Play at plate video

[chuckfan1]

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.

[budjones05]

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.

[mbyron]

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.

[PeteBooth]

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

[umpduck11]

Originally Posted by msavakinas

the manager, once he got tossed (which he deserved once he put his hand on the ground) deserves his say.

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.

[buckeyetc71]

His ejection mechanic is exquisite.

[cookie]

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"?

[DG]

Originally Posted by msavakinas

That is something that should be talked about in the pre-game.

You discuss how to handle ejections in pre-game?

[MichaelVA2000]

Originally Posted by chuckfan1

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.

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.

Originally Posted by cookie

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.

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.

[UmpJM]

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

[GarthB]

Originally Posted by msavakinas

From what I've been taught, the manager, once he got tossed (which he deserved once he put his hand on the ground) deserves his say.

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.

[socalblue1]

Originally Posted by DG

You discuss how to handle ejections in pre-game?

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.

[chuckfan1]

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.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by chuckfan1

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?

What's that?

[chuckfan1]

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.