He really did say it
 

I was calling with an experienced guy for the first time the other day. The visiting team was winning 6-1 in the top of the seventh and attempted a squeeze play. The hitter missed the bunt and there was a play at the plate. R3 slid head first into home and beat the tag on a close play. In an effort to get the game over, I called R3 out. There was no discussion. Later in the same inning with the visiting team now leading 9-1, there was a bang-bang play at first with the first baseman coming off the bag before getting the throw. I was anticipating my partner coming to me and asking if he stayed on the bag. Instead of asking for my help he called the out to end the inning. The visiting coach calmly asked my partner if the first baseman came off the bag. My partner said, "Nope, you are up 9-1." The coach smiled and asked if he came off the bag if he had been up 2-1. My partner said, "You bet, Coach." I could believe that he made the call, but I couldn't believe that he actually said what he did. I was just glad the coach took it in stride and didn't ask any more questions.

Maybe you didn't admit yours to the coach but I still find this disturbing:

"R3 slid head first into home and beat the tag on a close play. In an effort to get the game over, I called R3 out."

I TOTALLY agree with you. I consider this cheating. Apparently, Ump99 never heard of a team rallying, and coming from behind. Earlier this season, the Chicago Cubs trailed the Houston Astros by (I believe) 10-0, and came back to win.

Helping one team, no matter the reason, is CHEATING. I find Ump99's, and his partner's, actions reprehensible. And, to think that he's bragging about it in print, makes it even worse.

Bob

QUOTE=umpire99]I get the feeling you are trying to "pull our legs" or "start something" but here goes.

6-1 is not a blow-out game therefore I do not understand when you say "In an effort to get the game over"
The call should be what you saw.


[/QUOTE]

This almost or perhaps it is a Troll post. 9-1 is not a blow-out game. The mercy rule is not even in effect yet.


In Summary: I am surprised the coach didn't say anything. It's one thing if the score is 20-1 quite another 6 or even 9-1. Again this might be one of those posts in which you want to get a "rise" out of everyone.

Pete Booth

"In an effort to get the game over, I called R3 out"

You sir, are a loser. And so is your dopey partner.

Ethics? hmmmm....

-Josh

If his partner had come to him for help, I wonder what he would have done??? Probably would have said his foot was on the bag and backup the out call.

This just can't be true.

He really did say it
 

And you really did do this. Sounds like you and your partner may want to either change your attitudes or stop umpiring.

He should be asking some questions of your assignor after the game. Both of you get an F-minus.

That's being a little generous. I would hope this is untrue...

-Josh

[QUOTE=umpire99] In an effort to get the game over, I called R3 out.

You want outs that bad, open up your strikezone...

This is where the trouble lies. You should have called the play the way it was, not how you wanted it to be. That is unfair to the visiting team, no matter what the score is. They made an athletic play, and you took it away from them because you wanted to go put your feet up and have a beverage. I don't agree with this philosophy.

Your partner did the same thing you did, but admitted it to the coach. In my opinion, this showed more balls, even though you were both wrong for doctoring the results to suit yourselves.

Fixed your post.

Ump99, for argument sake, I'm going to assume what you have written is true. I hope for your sake it isn't.

The only currency that we trade on is our ability to be impartial and be honest. We should be making our calls based on what we see, and not be influenced by our feelings, the game situation or any other factors. I know this is an ideal, but more often than not we do this.

You don't think that this coach is going to file this away in his memory? You don't think that this isn't going to be talked about between other coach's? Once you lose credibility as an umpire you have lost everything.

If you actually have done what you claim in this post, you have done a grave disservice to the rest of us.

I have seen a lot of $hit talk over the years on this site but this post has to be the worst! It is a perfect example of umpires injecting themselves into the game and (I never thought I would say this) CHEATING! You (umpire99) and your partner should be expelled from your association if this is a true post. If I were you, I wouldn't be boasting about this on the Internet!

Just shameful!

Methinks we're being played.


Either that or Lance wears number 99!




Tim.

