Following the Rules

[bobbybanaduck]

Originally Posted by harmbu

At this point I returned to my dugout and made the mistake of not protesting. I got out my rule book and eventually turned to rule 7-3-4.

After the inning ended, I approached both umpires as they were standing together at home plate. This is how this conversation went:

Me: Can I show you what I have found?

PU: Sure.

this is how it would go if i were the PU

You: Can I show you what I have found?

Me: If you don't put that book away and return to the dugout NOW, you're done.

[harmbu]

I knew it. Three replies and pretty much three defenders of the umpire. One of them who a couple of weeks ago can be quoted as saying:

"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.........."

I know this is a different situation all together, but nonetheless when a coach posts, he is torn apart no matter what the situation.

[mbyron]

Well, you can feel sorry for yourself if you want, but you asked what other umpires thought and you received three responses. I'll offer one more.

I think that the umpire got himself in trouble by denying that the rule says what it does, and then fobbing the denial off on the interpreter.

I had a coach ask me exactly the same question this past season. "Doesn't he have to make an effort to avoid that pitch?" I told the coach: "Yes. And he did. Take your base."

Like other posters, I'm not going to place an undue burden on the batter to avoid a pitch in the batters box. The burden is on the pitcher to avoid the batter, and the only way I'm keeping a hit batter in the box is if he moves into the pitch.

Now you're worried that I lied to the coach about whether the batter made an effort to avoid the pitch. I didn't lie: what does "make an effort" mean?

[harmbu]

I think that the umpire got himself in trouble by denying that the rule says what it does, and then fobbing the denial off on the interpreter.

I had a coach ask me exactly the same question this past season. "Doesn't he have to make an effort to avoid that pitch?" I told the coach: "Yes. And he did. Take your base."

I can live with that. I have thought players leaned into pitches before and asked if he attempted to avoid the pitch. When I was told he did, I assumed the umpire saw it differently than I did and I moved on.

My main concern was with him admitting that he knew the rule, but that he was going to ignore it. Maybe I should have made that more clear in my original post.

Thanks

[Rich Ives]

Originally Posted by harmbu

I knew it. Three replies and pretty much three defenders of the umpire. One of them who a couple of weeks ago can be quoted as saying:

"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.........."

I know this is a different situation all together, but nonetheless when a coach posts, he is torn apart no matter what the situation.

I'm with the umpires.

And no, coaches are not routinely torn apart. I have seen many posts along the lines of "the umpire screwed up - did you protest?"

[BigTex]

Originally Posted by harmbu

I knew it. Three replies and pretty much three defenders of the umpire. One of them who a couple of weeks ago can be quoted as saying:

"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.........."

I know this is a different situation all together, but nonetheless when a coach posts, he is torn apart no matter what the situation.

Wait just a minute there Skip. You came here and asked a question (on an umpires forum), got three answers, and then blasted the umpires. You did not get three defenders of the umpires, you got one who defended the umpire, one who asked for more information regarding your specific play, and one who said the umpire handled it wrong. When you said:

Originally Posted by harmbu

I knew it.

you have admitted to having your mind made up before you even started the conversation. If you want to come here and discuss the rule, and how that particular umpire handled it, we have no problem with that, but don't come here and blast people because you mistakenly thought the umpires were being blindly defended.


FWIW--The plate guy was wrong in the way he handled the situation. I was not there, so I cannot comment on the call, but what happened afterword, you have a right to be upset with.

[harmbu]

Thank you Big Tex. You are correct that I jumped to conclusions. I guess I let my frustrations from the game spill over into the discussion. I do appreciate all the help I get on this board. I have learned a lot over the past several years simply by reading posts that I am not even involved in. Some of the posts here have helped me avoid problems in my own games. I appreciate the people around here.

[greymule]

I pitched long ago. I don't know how many batters I hit, but over the years it had to be dozens. Only once did an umpire keep the batter in the box, and that was on a change-up, a little high and inside, on which the RH batter clearly stood still and let the ball hit him in the left elbow. (He did not lean into the pitch, however.) The batter complained a little, but not much. His coach said nothing.

There were other times in which the batter did not move, but I could tell that he simply froze. That might meet somebody's definition of "didn't make an effort to avoid," but it was obvious that HBP was the correct call.

[griff901c]

What kind of pitch? A 65 mph breaking ball that doesn't break? Hitter better move.....An 85+ mph fastball...inside... hitter just sorta puckers...go on down.

Now if the hitter throws out a chicken wing or a knee...stay here slugger, your not going anywhere.

As said before..alot of variables in each situation.

