Play at plate video
 

http://www.youtube.com/v/WEp7JBcDwQE

Play at the plate. Though the video doesnt show the actual attempted play, it appears F2 never had control of the ball, and the call was made to quick. In addition, as the rundown is happening, PU should have taken off his mask, and be ready for any potential play. Instead he reacts as the ball is coming home. He looks frozen there, til the play is headed his way. Later as he is talking to the coach, his partner probably should have come down sooner, been about 10 feet away listening in, in case anything is said, he can verify.

Maybe if he waited like another second, he could of made the right call. Also, his partner should of been down there listening. He could of saved an ejection. Also, after the ejection, the plate umpire should of just walked away from the play as well.

I agree that PU should have (not "of") waited to verify possession of the ball. I like the mechanic of pointing with my left hand when the tag is applied in time, then asking to see the ball, then calling the out. Never had an "out-safe" with it yet.

The video is why clinicians go over postioning ad nauseum. The PU was not 3BLX where he should have been. He was right behind the plate and had no clue where the ball was.

The first thing he should have done is checked with his partner to see if he could help. If his partner couldn't help, then he has to live with it.

On a play at the plate where an umpire "kicks it" it's a good bet that the manager will get tossed.

IMO, the BU did the right thing. He allowed his partner to "handle it" but when things escalated, he stepped in and escorted the manager away.

Positioning is the key.

Pete Booth

I totally disagree.The coach had already had his say, and it got him dumped.
After being ejected, his discussion time is over. The BU did his job, taking out the trash, as it is refered to in these parts.

His ejection mechanic is exquisite.

Should the BU - if he had an excellent view of the dropped ball - have jumped right in soon after the out call to point out to his partner that the ball was dropped (even if as it appears the PU is not requesting his help)? It seems that it would have saved a lot of trouble, plus have gotten the call right.

Or would this depend on what kind of pregame conference the two of them had over "dropped balls"?

You discuss how to handle ejections in pre-game?

Good point that the PU should have had his mask off much sooner. He should have also removed his sunglasses during the post play chat with the OC.

If the BU had more information regarding the play he should not jump right in immediately after the call. The BU could have positioned himself where eye contact could be made with the PU indicating that further information was available. It’s the PU who would decide whether or not to seek help. Had the BU seen the ball on the ground and the PU requested help on the play, the results could have been different.

After the PU ejected the coach he should not have approached the coach again. This made the PU look like the aggressor. When a person is ejected, they’re dead. Do not talk to dead people.

When the BU finally became involved he started off well by getting the coach away from the PU. When the coach turned and began exiting the field, the BU should have come to a halt instead of stalking the coach as he left.

Hmmmm....

I can only recall discussing ejections one time during a pre-game. My partner brought it up.

Curiously enough, he ejected someone during the game.

JM

Deserves? As in a reward? For getting dumped, you're going to reward him?

There are some who work that way. I haven't seen it often, thankfully. It's been my experience that getting his say usually plays a part in getting him ejected.

Once a coach has been dumped, I don't care what he has to say and I will not entertain any further dialog with him. He's no longer in the game and no longer has any right to discuss anything with me. Why would I want to subject myself to abuse from someone who has already proven to be abusive? Sounds like the the battered spouse syndrome.

When working with a new partner or at certain levels / leagues the crew should talk about how to handle an ejection or major argument.

Over the years I have seen too many cases of what should be a simple ejection or argument turn into a fiasco because the crew were not on the same page.

Handling ejections should always be a part of the pregame. Though it might be rare, if and when it does happen, shouldnt we want it to go as smooth as possible, as in everything else we do? ala an "Infield Fly" rotation?
Also, the BU , on this play should not come down unsolicited with what he saw. It seems one of the few acceptable times another umpire can do this, is maybe on a "bobble" or juggle at the plate, that maybe the PU didnt see.
Here, even though the video doesnt show it, the ball appeared to have rolled several feet away, which the PU most likely saw.
If Im PU umpire, I probably have that seed of doubt starting to creep up inside of me, but Im not going to change the call. If I go to the base guy, what "additional" information can he give me? Tell me I kicked it? I probably realize it at this point.
Most likely have to let the call stand.

What's that?

Yeeesh....figured, theres always gotta be someone.....
Anyways...wasnt commenting on that specifically.The mention of the Infield Fly sitch was just an example of things we cover in pregame. Not the overall point of the post.
As in...."Ok BU guy...In an infield fly situation, and a fly ball to the outfield, I will rotate up to 3rd if R2 tags and goes..."
And then...."Ok BU guy...probably wont happen, but in case we have an ejection, lets handle it this way...." etc.
Trying to emphasize that ejections probably should be covered in the pregame. In working with a few D1 guys....they always cover it.

[QUOTE]I disagree. I do not go over Ej's with my partner. There is too much other more important information to cover.

Also, by going over Ej's means that in effect you will be looking for some.

IMO, the BU did what he was supposed to. He allowed his partner the respect he deserves in handling the situation. When the argument escalated he then stepped in and escorted the manager away.