A lot of the same people bashing the OP fail to realize that they are the ones who support the "outs make the game move quicker" philosophy. Ozzy himself used to use the signature "When in doubt, call him out". How many times have people here praised the mercy rule for helping them get home sooner, or said they would take an extra strike (on a check swing) even if they didn't think the batter went around? Even opening up the strike zone could be considered "cheating", regardless of the score. Umpire99 is not the first person to adopt the attitude of calling more strikes and outs to get the game over with.

Maybe when you have umpired for a little while longer, you'll understand the difference. I doubt it, though.

[QUOTE=Nigel Tufnel]Not much difference here. You're cheating the batters out of a legitimate strike zone.

Bob

Sorry, but you're wrong.

On your check swing analogy, we are talking about getting a strike back that did happen. Nobody is saying to make a strike up, just we want to get it back if it happened.

The mercy rule is an actual rule, by following it, we get home sooner. But its not like we make it up, as the OP did.

No good umpire agrees with opening the strike zone.

And the "when in doubt, call him out" philosophy is for when those select moments happen where the human eye is incapable of distinguishing which event happened first (ball or foot). Not even a philosophy, a rule. The runner has to BEAT the ball. So, if we can't tell if he beat it, then he would be... OUT.

Stop taking on the world, particularly when it comes to umpiring. Don't act like everything everybody says is inherently wrong or always take the minority position so you can pick a fight. Not only is it annoying, it will NOT impress evaluators/assignors, it will piss off game participants, and, most importantly, it will NOT make you a good umpire.

Sorry to be blunt, but its a recurring theme with you. Maybe you'll listen to a young guy like me rather than some of the vets on the board.

:eek: Oh my...

Tuss gave a good, reasoned, serious answer. I'll give credit where it's due for that, because all I can say right now is, wow. Just...wow.

Outs that are supported by the rules do make the game move faster.

[QUOTE=bluezebra]Please Bob, don't take that quote literally.
Steve had the heart to fix my post.

Let's stay on topic, this guy Ump99 is a douche.
Oh yeah, and his partner should keep his pie-hole shut too.

The only partners I have ever offended are from my hustling when they don't, or from my being fair when they want me to be expeditious.

I know those guys...they're called fossils

In it for the money only, and the game has passed them by...:D

and another thing
 

I think this thread was started here, when it should have been tacked on to the aforementioned---Buying yourself (and your partner) trouble...

a propos..don't you think :D

You need to learn the difference between humor ("When in doubt, bang 'em out") and reality! My signature is an old saying that we use after a few beers. It never, NEVER finds its way onto the field, my friend! And in none of my posts will you ever see me telling people to lie or cheat! I tell them the THINK strikes and outs but I never, EVER tell them to fabricate them!

I think our poster is a fairly common type. I'm judging by my experience of having been accused of this kind of cheating on out calls late in the game (usually regardless of score): any banger after the 5th risks a remark like "he's got a date" or "he must be hungry."

Of course, rats don't need an excuse to accuse someone of cheating, but they've probably seen it from time to time. I bet this poster didn't expect the reaction he got, though...

my .02
 

I agree 100 % ...... This is "the" point.....everytime someone does something like this, it hurts the rest of us........I get every out and strike the rules allow honestly........we need to follow the military academies honor code.........we wont cheat or tolerate those that do.................

Funny
 

It is funny how you guys get on here and tear each other apart. Had this post been made by the coach about how the umpire told him that the call would have been different in a close game you guys would have ripped the coach for complaining. Someone would have probably told the coach that he was completely wrong and that he had no idea if the umpire was making the call because of the score. Even though the umpire actually told the coach that he would have called it differently.

The subject was about two umpires: one who is tactless and unfair, and one who is simply unfair. Both are objectionable to many of us. Why is that hard to understand?

It is time to say, look at the source! Don't bother, L.A.! This guy is more than likely a previously removed poster trying to get a rise out of us.

You're so right.

... So, how you been, Ozzy? And just so you know, I always took your quote at the bottom as a quip and not your credo. ;)

We weren't tearing each other apart...but we are ripping you a new one.

Don't try to spin this one. If you were serious in your post, you were wrong.

Perhaps not. He has been a member since April of 2006, with 49 posts. I think he was dead serious, unfortunately.:(

I always wonder how people have spent their entire officiating career working subvarsity games at tiny schools and wonder why they aren't getting varsity games at larger schools. People are always watching and listening.