How about a pitch that nicks a jersey? Really tough one for me..the way I see it...which I don't..is I gotta hear it...and if you really want it..sell it to me...roll around on the ground..because that what it takes on a nicked jersey.

And what was the purpose of the rule book? I have a problem with coaches coming out with a rulebook. Go ahead and read the rule..come out and tell me you read the rule..but leave the book in the dugout. By now it's too late anyway. You may have showed them..but the call stands...too late.

Granted they did blow it with the interpreter line of bs....and that's on them...but back on you for not protesting at the right time. You might have even won since these yo-yos didn't make it a judgement call..which we all know cannot be protested.



griff

[harmbu]

Originally Posted by griff901c

How about a pitch that nicks a jersey? Really tough one for me..the way I see it...which I don't..is I gotta hear it...and if you really want it..sell it to me...roll around on the ground..because that what it takes on a nicked jersey.

griff

That one got me some strange looks from my fourth graders as I was laughing at the computer screen picturing the "mamma's boy" on my team being nicked in the jersey and rolling around on the ground like he had been shot.

[griff901c]

Originally Posted by harmbu

That one got me some strange looks from my fourth graders as I was laughing at the computer screen picturing the "mamma's boy" on my team being nicked in the jersey and rolling around on the ground like he had been shot.

Just want to let you know my edit is not an attack.Just my thought on the issue.

griff

[BayStateRef]

I work a little baseball and a lot of basketball. I study the rules religiously. So do my interpreters. But they have issued "interpretations" that I do not agree with or which other officials do not agree with.

The NFHS has made a big push in basketball to have officials take their personal biases towards rules out of the game. If a player plants his butt in the lane for more than three seconds, we are told to call the violation...not make an independent judgment that "it was no big deal." But I have had interpreters "instruct" that if there is no lounge chair and sunscreen, do not call the violation.

The umpires at your game were following the rules as instructed by the person responsible for providing that instruction to them. You (and others here) did not like them "hiding" behind the interpreter, but the theory is that all umpires from that association will be consistent in that call. Perhaps they will take your concern back to their interpreter and get a clarification. I have done that with my interpreter...and sometimes he has changed his ruling. Other times, I have had officials from other regions and other states tell me the interpreter is wrong. He may be...but it is the way we are trained.

One more "real life" example. It is from basketball...but the point is about interpreters and officials who apply the rule. In Massachusetts, we use a 30-second clock for high school games. Question: what happens if the clock stops working during a game? The rule says there shall be an "alternative time piece." Our interpreter said the rule is firm. If there is no clock and no stop watch as an alternative, suspend the game. I have had other officials, athletic directors and coaches say that is wrong and not fair. They may be right. Or not. But given the clear instruction from my interpreter, I handle it that way. Your umpires told you clearly how they were told to call the HBP. You need to accept that and tell your defense to "turn two."

[BigUmp56]

Originally Posted by harmbu

I knew it. Three replies and pretty much three defenders of the umpire. One of them who a couple of weeks ago can be quoted as saying:

"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.........."

I know this is a different situation all together, but nonetheless when a coach posts, he is torn apart no matter what the situation.

Do you really think the other situation in which I made the above quote is in any way similar to this one? I certainly didn't mean to appear to "tear you apart", but I do think you need to understand what the accepted practice is for many umpires in this situation.


Tim.

[PeteBooth]

Please explain "how you were torn apart"

Tim, Bob and Bobby answered you WITHOUT getting personal with you. What did they say that made you think You were "torn apart"

IMO, your tone with the PU (by bringing out the rule-book) is more in line with "tearing the PU apart" as opposed to the response you got.

The bottom line here is that

Your F1 threw a bad pitch. Was it "heat" a chang-up, slow curve

Perhaps B1 FROZE - it happenes. There are many factors.


The only issue I have with Blue is that he used his interpreter's name instead of just saying "Skip in my judgement the palyer made an effort" - end of story it's time to play.


Are you this sensitive in dealing with your players? If B1 hits a ground ball and "dogs" it to first are you going to say That's ok or are you going to make him sit the pine and put someone in who will hustle.

Pete Booth

[harmbu]

Once again I will apologize to all who I offended by my "reaction" to the first few posts. Had I thought about it first, I would not have responded the way did.

As has been pointed out, I should have been more clear on what happened. Here is my attempt to do that:

--The pitch was a fastball and the batter just stood there.

--I did not come out of the dugout with the rulebook in my hand. I had it in my pocket and asked if I could show him before taking it out. Had he said "no", I would have never taken it out.

--My issue was not with the call as much as with the way it was handled after the fact. This has been addressed by some of the replies. I am glad to hear that I am not alone in feeling that he shouldn't have brought the interpreter into the discussion.