The bottom line is this:

The PU was out of position.

He could have either asked for help which he didn't or "eat" the call which he did.

The coach was upset, had his say and then got himself ejected by "taking it to the next level"

I agree with Garth in that at the moment the EJ occurs we stop listening. The coach already had his say, now it's time for the coach to leave and get on with the game.

The coach got "hot under the collar" at the PU and the BU stepped in and got the coach to leave.

Lesson to be learned: Positioning Positioning Positioning. Also, even though we kick a call does not give the coach "carte blanche" to say and do anything he wants.

Side Note and off topic a bit: Depending upon one's area most HS coaches are also teachers. A teacher in addition to being an educator should also teach his students how to prepare for life. We all know Life isn't fair, however, these same coaches do not take that advice out onto the ball field. It seems as though they turn into Dr. Jeckle and Mr. Hyde.

Pete Booth

Its covered, but that takes all of 15 seconds. If we do have a problem with a coach and ejection, the non-ejecting coach can make sure the coach leaves quickly etc.,

If I'm PU, after the ejection, I'm not paying attention to the coach anyway, that gives me time to write it down for the report.

Thanks
David

Sort of off topic, but everyone is in agreement that the coach deserved to get tossed for demonstrating, right?

I think that the crew in the video screwed up so badly that it's pointless to debate whether to toss this coach.

But to answer the question you could have asked, I agree with the general principle that coaches who come out to argue and start demonstrating rather than discussing deserve to be run.

Does anyone know what level of play this is?

Did you mean crew or UIC? Prior to ejection I see nothing wrong with BU actions.
Some say he should have been closer during the confrontation but I disagree.
On the audio we kept hearing everyone yelling to check with the other umpire and I'm sure the coach was asking for that as well. If BU came in closer it would give the appearance that either he wanted to say something or would fuel the fire even more if BU was so close and UIC still did not ask for help. In this situation I think the BU was very discerning.

When the chant "get some help" started, BU turned and headed for his position in short right-field. Around here, that's a sign for "I got nothing to help you."

My crticism of BU would center on his technique of herding the coach off the field. I think it was more than what was required and looked somewhat comical.

I agree. It started out well (he came in when PU turned away), but went too far (once the coach went past the foul line, or so, BU should have stayed put (to stop the coach from returning) and just watched him leave).

If I were BU and IF I saw the ball on the ground (with no signal from PU that he saw it too), I would have come in immediately.

I agree.
I was giving BU props for staying away pre ejection.

This is what I don't understand. The price he paid (getting dumped) is the consequence for his behavior, not the price for sticking around and continuing to vent. He is no longer a participant and as such, has no right to be on the field or vent at me.

You're an aspiring law student. Try this:

When a judge, who has had enough crap from someone in his courtroom orders the bailiff to remove him, doe he say: "But wait a minute, he's paid the price, let him stick around for a few seconds and vent at me first."

I don't think so.

Many times, when I see umpires allow an ejected coach to stick around and have his say, the situation goes from bad to worse with the coach showing up the umpire(s) and further delaying the game. What part of that is positive?

I know at the pro level managers are apt to yell "I paid my five bucks, I'm gonna get my money's worth." Even at that level, you'll see umpires who will continue to argue with him and those who will walk away and let their partners do their job. The ones that walk away seem to have shorter interruptions in the game and fewer antics by the managers.

I don't don't work proball, not even as a fill-in anymore. I'm not there to let some clown entertain the crowd. I'm there to work a baseball game. An ejected coach may stay a bit too long on the field acting out, but not with me participating.

I believe it was Garth who gave us a link of a confrontation between Tom Haller and Earl Weaver.

Earl was dumped but as the energizer bunny kept going and going and going. Haller tried to get away but Earl wouldn't let him.

However, that is PRO ball and IMO you cannot compare PRO ball to amateur ball.

Nothing good can follow when you allow a coach to "continue" after he has been dumped. If he was civil to begin with he would not have been dumped. Why continue to allow the coach to yell obsentities sarcasm's etc. To me it makes no sense.

You said after you dump the coach My question is this:

Then why bothering dumping him if you are going to listen to him. Either dump him get the game moving or "take it" and delay the game even more.

Now what if you have an incident with the "other' coach and have to dump him. Does that mean you also give him his due as well.

When the coach is dumped he's dumped and deserves no more attention.

Pete Booth

Bill Haller was the umpire. Tom Haller was a catcher.

Thanks Garth I always got those 2 mixed up.

Pete Booth

I never discuss ejections in pregame. I will get mine and my partner will get his and I have his back and I expect him to have mine. There are more regular things to discuss in pregame than how to handle ejections.

I have discussed ejections at pregame if forewarned, but that is rare. Last year I ejected a coach I had not been forewarned about. I found out later my assigner had been forewarned but he looked at the schedule and concluded that my partner and I would take care of business so he didn't tell us.

Thank you, Garth, for better wording my thoughts on this point.

Absolutely
 

Just like in basketball we discuss potential ejections. You want to know how to handle the sitch before you have to handle it.