I've gotten my "big breaks" working games for rec leagues (be it wooden bat leagues, men's leagues, etc) and someone of importance just happen to be there to watch their son/nephews/etc. I quickly went from working subvarsity high school games to working interstate high school varsity rivalry games and competitive woodbat championship games (in a few short years). It's amazing what a little hardwork, good attitude, willingness to learn hustle, and ethics will do for a student of the game.

-Josh

No, we would have expressed our sympathy to the coach for getting a good old fashioned screwing by a useless umpire with no sense of ethics..........


Tim.

Holy cow! I have not read this much malarkey in years!

The depths of hypocrisy here is astounding!

There is NOT ONE OF YOU who haven't done this very thing. There are two types of umpires in this world: Those who have called a "safe" out because of a blowout; and those that lie and say they haven't!

Time to put away the soap boxes men. Seriously, most of these posts reflect badly upon you, and are plain ridiculous. Save your arms for strikes, instead of patting your own backs for your "integrity". :rolleyes:

I agree with the posts comparing "opening the zone" to "calling a close safe an out". It is all "cheating", and ALL of you have done it. Get real!

I am not a fan of calling things differently because of the score. The truth is though that the "close ones" ARE going to go for the benefit of getting the game done when it is a blow out. MANY MANAGERS AND COACHES WANT THIS!!! What I was taught is that this has to go both ways though! You open the zone for one team, you open it for both. Hell, the CCA manual even covers this! The NCAA standard for plate work has a section "knows when and how to expand the zone for a blow out". Nope, it doesn't cover the "banger" at 1st.

I KNOW that every single one of you will and/or bias your close calls if a certain team/manager has been all over you. It is human nature. You may call them safe to keep them off your back, or out to "screw them". ALL of you have done it one way or another. To pass harsh judgement on the guy that just admitted to it the way many of you have is some of the worst displays of hypocricy I have ever seen! :mad:

On the other hand, with metal bats, anything less than 10 runs is "close" in my book. So, a 9-1 ball game IS still the time to be altruistic. A little common sense helps.

To the original poster. I am not going to say you were wrong to call it this way. I WOULD NOT EVER admit it to a coach. That is career suicide. I will give you points for at least being smart enough to realize that. But, some great points have been made about biasing calls like this. Don't write all of these guys off. I think the right intention is there.

With all due respect, there is a big difference between opening up the strike zone and blatantly calling a play the opposite of what you observed. Opening up the strike zone (of course equally) is a way to help both teams with struggling pitchers. If one team is struggling, I may still open it up but I sure and sh*+ don't call one strike zone for one team and one for another.

Intentionally calling a play despite what you saw is against all ethical standards. I would and have NEVER done that. In fact, this spring I made two calls that sent games into extra innings. Yeah, I could have called the plays otherwise (especially the obstruction call at HP) but I always call the play the way I see it. I sleep better at night that way.

-Josh

Rei, I can speak for no one but myself.... I have never done anything even close to what you or the OP is saying! Maybe it was my upbringing and the way I was trained but I have enough problems dealing with myself when I blow a call. I could not dream of doing any of this crap!

Maybe I'm old fashioned! Maybe in today's world, you guys do this. Well, not in my world and not on my crew! So put that in your pipe and smoke it!

:rolleyes:

One of my favorite memories of Portland is one meeting when I heard a couple of guys sing a slightly altered Beatles song, "Here Comes the Son".

Not me, pal. Not even once.

I've had many opportunities to end crap ballgames and get to my air conditioning and martini, but I never intentionally got a call wrong to do it. I've had borderline pitches that would have walked home the winning run in deep extra innings, and never wavered in my correct strike 3 call.

I call it integrity on the baseball field. People can and have called me "one flaky SOB," along with other not-so-nice remarks over my umpiring "career," but nobody has ever been able to accuse me of any improprieties such as you describe.

Yes yes yes.

If you want to say there is a subconcious bias in the 11th inning of what has become a 20-11 ball game with 2 outs, that's fine.

But don't accuse me of actively fixing a game.

