Sending a "message"
 

Hi all:

The recent thread about the mens league prompted me for this post.

Have any of you ever "sent a message" or more commonly called an FYC?

If so what were the curcumstances?

Did it work?

What level of ball? HS / College etc.

FWIW, I have used the FYC call in dealing with both mens leagues and CBL (Collegiate Wood bat) leagues and it worked.

OR

You simply do not subscribe to the FYC call at all?

Thanks

Pete Booth

I guess you could call it an FYC....
 

offensive team at bat leading by more than ten runs and still stealing bases and bunting. Game is out of hand and no reason to keep running score up other than stats. When I am on bases: EVERY remotely close play (as in ball gets to base within 3 seconds of the runner is an out. When working the plate any ball anywhere near the strike zone that doesn't bounce on the way to the plate or sail over batter's head is a strike against that team for at least the rest of that inning or until the BS stops.

I have done it twice in stupid summer tourneys where unqualified dads or wannabe zealots are coaching. I felt I owed it to them.

I did not hear a word from the coaches or players. I got a little bit of whining from the momma's. I don't know about you but I like my momma's a little bit pissed off. (grin)

The closest I've ever come was when a pitcher in a major LL game was not even coming close to the plate. He was walking every batter. One came to the plate and said, "I'm just going to stand here and wait."

I called the next pitch a strike. It was high and the batter turned and looked at me astonished. Now that I had his attention, I told him that he needed to pick up his bat and be prepared to swing at the ball. I told him that he needed to show that much respect for the pitcher.

His coach understood. But I don't know that I would do it again.

Rita

LL? I like it Rita.

I've done it. Not very often though...men's league, in the Fed ball/american legion ball that I do...typically the coaches handle thier players pretty well. If a coach is being a prick, I'll eject him, it's not fair to penalize his players.

:rolleyes:

I hope I never allow a game to get so out of hand that I'd even consider it. If a game DID so badly out of control that I'd consider it, I'd hope I have the common sense to never actually do it.

And if I actually carried out a F$#@ Y#$ Call to a player, coach, manager, bench or bleacher section, I'd hope I'd have the decency to end my career as an umpire, for I have surely failed at any sort of game management or honor to the game.

If
 

If in that situation, a check swing appeal or a balk call works

FYC or Attention getting device
 

Kyle:
I think there's a middle ground somewhere here between this position and Major Dave where as he stated, you wouldn't necessarily refer to it as a FYC as much as a "remember the expectation of good sportsmanship" we talked about in pre-game. During a long season, some coaches, players and parents forget that pre-season meeting whee that discussion was held, many time to rolling eyes.

I did it once this season. HS fall league game, kid is up last inning for home team, represents tying run I think with two on and two out. First pitch, FB no doubter strike, his team had not swung at the first pitch all day. He turns and says "that was not a strike, just letting you know" as he dropped the bat in mock disgust. That normally would have been a heave-ho. But given the situation, I let it slide but behavior noted. Next pitch, two balls inside, not normally in my SZ. Bang Strike 2. Behavior punished or FYC, whatever. But he's still in the game.

His coach was in the process of yelling to him, "You're OK, just takes one, etc." When Little Johnny decides he wants to take another bite of the apple and informs me "Blue, you can't just make the rules (SZ) up as you go along". Me: "Yes, but I am responsible for enforcing sportsmanship, You're done".

His coach had no problem with it, actually said he's done worse and gotten away with it, which is amazing. And players on his team later came over and apologized for his behavior.

Sometimes games/situations get out of control in spite of your best efforts and that's when you have to step in and enforce the rules. In my opinion, at that point if an FYC is required to get their attention, I don't have a problem with it's use. I just might put a different label on it.

I only use the FYC call with teams that "get ot or should get it" That means no LL, or High School. I had a game where a batter didn't like a pitch I called a strike. The next pitch I balled when it came in at eye level. He was loud and sarcastic as the pitch crossed the plate. There were two dugouts and 17 players who knew what was coming on the next pitch. The catcher set up a foot outside and I rung him up on the next pitch for the third out. I ended up ejecting him but he was the only one who didn't get it.

The catcher of his team while warming up his pitcher said to me "some guys don't know when to keep their mouth shut." A couple of batters on his team made the comment "we're cool aren't we blue" I of course told them I had no problem with anyone else.

In my case it worked. I think I've only done this 2 or 3 times over the last 10 years or so.

Be careful if you're going to do this.........

Hop off your high horse. It has nothing to do with game management. If coaches or managers are giving you a hard time you dump them. Ignore fans as much as possible. If they're truly obnoxious and disrupting have game management eject them.

It has everything to do with players knowing there "place" and how they deal with you. That being said it should only be used rarely and the circumstances have to be perfect. It should, in my opinion, never be used in LL or High School. The players have to "get it" for it to be effective. If you don't know what "it" is don't use it.

I've used this perhaps twice in the last 10 years and yes it was effective and while working with a partner he used it and yes it worked.

This is another arrow in your quiver. Think of it as being in a glass case that has to be broken before it can be used.

Is the air thin up there on your high horse?

Also, "allow a game to get so out of hand"? Really? If I had known that it was me and my partner that let the scores run up, I'd have been doing stuff about it. This year, I had a 24-0 JV game; part of the problem was talent, but part of it was the weather - the losing team not only had some players 'called up' to varsity that day for the varsity make-up game being played, but the JV had played twice already that week. But I'm not sure my partner and I had it get out of hand.

