an invisible blue.

How far do you go to do that? I'm curious.

I'm asking this specifically, because there is an umpire here (Israel) whose calls I really like (his name is Yaniv). His "ball" and "strike" and "foul" and "time" all sound somewhat similar - he kind of grunts it and melts the word together, and you understand him because the word is a bit intelligible, and he uses hand signals. The advantage, I think, is that his personality is not imprinted on the game. Almost immediately, we ignore him, and pay attention to the ball, the runners, the players, in short, the game itself.

I, on the other hand, have been making very very clear calls. That is, "foul ball" sounds like "foul ball", "strike" like "strike", "ball" I rarely call at all (only ball four), but the point is that you can hear my voice, and right away you recognize that it is *me* making the call.

What do you guys think?


_________
ShmuelG
Israel

Our District UiC has an interesting illistration of the visibility question.

With a bang-bang play (say a tag at third base from an outfield throw), which umpire is less the focus of attention?

• Bashful, who slowly makes a routine, unvocalized out call.
• Assertive, who reacts to the play with a strong call of "Out!" and a hard bang with the fist

Bashful's problem is that the players, coaches and fans have to wait for the call, maybe struggle to hear/see it, and then question it. When Assertive makes his call, the fans barely have time to ask, "Was he safe?" before hearing the definitive call and moving on.

Sometimes the attention is on the umpire. Make the call authoritatively, let them know what happened, and they'll move on. If you seem to make the call tentatively, unclearly, or so quietly that people don't even know what happened, you will become the center of attention.

I think this goes even more strongly for the points others have made about game management. If you insert yourself decisively when problems are small, your intervention may be small. If you try to hide until the problems are big, then your visibility will be large.

For your exact question, I strongly believe that unclear or misunderstood signals will attract attention to the umpire. Be decisive and distinct and deliver the calls you are there to make, after all, and folks will concentrate on the game.

[PeteBooth]

Shmuelg]No, this has nothing to do with the famous ficitional British wizard, but everything to do with umpiring.

We are taught that a good blue is an invisible blue.

How far do you go to do that? I'm curious.

That might have been an old saying because I too have heard the same thing, however, in today's baseball climate it is virtually impossible if you are doing your job.

The rules for the amateur game have made it "tougher" to be invisible. We have the FPSR, No malicious Contact rule OBS rule.

When I played we simply went by what the BIG BOYS did and it was accepted. The umpires didn't have to worry about all these safety violations. Also, the game policed itself back then. No riots etc. That's probably when the "invisible" saying came about because back then an Umpire could be "invisible". Today is very different.

Ever end a game on a FPSR violation?

If you have then you probably heard the following as well:

"that's the worst call I ever saw"
The runner has a right to break up a DP etc etc
That isn't baseball etc. etc.

In other words all of these safety type rules that have been derived to keep insurance costs down have also effected the game to the point that we couldn't be invisible if we wanted to.

Pete Booth

[LilLeaguer]

Originally Posted by PeteBooth

That might have been an old saying because I too have heard the same thing, however, in today's baseball climate it is virtually impossible if you are doing your job.

The rules for the amateur game have made it "tougher" to be invisible. We have the FPSR, No malicious Contact rule OBS rule.

When I played we simply went by what the BIG BOYS did and it was accepted. The umpires didn't have to worry about all these safety violations. Also, the game policed itself back then. No riots etc. That's probably when the "invisible" saying came about because back then an Umpire could be "invisible". Today is very different.

Ever end a game on a FPSR violation?

If you have then you probably heard the following as well:

"that's the worst call I ever saw"
The runner has a right to break up a DP etc etc
That isn't baseball etc. etc.

In other words all of these safety type rules that have been derived to keep insurance costs down have also effected the game to the point that we couldn't be invisible if we wanted to.

Pete Booth

Oh, I don't know. MBL umpires can pull themselves into the center of attention even with their ruleset and conventions, say on a call of obstruction.

[His High Holiness]

Originally Posted by Shmuelg

We are taught that a good blue is an invisible blue.


I'm asking this specifically, because there is an umpire here (Israel)

ShmuelG
Israel

In the modern game, an invisible umpire would be about as successful as an invisible Israeli soldier on the West Bank.

Peter