Salute!

I also would never and have never thrown a single call for any reason. I too have way too much respect for the game to do it. Period!

... It's easy to speak for oneself, but to speak for everyone and condemn them in one stroke is pretty risky. Rei should speak for himself.

LOL...you guys crack me up!

Only a bunch of guys on the internet will state they have never biased a call based on the game being a blowout! :rolleyes: This is rich!

I have heard top level guys in NCAA and pro ball admit to it, but NOOOOOOOOOOO, not the members of officiating.com!

I didn't umpire on the internet, I umpired well over 3,000 real ball games, and never intentionally called one wrong. I got enough calls wrong unintentionally as it was (one in every 100 calls or so :) ), so why would I do it on purpose? Now, I have had both coaches say, "let's get out of here, Blue," but I would just give them the option of calling the game at that point. I never artificially speeded up a game.

Yeah, I've actually seen a pro ump in spring training call a guy out that was 4 steps past the base on a routine infield single. It was in extra innings in Yuma in 110 degree heat. Despite the heat, I thought it was still bush league when I saw it, and I wasn't even an umpire yet. If teams don't want to play anymore, they can tell me to stop the game, and I'll gladly oblige. But I will not make ridiculous looking calls and call my integrity into question.

Now, you can say that you do this crap all the time, I don't care. But don't speak for the rest of us and presume to think you know us better than we know ourselves. Continue to speak for yourself, and stop calling us liars.

I don't care what NCAA D1 people have to say. When you throw out your values you put yourself into a pit that you will never crawl out of. If this is what is going on in NCAA, it is no wonder that many of my comrades are leaving that fold! I am surprised that one of your accomplishments would brazenly and openly defend such actions. No, I am disgusted.

Finis

Once. Something like 27-0 in the second inning of the second game of a DH. First game ended something like 35-2. I called an out at first when the lead foot hit the bag before F3 caught the throw, but the trail foot hadn't yet crossed the base. It was as much a "game management" call (the defense was well past "resigning themselves to losing" and on the way to "taking out their frustrations on the winning team") as an attempt to get home early.

I am never going to justify purposely calling a play incorrectly to get out of dodge, but comparing 27-0 and 6-1 (later 9-1) in the same conversation is ridiculous. They are two entirely different situations. I agree with the other fellows here, I miss enough unintentionally to miss one intentionally.

-Josh

I suppose that we'll all have to reconsider our stand on the question of shaving calls on the bases when there's a blow-out. Would you do it at 9-1? 20-1? 50-1?

Reminds me of the old story about Lord Beaverbrook. At a dinner party, he found himself seated next to a beautiful young lady (he himself was, of course, none of those things). He turned to her and ask, "Young lady, would you sleep with me for a million pounds?"

She responded, "Well, I suppose I would for a million!" To which Beaverbrook replied, "I see. Would you sleep with me for 10 pounds?" The young lady flushed with rage, and declared, "Lord Beaverbrook, what do you take me for?"

Beaverbrook eyed her calmly and said: "My dear, I believe we've already established that. Now we're merely haggling over price."

I already know that I'm a prostitute, I sell myself for a price all the time. The price is dependent on the companion(s) involved and how much abuse (whether that be baseballs caroming off my body or the occasional verbal assault) I want to take for that price. But I provide a very important service to the community :p

I'm not condoning either situation should mean one should 'shave a call'. However, a 6-1 (and 9-1 later on) game is still close in most high school baseball contests. If an umpire chooses to lower himself to incorrectly call a play s/he knows to be false, then so be it. However, it shouldn't affect the overall outcome of the game.

-Josh

Are you by chance, Lord Byron?

My fear in doing this has nothing to do with my ethics - it's just that if I intentionally kick one, there's likely to be a contingent who simply thinks "that terrible umpire kicked one again." Why bother with that?

I'd like to say I've called things differently based on the score when it's truly lopsided, but I just don't bother. Maybe the 32-0 game Bob was mentioning. Maybe my strike zone widens a bit once we've established a game is well out of hand. But out/safe calls? It would have to be defensible (close enough to be called an out in the first place) for me to call an out there, and most of these ones just aren't.