Our men's league here has this idiotic policy of every team plays every other team, regardless of division, at least once. So I had the joy (on the weekend where they play a single 9-inning game, thus the 10-run inning is the 7th) of being part of a 50-1 score. As God is my witness, I'm not making the score up. And you know what? It wasn't even THAT close.

That's where I nearly got me a form of FY call. Game's out of hand, but a guy tries to steal 2B, for reasons only known to him. As I kept my chest to the ball, letting it turn me, I had already decided "if the infielder catches this ball, I'm getting me an out." That was even before I'd seen how close it might be. Unfortunately, although it certainly would have been close enough to get, the fielder let it get away - par for the course for that day.

Is that against your code of honor? Your mileage may vary.

[/QUOTE]

Kyle not sure where you are going with this.

It's one thing to say you have Not or will not use an FYC it's quite another to say
I have surely failed at any sort of game management or honor to the game

The FYC has been around for years and is not something new. IMO, it was more prevelant when I played because we played baseball every-day and had more baseball savy than the young players of today. As another posted mentioned we knew what "IT" was.

It was pretty much a "given' when I played that if you "pissed off" Blue you better swing at the next pitch no matter where it was.

here's another example:

Mens league game - 9 innings - mercy rule in effect after 6.5 or 7 (If HT is trailing)

95 degree day and we are approaching the 2.5 hour mark

Bottom 7 HT ahead by 9. B1 doubles. The next batter hits a rope in the gap between F8/F9.

My grandmother could have walked home from second base. R2 simply trotted into third base and stayed there.

The next 2 batters purposely got out.

My partner and I had enough. Both of us almost simulataneously said "Balk" awarded R3 home = game over.

It's one thing if the particpants are actually PLAYING the game of baseball it's quite another when they want to pro-long the game because they do not want to go home early and do chores (like mowing the lawn) for the wife.

IMO, it's not a technique used EVERYDAY but depending upon the situation it can be effective. It's not "cheating" the game or jeopardizing one's integrity as an official.

If you are uncomfortabel using it that's fine but do not say that any official who uses this technique is dis-honoring the game.

Pete Booth

Mens league game - 9 innings - mercy rule in effect after 6.5 or 7 (If HT is trailing)

95 degree day and we are approaching the 2.5 hour mark

Bottom 7 HT ahead by 9. B1 doubles. The next batter hits a rope in the gap between F8/F9.

My grandmother could have walked home from second base. R2 simply trotted into third base and stayed there.

The next 2 batters purposely got out.

My partner and I had enough. Both of us almost simulataneously said "Balk" awarded R3 home = game over.

It's one thing if the particpants are actually PLAYING the game of baseball it's quite another when they want to pro-long the game because they do not want to go home early and do chores (like mowing the lawn) for the wife.

IMO, it's not a technique used EVERYDAY but depending upon the situation it can be effective. It's not "cheating" the game or jeopardizing one's integrity as an official.

If you are uncomfortabel using it that's fine but do not say that any official who uses this technique is dis-honoring the game.

Pete Booth[/QUOTE]That's not an FYC. Not sure how a batter purposely made an out, but it would not happen twice.

I've always considered "sending a message" a cowardly and C.S. way of controlling a batter, pitcher, team or game.

Bob

So whats your key to controlling that situation?

Use your game management skills. It's not as if the FYC is your best option (I don't know that it should ever be an option, at least to start with).

30 years ago in college ball the FYC was all the rage. Umpires used it judicially and appropriately and skippers and players knew what it meant.

It has lost favor among upper level umpires, assignors and evaluators over the past ten years, and is disappearing even faster than the neighborhood play.

Many skippers and players don't "get it" and it just confirms in their mind that the umpire is incompetent when he calls a cockshot a ball, or down and out a strike.

For the most part, it has lost not only its favor but also its usefulness. Although it is apparent from this thread that it still has some fans, I haven't seen it used in a college game for at least the past five years.

For what its worth....
 

I have not ever used an FYC in a college, Legion or even a HS varsity game. I have only used it twice that I remember in stupid, summer ball tournament games (13/14/15 yo's) when the coaches and many of the players don't have an effin clue. It is usually, very hot, very late and the game is over in everything but the number of innings to play. I DO NOT advocate using it in games that matter such as the higher levels mentioned in my first sentence above.

Quite frankly, you shouldn't have to in the higher level games. I make the calls as I see them and keep the game moving. When some player or manager or ASSistant coach doesn't want to keep the game moving then I deal with it as necessary. I averaged less than 2 hours in my HS varsity plate games last season and am usually between 2 hours to 2:15 for college games. I know how to manage the game from my end. Sometimes the coaches and players in their zeal to win forget about those little details. Pitching mistakes, pitching changes and errors by the defense are what usually messes up my game management and timing. You absolutely cannot fix those things as an umpire. HS varsity I usually get to the 5th in about 45 minutes then the wheels sometimes fall off. In College it is the 7th that bites me in the ace.
My two cents. Your mileage may vary.

If you have to 'send a message' then send it. When the game gets to the point where you have to do that, then I suspect the teams just don't get it anyway.