Depends, if the coach is showing his *** and the umpire is showing his class...

Correct and atw hat point do you interact with the coach to remind him that his continued presence = GAME OVER.

Ah, yes, not talked about here, the ultimate and only real weapon and amateur ump has. Forfeit.

I have a very simple way, a mechanic, which works very well. If I am PU and the talk isover, I assume my position behind the plate, helmet on, waive to F1 to begin to pitch. What? Coach not gon yet? Time called, helmet off, approach Coach and lay down the ultimatum.

"Coach, I am going to resume my position behind the plate and restart this game. If you have not exited the (sight, field, w/e is required by an ejection) by the time I call "Play", this game is over."

Then do it.

If I am BU, same scenario less helmet and with a handoff point to PU to restart play.
I hear a lt of bravado about not playing with the clowns and all that crap but not once has anyone come forward with a CURE for the recalcitrant coach. There is only one cure.

Dump him then dump then game.

Why not? Ejections and forfeits from ejected coaches who ignore ejections are part of Game Control, too many umps think they are part of some kind of emergency, let's not talk about that, OMGod!!:eek:

Hshshtt, talk to your partner.

This is a what the 4th inning? The coach comes down and instead of realizing that PU has blown the call for some reason (obviously he must have been blocked for the ball was clearly loose), he does his hands in the pocket thing until he can no longer control his inability to reason. So he points and gets tossed. Surprise, surprise. NOT.

PU did all kinds of things wrong no doubt but it is the 4th inning, a close game, is coach best thrown out? i dont think so.

Nowhere did I hear " Blue, I'm not lying to you the catcher kicked the ball out ot the infield grass, you didn't see it. That's OK but your partner may have. Could you ask him if he did?" Then wait.

If neither can get together on the right call, MOVE ON.

Here's a couple of other pieces to consider. Was R1 picked off or drawing the throw. If picked off, then the OFF is begging for assistance to bail them out. SORRY! If a play, then there is more legitmacy in the gripe. Tell PU that ""We set this play up and got what we wanted, a trade for an out for a run. Blue, we got our run if your partner will concur, F2 had no control."

Unfortunately, they both kicked it.
 

As the play developed, the PU should have moved to 1st base line extended, so he could oversee the run down and be ready for the play at the plate. As the runner and ball converge at the plate, he should have stepped up the 3rd base line a few feet, giving a better view of the tag/foot on base, etc... also would not have been screened on the dropped ball. As with any close play/collision: Pause, Read, React. Play's over: "Show me the ball. He's out!"
Base U did the right thing by turning with the ball once his play was over, but, when you see a dropped ball that was screened to partner, you should call 'Time' and trot on over (whilst your partner trots on over to you -- ain't nothin' goin' to happen until you say what's what, plenty of time) to inform your partner of what you saw -- nice and private-like. He then can confirm/alter his call.
I've never had a problem with a coach that came out (after a brief conference between partner and I) and did not accept: "Coach, we just talked about the very thing you are concerned about, because we want to make sure to get the call right. The call stands (or: My partner saw the ball on the ground, I was screened, the call is: safe)."
Meanwhile, of course, partner should have been closer at hand instead of wandering around after he convinced 1st base coach to let his manager discuss the play.
The opportune moment came when the coach backed off with his hands spread in appeal. Fine time to step in and mosey off a few feet with the PU and just tell him what you saw.
Also of course ... what's wrong with saying to a coach asking that you et help: "No problem, coach. Hang on a minute." And pat your chest to your partner. He trots in, you wander over: "You got anything on that play?"

Inexperienced umpire, a bit of ego creeping in, not enough time before the call, too agressive towards the coach -- and, yes, the "herding off by the BU was a bit much.
Coach should have stayed in the game. These guys forgot that our most important function if to get the call right.

The only time we are required to get help is on a check-swing ball. Any other time, if it helps us -- as a team -- get the call right, we should take the 20 seconds and let everyone at the field that we are not ego-driven, just integrity-driven.

It looked like the PU was frozen. He kept checking the runner at third while watching the play at 1st. He should have moved his feet instead of just his head.

I know the mechanic in this play is at 3rd BLex but I've never liked that. I like to work 1st BLex. I feel I get a better view of the play developing and also of the front edge of the plate.

Either way, he needed to slow down and get the call right. He should have allowed the coach a little more room since he obviously screwed up the call.

guys, the problem here is that the PU has no idea he kicked the call, he, because of bad mechanics, just plain and simple never saw the ball on the ground. if the rat asked him to get help and he said it was his call, or he does'nt need help, or anything else similar, then the PU has too live with the call, the rat "knows" the ball was on the ground. if PU refuses to ask for help, shame on him, he just compounded his first mistake. if he does ask and BU says he has nothing, then you eat the call. now with all that said, by now, with all the yelling, i am pretty sure PU knows what everyone else knows. he kicked the call. now when rat starts his rant, you may give him a little more rope, but when the demonstation starts, see ya.

steve