Smittyisms

[Jerry]

"I have a challenge for you. Just show one reference (just one) where it says our job is to use a "plate brush" for sweeping off the plate?"
Peace

For #666:

The Boston Globe had a September 28, 2005 interview with MLB umpire crew of Joe West, Brian Gorman, Mike DiMuro and and Mark Carlson. One of the questions asked was "What's the correct position for brushing dirt off home plate?" (Page 1 of the article).

On Page 6 of that same article, Joe replies, "The correct position for brushing the dirt off home plate is facing the catcher, bending your back side to the pitcher, as a matter of courtesy to the fans."

By inference, we should be able to reason that MLB umpires receive those instructions somewhere in their training. Yes?

There are also many amateur umpire associations that have those same instructions actually written into their training manuals and guidelines for their umpires.

Jerry

[rookieblue]

Coach, I believe you are correct. Mr. Childress also "introduces" the expression in his 51 Ways to Ruin a Baseball Game.

Mr.Childress also condones calling a play at a base the way it looks obvious to everybody else, even if it is the wrong call.

Just because Carl says it doesn't mean it is a good idea.

Originally Posted by rei

Mr.Childress also condones calling a play at a base the way it looks obvious to everybody else, even if it is the wrong call.

Just because Carl says it doesn't mean it is a good idea.

Which makes me think of the saying:

It takes one to know one!

[waltjp]

I saw a base umpire signal time by using the signal for a technical foul in basketball.

[BigUmp56]

Originally Posted by waltjp

I saw a base umpire signal time by using the used for a technical foul in basketball.

Was it the same guy who said the ground can't cause a fumble when a fielder dropped the ball after diving for it?


Tim.

[waltjp]

Originally Posted by BigUmp56

Was it the same guy who said the ground can't cause a fumble when a fielder dropped the ball after diving for it?


Tim.

No, he claimed it was a catch because the outfielder held it for 2 steps.

[scarolinablue]

Originally Posted by waltjp

No, he claimed it was a catch because the outfielder held it for 2 steps.

Was that both feet down BEFORE he crossed the foul line? Or is it DBT?

[Publius]

Originally Posted by rei

Mr.Childress also condones calling a play at a base the way it looks obvious to everybody else, even if it is the wrong call.

Just because Carl says it doesn't mean it is a good idea.

What the hell does he know about calling the bases? He always has the plate.

BTW, I found the second sentence of your quote elsewhere. It was in a combo dictionary/thesaurus as an example of "understatement."

(In our association, he'd have the bases at something approximating 50%, or he'd be a different kind of umpire--unemployed.)

[jicecone]

Originally Posted by Publius

What the hell does he know about calling the bases? He always has the plate.

BTW, I found the second sentence of your quote elsewhere. It was in a combo dictionary/thesaurus as an example of "understatement."

(In our association, he'd have the bases at something approximating 50%, or he'd be a different kind of umpire--unemployed.)

I agree, EVERTHING Carl has said should not be held gospel but one thing for sure his contribution to basball officiating ranks at the top. Controversial or not.

As I once told a rookie getting ready to work a game with a very very good umpire, "You should be lucky if he lets you hold his indicator while he ties his shoes."

[Jim Porter]

Originally Posted by rei

Mr.Childress also condones calling a play at a base the way it looks obvious to everybody else, even if it is the wrong call.

Just because Carl says it doesn't mean it is a good idea.

You have that a bit wrong. The call that's obvious to everyone is the *right* call. The call can't be, "wrong," if it's obvious to everyone. It might not be exactly what you think you saw, but it's most certainly the *right* call.

[Don Mueller]

Originally Posted by Jim Porter

You have that a bit wrong. The call that's obvious to everyone is the *right* call. The call can't be, "wrong," if it's obvious to everyone. It might not be exactly what you think you saw, but it's most certainly the *right* call.

And why praytell would you make a call contrary to what you saw?
That indeed would be a smittyism

[GarthB]

Originally Posted by Don Mueller

And why praytell would you make a call contrary to what you saw?
That indeed would be a smittyism

Quiz:

R2 stealing third, F2 fires down. F5 receives ball before R2 begins head first slide. F5 lays glove down six inches on 2nd base side of the bag. Everyone, including his coach see R2 slides into the tag clearly before the bag, but you, and only you, think that you saw his right hand touch the bag a micro-second before his left hand touched the glove.

Your call?

[Rich]

Originally Posted by GarthB

Quiz:

R2 stealing third, F2 fires down. F5 receives ball before R2 begins head first slide. F5 lays glove down six inches on 2nd base side of the bag. Everyone, including his coach see R2 slides into the tag clearly before the bag, but you, and only you, think that you saw his right hand touch the bag a micro-second before his left hand touched the glove.

Your call?

I have to admit, I'd call the runner safe in this situation if I'm picturing the play correctly. It's a great baseball play to slide to the back of the base to avoid the tag.

[Publius]

If I "think" I saw the runner in GarthB's play touch the base a microsecond before the tag, I'd call him out. If I "know" I did, safe is the call.


quiz II:

R1, one out. Batter singles to right center, R1 touches 2nd and heads for third, F8's throw goes there too. On the throw, B/R heads for 2nd.

F8's throw beats the head-first sliding runner by a narrow margin, and F5 lays down a tag on R1, then throws to 2nd in an attempt to get B/R advancing there. Everyone in the park "saw" F5 tag R1--everyone but you, the PU, who had a perfect angle and who saw him tag the dirt inches in front of R1's hand, then throw to 2nd before R1 could slide into the tag.

Your call?