As to expanding my zone for an out of hand game, that would be a last resort type of thing. It is very hard for me to deviate from my zone, I guess I don't have that much flexibility in it. Once it's dialed in for a game, it's very difficult for me to change mid-stream.

Look, if I have to resort to miscalling ball/strike, safe/out to manage a situation in a game, I'm not doing my job. A FYC is just that. And those are followed by the FYP, and someone (us) gets hurt.

Why even start down that road?

Pete,

Good question.

I don't believe I have ever made a FYC in a game.

To me, it's kind of an "advanced" umpiring technique - and I'm still kind of new to this stuff.

I can think of one player who was sure I had, but I hadn't.

I can think of another player who was sure I would, but I didn't.

I'm not opposed to it if the circumstances call for it - and the practitioner knows what he's doing.

JM

I think that I've only used it once. A new catcher was in the game and showed his displeasure at 2 close pitches I balled. I told him to knock it off, but he did it again. Next pitch was right down broadway and I balled it. It worked.

The only reason I felt comfortable doing it was that Jim Leyland was on the coaching staff (his son was on the team). The manager started to complain, but Leyland cut him off. It was obvious that he was explaining what had just happend.

The FYC is always a loaded question. There seems to be 2 scenarios.
The first scenario is like, have you ever told a little white lie. I believe that he who is without guilt can cast the first stone. Anyone anywhere, who has not expanded his or her strike zone whether it was during the game or at the beginning of a game that they knew was going to be a blowout, or called a tie at a base the opposite of what they normally call or anything else that differs from what they normally call is guilty, end of story. If you have never, ever done anything intentionally, great. Throw that stone. If you have, I guess we should exterminate you. I will not penalize those who "thought the thought" but did not carry through with it, although I do wonder why you thought the thought.
The second scenario is the FYC to make a point. Batter gripes on 2 pitches, catcher sets up outside and makes pitch look right down middle, strike 3. I do not see why you could be guilty in scenario 1 and that is OK, but think scenario 2 is wrong. Wrong is wrong in both, or OK is OK in both, just so long as it is used judiciously and not the norm, and I will not try to even guess how every one interprets judiciously other than to say it would come under good game management skill. A lot of us would not be very good at it and would get in trouble. For others, it would work like a charm.

A central problem with the FYC for many umpires is that it is too easily misinterpreted:

1. The umpire is lousy with balls & strikes anyway, and it's written off as just another mistake. Participants interpret a FYC as a bad call by a lousy umpire.
2. The umpire uses the FYC as a crutch instead of employing good game management techniques. Participants interpret a FYC as a bad call by a lousy umpire with a temper.

To send the right message and use a FYC effectively, then, you must be a really good ball/strike umpire who doesn't miss pitches. And, you must be known to be such. A missed call then demands explanation, and then the explanation might be "FYC."

Also, you must be great at game management, and have a player go over the line anyway. Once everyone on the field sees such a player and is thinking "what an azz," a FYC from the umpire can actually be welcome.

For my part, I'm not there yet. So I don't use the FYC at any level.

The FYC probably retains some small place in amateur baseball, but the place is really small. Certainly I would not use it in HS ball (though I've been accused of it): for one thing, I'd be worried about being misinterpreted along the lines of the above. But also, I choose not to get into pissing contests with teenage boys.

How many of us have Jim Leyland at our game to explain to a clueless coach about complaining on pitches or showing the umpire up. Leyland probably explained the umpire only has 2 choices, use the hammer (ejection) or the FYC which keeps the player in the game if he "gets it" and doesn't go nuts on strike 3 and the manager cannot get there quick enough to "save" him.

Umpires do not have the technical foul or yellow card as a way of warning a player who has gone right up to the line just short of ejection.

Now, without Jim Leyland at a future game, watch this clueless coach stick it up some umps hind-end by asking, is that a real strike or a FYC (message) strike? And then, he will probably proceed anyway, to call up the assignor and blackball you from future games which so many assignors (not all) allow, so they get to keep the school or league and their money rolling in, rather than backing their umpires or telling the umpires to just eject and do not FYC and he will back you 100% and yell at the clueless coach.

And don't open that can of worms like this FYC about coaches being there for the kids, game, sportsmanship, mom and apple pie, and fair play.

I've never considered lying to be an effective or desirable game management tool.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-pFQMMY234U

If you are uncomfortabel using it that's fine but do not say that any official who uses this technique is dis-honoring the game.

Pete Booth[/QUOTE]

How about this? I am very uncomfortable with being unethical.

And I don't buy into the notion that just because it's been done in the past, somehow it justifies me doing it in the future.

In a previous example, a catcher is whining about the strikezone. The umpire warns him about continuing. That doesn't work. The umpire calls a strike down the middle a ball, to send a message.

Now you've cheated the pitcher out of a strike, and given an advantage to the offense. Plus, nearly all the observers now think you're incompetent. (including the batter, who doesn't know WTF you're doing now). All because you can't handle your business.

Instead, you call time, dust off the plate, go mask to mask with the catcher, and have a quiet come-to-Jesus conversation with him.

How hard is it to do things the right way?

I would agree with your third scenario where the occasional FYC is a "part" of good game management. Remember, questioning ball and strikes is against the rules and could be considered bad sportsmanship subjecting the questioner to immediate ejection.

