Whoa there Banana, why are you looking to the sidelines? F2 has already returned te ball to F1 and your looking way from the field entirely. Showboating?

I thought you did well. Especially ballsy to call that Stike Three when F2 pulled his mitt back into the zone for no reason.:)

I would suggest that you have a wee little commo with him about pulling any pitches.

I always keep my helmet on.

Nice job of locating F2 on the foul and backing straight out for distance.

The signalling to the coaches, been there, no scoreboard, do that. Beats having to hear "Blue, what's the count" 200 times a game. Comment: Palms in on showing the count is easier to read from the field. Glance over andmake sure that the 3rd base Coach is looking, forget about the 1B Coach. I like to make certain that F1 sees the count if possible.

The comment about "pointing as if it is a HR" is absurd. Staying down, you do fine, you call a strike when you see a strike.

Learn to use your inicator without looking at it. Notch the wheels so you know where 0-0-0 is.

You can tell good timing from a still shot with no field view? Congrats. I see bad habits.

I didn't find Mr.Benham's comment to be offensive, although we certainly have come into conflict in the past.

I'll have to change my strike mechanic to combine the verbal and visual parts of it. The reason I didn't do this in the past was because I wanted to do whatever I could to stay down in my stance longer, even if it meant a two-part mechanic. I don't want to fall into the habit of coming up too early and suddenly get fooled by a curveball.

I can't tell you how nice it is to have the time to post again and see you're still here, Donovan. Nope, haven't died yet, just been busy.......


Sorry, Donovan, but I don't think it's our responsibility to constantly update the base coaches on the current count. If they aren't paying attention that's their problem. 90', 70', or 60' basepaths. Scoreboard or not............


Tim.

You looked good back there. If I were a spectator or on the bench I would beleive your calls this is perhaps the most important aspect when you officiate a game. Hustled down to first on the ground ball. Pointed in the air on the infield fly and verbalised it. Your timing on balls and strikes was fine. I'd be honored to be your partner.

Don't let the nit picking on style points bother you.

http://i222.photobucket.com/albums/d...ump/strike.jpg

A supervisor once told me that when I point out that strike I should keep my eyes forward. He said if I do it with no runners on base it will become a habit that will continue when there ARE runners on base, and that's the time looking away COULD be a problem (batter's interference, for example). He suggested pointing not toward the dugout but up the first baseline. I know of an NCAA CWS umpire who does it that way - I opted to just keep my eyes forward while still pointing out to the side.
I will agree with posters who said to "marry" the verbal and signal for the strike call. And yes, that is a hard habit to get into. And no, I still don't do it that way. Something about "old dog, new trick..."

JJ

Sorry, Donovan, but I don't think it's our responsibility to constantly update the base coaches on the current count. If they aren't paying attention that's their problem. 90', 70', or 60' basepaths. Scoreboard or not............


Tim.[/QUOTE]

Whether you verbalize balls and strikes every pitch every other or never it's simply a matter of style. I do it on every pitch (almost) not for the players etc. but for my partner and it also myself. It helps keep me focused.

Don't have much to add other than your shirt tail is coming out, JM. Invest in a flexbelt.

Trying to get a video of me on youtube in the coming weeks... so you all can have at me then :)

he did do a pretty decent job, and i assume he knows he does a pretty decent job otherwise he probably wouldn't have posted the video. with that in mind, i think he posted looking for the nit picking. umpiring is never perfect and can always be worked on and tweaked to be better. when you become satisfied with your work, it's time to hang em up. and, if you are satisfied with the timing on some of the pitches and employ the same when you work, i guarantee you are missing ball/strike calls. it is physically impossible to have seen the ball all the way into the mitt if you call the pitch before it reaches the mitt.

my .02
 

Ill let the others give you the detail, but I liked the hustle...........

good read off of the catcher on the pop up.............

Not only is it "softball-like", it is softball mandated! That is precisely how it's supposed to be done, by the book, for the major softball sanctioning bodies.

It took me awhile to get the hang of the "bifurcated" (two-part) call after coming from a baseball background of giving the simultaneous verbal and visual signal.

I've finally separated the two styles to the point that I can effectively use the correct method for the correct sport. But during the season, if I find myself switching back and forth alot between baseball and softball, every once in awhile I'll catch myself slipping up and doing one the "opposite" way!

I gotta thank UmpJM for posting that video, and for the constructive comments from y'all, especially bobbybanaduck. Picked up a few things here painlessly. (Nice photos, too, btw!)

Interesting about the "bifurcated" strike call - our dear Papa C was at one time recommending precisely that, at least for new umpires, to assist with timing.

Thanks all around, gents.

Bob James

Ball hit the mit and he made his call. At least that's how I saw it.

the "call" is mental, the "signal" is visual. go to 1:17 in the video and then watch it, then click back on that 1:17 mark. do it repeatedly so you are seeing it over and over again. the "call" is made before the ball hits the mitt. this is evidenced by the fact that he is already mving out of his stance prior to the pop of the ball in the mitt. watch him and listen for the pop.