If you take the position of being morally opposed to the FYC, and I clearly don't believe it quite reaches that moral high ground (it is a game after all), then you must be tossing folks at the first sign of displeasure (and risk being labeled a red-***) or accepting the critique like a doormat (and being labeled a doormat). You're going to open yourself up to criticism either way, it goes with the territory.

The FYC simply offers an additional tool-in-the-tool box, which only the baseball knowledge impaired players and coaches do not understand. It's a bridge between allowing the behavior to continue and ejecting at the first sign of such behavior. I don't particularly care for either extreme, but that's just me.

If imposing an occasional "one-pitch penalty for bad behavior" is wrong, I don't want to be right.
If being right means being without you (FYC call), I'd rather be wrong than right.
(My apologies to Luther Ingram, Homer Banks, Carl Hampton, Raymond Jackson and Stax Records or any of its affiliates)

:eek:

Please stop making it a morality play, it's a judgment call regarding how you personally handle your game management situations, that's all. No right or wrong answer in my opinion.

I guess like any game management tool, if you're using it too much, then the problem may not be with them, it's you. Like T's in basketball or ejections, maybe one or two a season. They shouldn't be happening game after game.

When they do happen, I still tend to think of it as a "trying to keep you in the game, despite your borderline bad sportsmanship" call but FYC is easier to say/understand then TtKYitGDYBBS, see it just doesn't work. FYC while vivid, accurate and descriptive is a slightly pejorative term.

:)

I don't see where the problem of understanding the call is, coaches that I've talked with after using the tool and explaining that, in effect that's the kids warning, have never had a problem with it, in fact most say either thanks or they knew it was coming. I never had a problem with it when I coached HS kids.

It's really not a debate out there, it's a baseball game. Players play, coaches coach, umpires umpire.

That's one way to be seen as a moral person; redfine morality.

It brings to mind a great saying from the 90's. "That depends on what the meaning of "is" is."

Is telling everyone a strike pitch is a ball, when in fact you know it to be a strike, telling the truth? If you believe it is, read no further. You wont understand, anyway.

I would, obviously, disagree with about everything in your post. I have never had to resort to a FYC. It has not caused any problems. Ejections? About 3 a year out of 90 or so games. I am capable of communicating my displeasure and my expectations without lying and without tossing everyone who pisses me off and without becoming a doormat. I'm sorry if you haven't developed that ability.

Your "if so, I don't want to be right" logic sounds romantic, but my credibility and reputation are more important to me. If lying works for you and comes easy to you, by all means, use it. I believe in more direct and easily understood communtication.

It's not morality, it's ethics. Everyone has their bar set at a different level in order for them to sleep at night.

The President-elect thanks you for your support!:rolleyes:

I hope you noticed the sarcasm dripping off the page. I was, of course, referring to the man who referred to himself as the "first black president", William Jefferson Clinton.

Yeah, I recognized the quote. So now we have the second! Whoopie.:)

FYC is only effective when both teams get IT. FYC is NOT game management. Obviously you don't know what IT is. I would advise you not to use a FYC since you don't get IT.:rolleyes:

Ok what Game management skills?

Here is the situation:

Let's say 1-1 on B1.

Next pitch is a Good hook by F1 on the outside Corner which you call strike 2 B1 takes exception.

So far no problem , HOWEVER,

He now proceeds to draw a line around the plate area and say "Hey Blue I could not have hit that pitch with a tree trunk" or something along those lines.

Now you have a player OBVIOUSLY showing you up in FRONT of the other players, coaching staff and fans watching the game.

What are you going to do?

At this point you have 2 choices

1. Dump him or

2. Possibly keep him in the game and also get your POINT across to EVERYONE that you will NOT tolerate such antics.

IMO, the aforementioned scenario is the crux of my OP.


For those that do not subscribe or think that the FYC is unethical etc. You simply dump him OR

You can send a message

Take your pick

Pete Booth

And before you pick, you might ask yourself: "Which option wold B1 choose?"

Oh, I get IT. IT is a childish way to thump your chest, and let everyone know you're in charge. Sorry, I don't subscribe to it.

And Pete, anyone who draws pictures for me in the dirt is gone. Would anyone really allow that to happen, and just miscall the next pitch to get even with him? That's insane.

The "I'll teach you..." mentality is exactly what that umpire in the youtube video is doing. Raise your hand if you thought what he did, a classic FYC, is okay?

If you keep him in the game, and send a message, you set up the next umpire working one of his games to clean up the mess. Dump him and the message is crystal clear.


Tim.

Under the example given by Pete
 

I would have to say, dump him unless the coach gets him before you do. I had that once. After a called strike on the outside corner, a child prodigy, 18YO summer travel ball tourney, D-1 early signee, son of an ex-Cincinnati Reds pitcher actually stepped out in front of the plate and turned to me and did a long look while bending over like he was inspecting the outside edge of the plate. I backed up, took my mask off and was about to step toward his dugout to dump him when the coach ran out of the dugout saying "I've got this blue" and take him off the field while giving him an earful.

I told the coach I was still ejecting him and he said that's fine.

In this example and my own story, I vote dump.

My FYC is for the coaches running up the score as in my reply to the original post above in this thread.

This morals and ethics discussion is going nowhere with some of these guys and quite frankly getting a little boring. We aren't going to change each other's minds, I don't think. At least we aren't getting into the sewer like some threads do.

Wow
 

Morality does not have the same hard and fast definition as you might believe.

FROM THE STANFORD ENCYCLOPEDIA OF PHILOSOPHY:
The term “morality” can be used either

1. descriptively to refer to a code of conduct put forward by a society or,
1. some other group, such as a religion, or
2. accepted by an individual for her own behavior or
2. normatively to refer to a code of conduct that, given specified conditions, would be put forward by all rational persons.

Neither does the rule book. All I am saying is calling people liars and cheaters just because they don't subscribe to the same theory as you do is not the best way to get your point across. Neither is questioning their morality.
I would ask that in the future you leave your questioning of my morality or honesty at the door. You don't know me that well, sir.

I would think everybody on this board cares about their credibility and reputation, don't you?

Anyway, I think the FYC, or whatever you want to refer to it as, is easily understood, even at the HS level. Note I added you communicate to the player or the coach what happened which includes that the players behavior is unacceptable and can result in ejection. I just think most prefer the option to modify their behavior on their own before I act. I am just relaying my experience with the matter.

Sorry you thought the term doormat referred to you specifically or to anyone who shares your point of view. I don't have a huge problem with either approach, I think you have to do something in those situation to penalize the behavior or you leave a bigger problem for the next guy.

The number of ejections you cited is about the same number of legit FYC calls in lieu of possible ejections I would expect, it's not an every game event. I have about the same # of ejections (usually coaches).

Coaches and fans probably "see" more FYC's and its cousin the perceived "make-up call" then actually occur. But you're going to battle that perception regardless of what you do.

To each his own. The only wrong answer IMO is to ignore the behavior entirely.

Peace my brothers.

There's nothing better than when they draw the line in the dirt indicating where the pitch was and then telling the batter (that batter only) that's your strike zone the rest of the day. What's more fun dumping them or watching them flail at pitches the rest of the day. Like I said you don't get IT. FYC in my opinion is not appropriate for LL, High School and College. These players haven't been around long enough to know any better. At least for me it has to be "higher level" baseball. Generally speaking they know where the line is drawn, they know how to question and complain without "showing you up". Over the years I've only done the FYC about 3 times and each time message was sent and the message was understood. You don't subscribe to it that's fine just don't imply that those that do are childish. That is .......well childish.:D

I don't see why a well placed FYC isn't appropriate in select youth or HS ball. They should be experienced enough to "get it" or "learn it".

This week the home team F2 batting (borderline unsportsman when visitors started to catch-up to them) jumps out of the box after a strike 1, demonstrating his displeasure at the call. HC coach started yelling for him to get back in the box and his teammates said the same thing. It was obvious that this HS junior had maturity issues. I directed him to get back in and he complied, but didn't like being told to do anything.

His complaining in both halves of innings resulted in K3 (10 inches outside). The coach and his teammates started screaming...at him. The team "got it". His coach thanked me after the inning...he "got it". He sat F2 the rest of the game to "consider it".

This was a fall ball game where player development is the reason that they play in football season. The FYC at lower levels is a teaching tool that I use judiciously/very rarely.

I'll take door number three...I'll dump him AND send a message. I've never met a competent umpire who allows players to draw in the dirt and stick around long enough to admire their work.

Hey, Be carefull getting off your high horse.

I guess he's not the only one on a high horse. I totally agree with him. No way, from youth ball to upper level mens league games, with a smattering of just about everything in between, will I allow some rat b@$t@rd player to show me up like this. It's an unwritten rule in the associations I work for that a player drawing a line at the plate to show where he thinks the strike zone should be is an auto pilot ejection.


Tim.

I would dump a player who did this as well. If the rest of the players did not understand, too bad for them.

Guess I'm on a high horse like Tim.

Are we sending messages because we are not being "backed up" by assignors or leagues for ejections (coaches and players) in the more controversial areas like being "shown up", rather than just being "backed up" on the can of corn ones like a verbal fyou, bumping, or running out to the plate screaming about balls and strikes that everyone in the stands can hear and see?

Are we getting our schedules "pulled" or "downgraded" because we eject or are we being "blackballed" because we eject for unsportsmanlike conduct that occurs in many forms, the obvious and the not so obvious, but never the less, unsportsmanlike conduct. Seems like this might be the root of all problems. Nobody has the intestinal fortitude to back their umpires to the hilt.

Don't all the Federation and other books have a sportsmanship area in the book, including an area where if there is a problem brewing, a coach, no less, should step to the front (rather than the umpire) and take charge of unsportsmanlike behavior of his team?

So, why is there such a problem with ejection for unsportsmanlike behavior, whether it is the can of corn variety, or the more subtle and sneaky and controversial (showing up) unsportsmanlike conduct? Seems like the root of the problem of sending messages, is assignors and league officials not backing their umpires on all instances of unsportsmanlike conduct, and those umpires that do penalize all areas of unsportsmanlike conduct, face retribution in the quantity and quality of their future assignments.

Hey Queeksdraw, I theen jou are already a high horse, amigo.

Signed,

Babalooey

This has been a great thread
 

But, I have to disagree with some of you who think a "message" is inappropriate. There are limited situations where such an action works, and gets your point across.

Some of you guys think there is a black and white line where you need to dump a hitter who is demonstrating his dislike of your zone. Fine, if you want to put up with garbage from somebody all day until he does something you can dump him for.

But there are times when the moaning and groaning by a batter needs to end, and if I can do it by a message, better to do it that way than an ejection.

I wholeheartedly agree that we can send messages.

"THAT'S ENOUGH!" with a hand toward the dugout, sends a heck of a message. It's never failed me.

Dusting off the plate, and having a man-to-man with a catcher or batter works well.

Calling time, pulling out your lineup card, and calling the manager out works wonders.

Send the catcher out to have a word with his misbehaving pitcher sends a message.

Intentionally miscalling pitches or safe/out, is also sending a message. It's saying, IMO, the umpire has lost control, and this is his only way of dealing with things.

I have found that warning messages are not very effective. Penalty messages are more effective.

I teach HS math and I have a soft part in my heart for students that can’t “get” algebra. But I have little sympathy for those who can’t be bothered to “learn”. We are not abdicating our primary function by taking the time out of relatively meaningless games to teach a life lesson. We are not teaching the Pythagorean Theorem. They should be able to learn that they can only hurt their team when they act like a dick with a well placed FYC.

For those who think that I’ve become incompetent or corrupt with the rare FYC, then they are like those in my class who can’t be bothered to learn. F-them too.

As a teacher, do you send a message to a misbehaving student by telling him that he incorrectly solved a problem, when in fact he solved it correctly? Or do you find a way to send a message that doesn't involve lying?

An FYC requires that the umpire, the official representative of bassball in the game, intentionally lie or misrepresent a ruling or call. If that is the only way you can get a message across, you are at best unimaginative and dishonest and at worst, incompetent and dishonest.

So let me get this straight
 

To those in the "anti-FYC" crowd:

Are you saying that in all your travels then you have never "given" a pitcher who is consistently hitting the black or the spot where the catcher holds his glove, even if it might be slightly outside the rule book definition of the strike zone? Never? Ever?

One of our jobs is to call balls and strikes. That's just ONE of our jobs. It's a strike when we say it's a strike and a ball when we say it's a ball. Period. End of story. That's the nexus of the conversation, what happens after one of the participants that has no business in the ball/strike decision making process, decides he wants to inject himself into that process. Anyone who does that in my opinion is already on thin ice to begin with, halfway to the parking lot.

One of our other jobs is to ensure that the standards of good sportsmanship are adhered to by the participants. Punishment/Reward. And the rulebook also give us some flexibility in this regard, it doesn't since it doesn't say you MUST eject it says you MAY eject. Or words to that effect.

Many umpires reward pitchers who are consistently "on the black" and hitters like Ted Williams with a SZ that others do not receive. Are these umpires liars, dishonest, hurting the integrity of the game?

Guys call pitches a strike for many reasons and many human factors go into it, including the rule-book definition and a punishment/reward analysis. If some of you are trying to tell me you are Robo-Ump and don't allow any of these factors influence you, let's just say I would have to see it to believe it.

See if you can apply your logic, ethics and standards to the above questions and get back to me if you will. I'd be interested in the responses.

Just as each individual umpires SZ is different so too is each umpires interpretation of the concept of ethics.

Some of the responses are a bit surprising to me in that if I were standing behind the fence with the batters Dad and he questioned a ball/strike call in a manner that would not draw an auto-heave-ho (drawing a line in the dirt, etc.) but clearly required a response from the ump, if the ump ejected him, I would say to the Dad, "He had it coming, he can't react like that." If the ump talked to him or warned him, same thing. If he gave him a FYC call, no problem. The only action I would have a problem with is if he clearly did nothing about it.

I think I would have my partners back on this regardless.

The question of ethical concerns are a bit overdone and maybe somewhat misplaced in this discussion IMO. I'm fairly certain that my occasional and judicious use of an FYC call is not even going to be in the conversation with St. Peter. What the fans/coaches/players opinion of my strike zone is a non-issue. Pandering to that crowd is a zero sum game you cannot possibly win.

Fire away.

That's not an FYC.

As kylejt has pointed out, that's not an FYC and not what we are talking about.

We are talking about calling a pitch right down the middle, jock high, a ball, to send a message to someone. We are talking about knowingly and purposefully calling a pitch or a play, that you would otherwise call as you had the entire game, incorrectly to send a message.

We are not talking about "your" strike zone, or the neighborhood play or anything else you vary at different levels of play. We are talking about lying about a specfic pitch or play to a specific player or coach to "teach them a lesson."

Do you really believe the best way to send a message about sportsmanship is to falsify a call?

Tell me, when you call a dead-on strike a ball, what do you tell the skipper when he asks where that was? Do you continue the lie, or do you admit you lied as the MiLB in that video did?

That's not an answer......
 

I'm aware of that. I'm not asking if they are the same, I'm trying to find out why one form of deviation from the rule book is acceptable to you and one is not.

Here we go again..
 

If you go back and read my responses on the topic, what I tell the coach that is that clueless enough to come out and ask is "He can't act like that" whether it's the pitcher or the hitter demonstrating. Therefore, IMO there is no lying to the coach/player involved and I sleep very well at night thank you. Further, I don't have to worry about lying to or fooling myself, which is more important.

Look, only the most clueless of coaches would question it under the circumstances, and only the most boneheaded would not support it. But if that happens at least I know where the kids get it from.

Nobody I know calls one right down the middle a ball to penalize the pitcher or one that hits the backstop a strike to penalize the catcher. NOBODY. That would be a pretty bad time to introduce the FYC.

Nobody I know makes the call and then lies to anyone about it. NOBODY. That defeats the purpose of sending a message.

The YouTube video and your examples are extremist and don't bolster your case that much IMO. That umpire in the video was not only making an FYC he reinforced it with an FY explanation to the coach and the circumstances surrounding the call are not presented in the video. Maybe he should have tossed the player, who knows?

I've think I've answered your questions regarding the knowingly and purposefully angle as it relates to the FYC. How about addressing my questions?

Sorry, but the general principles are the same. Why would one case be cheating and the other(s) acceptable baseball practice. Tell me where line is drawn? Why wouldn't pitch off the the black be even a greater lie in that it occurs much more frequently. The FYC happens at best, as has been discussed maybe once or twice a season, how often does the pitch on the black occur? At least once or twice an inning.

Is "knowingly and purposefully" not in play here on pitches in the black? Don't try to sell that one, I'm not buying.

This might work better....
 

This guy does a much better job communicating the issues we seem to be discussing.

Umpire Ethics

So I'll tap out and leave you to read and comment on the opinions raised here. He does get into the SZ and the retaliatory call (FYC) about half way down, however you probably need to read the whole article to understand his perspective.

Happy reading.

This is not a rule discussion, it's one about ethics. Try this:

A BR is jawing about your strike zone. He hits a bullet to right, but you stick your foot out and trip him up. He gets thrown out from R9. The ol' FY foot, of you will. IMO, it's no different than ringing him up on one around the chin.

It's anger management issue. You're mad, and you want to get back at someone. It's natural. Now, how you act on it is the issue. We've all seen umpires handle things improperly. Heck, even the World Series some clown had to rip off his mask and yell at the dugout.

We are supposed to be the keepers of the game. We should be above the FYC. Call it a high horse if you wish, but it was how I was raised.

Strike Two on the evading the ?? front..
 

Kyle:
with all due respect, to quote John McEnroe, "You cannot be serious."

That cannot be a serious example you raise. On what planet has that example happened?

I personally don't call your position a high horse. I respect your position.

It speaks volumes that nobody can adequately address the questions I pose and instead choose to dodge them or cite ludicrous examples.

Just calling 'em as I see them. :cool:

If it's a question of ethics read the link I just posted titled "Umpire Ethics" and see what you think. I'm not holding out much hope though.

I ain't mad at anyone bro' I wasn't raised like that. :D

Hi Slav:

what you are finding out or most likely already knew is that umpires for the most part are divided into various "camps" regarding certain issues.

It's akin to a tag play on a runner in which Evans and Roder have different philosophies. Some umpires are in the Evans Camp and some are in the Roder Camp.

My main point which I believe you are trying to point out also is that the FYC or "sending a message" IS a game management tool.

Whether you like it or not is moot because IMO I do not believe that if an umpire uses this technique then they should automatically be labeled as having no ethics or is "cheating' the game.

IMO, it's like many things in life "try it" and see.

I have done that with many things over my careeer from trying new stances behind the dish to experimenting with positions "B" / "C" when doing the bases etc.

Same is true for Game management tools. Try some and see if it works. Ie; The ole line-up card routine when a coach is giving you a hard time. Rather then get bent out of shape have that mono on mono chat with the coach and most of the times - problem solved.

There are many type examples in dealing with Game management which is the "nuts / bolts" of umpiring.

The point is: Most of us had to learn how to control a game.

How did we learn?

Watching other umpires, "picking the brains" of officials who have good management skills and Trying it out for oursleves

What's getting lost in all of this discussion is this.

The FYC is NOT used Everyday. It is used perhaps 1/2 times a year and when used can be effective.


Pete Booth

Years ago in a nonconference D1 game, a batter drew that line where he thought the pitch was (incorrectly) called. My partner, the PU, called time and yelled at the head coach, "Steve, did you see that?" The coach replied, "Yes". My partner then told the player, "When you finish your time at bat, go back to the dugout and tell your teammates that you have not only drawn YOUR strike zone for the rest of the game, but theirs as well."

An inning later I looked into the dugout and wondered why that player was sitting all alone on one end of the dugout.

After the game my partner smiled and said, "One thing I learned in Pro ball was you don't have to DO anything to them, you just have to make them THINK you're going to do something to them."

Not sure I subscribe to this line of thinking, but it sure worked for that level of ball on that day.

JJ

Not at all an appropriate comparison. Neither Roder nor Evans would advocating lying about the facts of the call or ruling. They just might have a different interpretation of the rule.

Yes it is. And an unnecessary and dishonest one.

Define it as you will, but knowingly and purposefully calling a cock shot a ball is being dishonest.

Good tool. Unlike the FYC, no lying involved.

And most of us learned to accomplish this without resorting to misrepresenting the truth.


Okay, so you only lie to the players, coaches and fans some of the time. That's much better.

Let's say you pissed off your auto mechanic. To get even with you, he tells you that you need to replace your alternator when all you really need is a belt. Is that okay with you?

You son showed up his history teacher. So to send a message, his teacher marks a correct answer on a test as being incorrect. Okay still?

A caoch comes out to you and tells you that he's subbing a kid properly, but instead he had two kids switch jerseys and he's bringing back a starter. What the he!!, it's not as if lying were unethical or anything.

[QUOTE]That is your opinion and not FACT.

Also, from your post you do not get IT

The FYC or 'sedning a message" is a tool used ONCE/ TWICE per year TOPS.

It's PRIMARY use is to keep a player in the game who under normal circumstances would be ejected because of his behavior / antics. In baseball as I previously mentioned in another response unlike other sports we do not have the luxory of issuing a 15 yard penalty and automatic first down at our disposal for unsportsmanlike acts.

Also, as another poster noted the players have to know what IT is and the times I have used IT the players definitely knew what IT was.

I had players after the game apologize for their behavior but more importantly thanked me for keeping them in the game and avoiding an automatic one game suspension for the next game.

Like I said it's a tool that obviously you and some others are uncomfortable using which is fine but to then say is absurd and strictly opinionated.


Pete Booth

[QUOTE=PeteBooth;550278]Oh, I get it. Even used it 20 years ago.

Frequency of lying has no bearing on the lie.

If that's the only tool you have for that situation, you are working games under-equipped.

Pete, here's a reality check. A pitch comes right down the middle, thigh high. You see it correcly. You know it's a strike, but to send a message, you call it a ball.

Question: Did you or did you not lie when announcing to the world that the pitch was a ball?

Forget your intent. Forget your lack of other tools. Answer the simple question, is not calling a ball on a pitch that you know to be a strike untruthful? Yes or no, Pete. Forget the rationalization that aids your comfort. Just answer that question yes or no.

There is no need or reason to lie about an FYC - that would destroy the message. If done at the right time for the right reason the point is made and life (And the game) moves on.

The FYC is the lie.

Look, I completely understand the FYC. I used at the D-1 level years ago. I have since come to understand the there are other and better tools of game management than lying.

At a Florida Classic, Evans disparaged the FYC and predicted the exact results someday that the young MiLB umpire experienced in the video posted earlier.

The game evolves. Umpiring evolves. One CAN umpire and be honest.

If you feel you have to use the FYC, fine. Just know it for what it is...a lie.

_____________

Edited to ask: I'm curious. To those who work other sports: In what other sport do officials feel free to lie about a call to send a message? Football? Basketball? Curling?

And if you don't make the FYC there's no need to even think about lying (and compounding a lie with another lie).

Paradigm Shift
 

Lets not go into ethics or morals, truth or lies, right or wrong.
Stay away from the FYC. Its a dead horse.
Some teams won't wink twice about a call made in their favor.
A coach ever dispute a bad call made against the other team?

Now, I have been known to miss a call, hell maybe even a half dozen or so a game.
Why do they have to be so close?
Some folks recognize human error when it happens and some folks tend to ride a dead horse pretty hard.

I, certainly, won't lose any sleep about someone yelling barbs from the furthest splinter of piney wood.
But if its up close and personal and persistent, I would like it to stop.
Hurry and get over it before I mess up again.
Before you realize it, I may have made another bad call. FYC!

Have another drink. It's early.

Professional Courtesy
 

Back to the OP, when have you done IT.
So you never consider IT? Only a few times in your long career?

Before I start, has anyone admitted making that call.
Don't get me wrong, but 5 pages of IT and I find very few solid examples posted above.

Let me offer. Outside pitch. I ball it.
Coach asks catcher for location.
Catcher, being a team player, shrugs to pacify his coach.
Truth be known, the pitch was outside.
Well, next pitch, same location. FYC!

Who hasn't had this happen to them on occasion?
And if it is used at all, it should be used at the lowest level. LL coaches are the worst ....

Wait.

The first pitch was a ball. You called it ball.

The next pitch, same location, was a ball. You, again, called it a ball.

Who are you effing on this call?







Make mine a double.

I've Had enough
 

I greatly resent being call a liar and untruthful and all kinds of other things by some of you if I use a message pitch once or twice over several years.

It is becoming rather obvious at this point that you either don't understand the concept of the message pitch, or you are just being obtuse. If you disagree with people who use the message pitch, fine. Even using a sharp elbow about it is fine too. that is how we all get better.

But when you start attacking the character of another umpire with words like lie, and untruthful, then you have crossed a line. Umpires have to be people of trust and honesty, for both sides. Don't start attaching words that are loaded with trouble for other umpires who disagree with your stance on this type of issue.

Let's get this important conversation back to a level of discussion between friends and fellow umpires, as opposed to a boxing match with rhetoric.

Easy solution. Don't put yourself in a position where you feel the need to lie about a call.

Neither. Having used the FYC at higher amateur levels, I understand it perfectly. The only ones being obtuse are those who utlize a tool that requires a lies denying that they lie.


It is what it is. An FYC is, by definition, a lie. If you use it fine, but realize what it is and be man enough to accept it and live with it without whining about it.

I used an FYC once this season.

The game was in the last half with the visiting team up by 8 with two outs. Strike two to the batter was on the outside corner, the batter how had been ohhing and awwing all game looked back at me in disgust and headed back to the dugout for a new bat. While there I overheard him say "I need the longest bat we have to reach that pitch." This was said quietly enough so that I couldn't toss him without appearing to have rabbit ears.

When he returned to the plate I leaned into the slot and said loud enough so only the batter and the catcher could hear and said "It is not long enough." Catcher then proceeded to set up a good foot outside. Glove never moved as the pitcher threw strike 3.