Do you have a rules reference to this?

Merry Christmas
 

I doubt you'll get the response you were looking for tonight.
The situation Pete describes is taken from the MLBUM {or JEA}.
Pete already gave you the situation right out of the book.
Perhaps, you'll find it written in a casebook, the BRD, or J/R.
But you will not find proper umpire mechanics in a rulebook.

It adresses two events differently. Intent of both is the same.
1) miss home, no signal or signal safe and voice "No tag" on a very close play
and 2) miss 1B, signal safe. Why is it different?
Umpire should not alert offense or defense to the possibility of a missed base.
Considered coaching by some and an big no-no by umpires.

Edit: To correct mechanic 1 above by adding empahsis on a play at the plate.

I actually don't think this is true.... BTW I have a CCA manual, both PBUC's, and the MLB umpire Manual, NFHS rules by topic.

Please reconsider statement
 

On a philoshophical note, DG's statement is rather bold.
The fact you have them proves his point very well.

Fed did have an "accidental force play," where a fielder with the ball could get an out if he happened to kick dirt off a base that a runner had been forced to when he missed it. But this wouldn't have applied to the play in the OP. (Of course, Fed also went through a period when, for missed bases, umpires simply called outs, without any appeal.) The accidental force play derived from the way Fed wanted umpires to call the play in which the BR beats the throw to 1B but misses the bag and is five steps down the RF line when F3 gloves the ball. In OBR, of course, the call is safe and look for the appeal; in Fed, the call used to be "out." Pete explained above how they now rule.

In terms of OBR rules, there are uncountable plays for which correct decisions require knowledge of supplemental materials. We could all cite play after play for which reliance on the rule book alone would be futile.

Prior to reading this thread I'd have agreed with you, but apparently not all could do this.

I have had these books since I started to Umpire.... But I simply said, and I could be wrong, but you dont need these books to be a good umpire, simply knowing the rules and when to apply them is all you need. Those books help us to become better umpires, they also help us understand and interpret the rules in a better way. Which is why in a few days I will buy the J/R manual, as It is the only one I currently do not own.

"You don't need these books to be a good umpire"

"Those books help us to become better umpires"

non sequitur

Missed Home
 

Alert #1: 2008 BRD available.
Alert #2: 2008 J/R available.
$9.99 plus S&H now on Ebay
umpire book, Books items on eBay.com
May no one outbid you. Good luck!
Else, may each of these books find a good home.

No, it's not. I think you mean it's a contradiction, which it is also not.

I don't need to go to a professional school to be a good umpire. A professional school helps me to be a better umpire.

I doubt you'll disagree with those statements, nor is one intended to support the other.

It is something of a contradiction, since a good umpire should want to become a better umpire and use every means at his disposal to improve his performance. Therefore, he would need the books. But since B does not follow from A—and many would argue that A is false to begin with—the statement is also a non sequitur. Of course, we probably differ on the meaning of "good" in terms of umpiring.

If all you have is the OBR book, how are you going to call the play in which the runner from 2B, on a ground ball to short, stops in front of F6 to block his vision, and then, with no contact made, continues toward 3B just before the ball bounces up and hits F6 in the nose?

The "good" umpire—the one with only the OBR book and without the interpretive guides—could certainly call the runner out for interference. The "good" umpire could argue that the runner "hinder[ed] a fielder attempting to make a play on a batted ball," that by intentionally positioning himself in the way, he committed an act that "interferes with, obstructs, impedes, hinders or confuses any fielder attempting to make a play." The "good" umpire would follow the book and make the wrong call.

Without the interpretive guides, you're going to call a lot of plays the wrong way. A good umpire does not call a lot of plays the wrong way.

There are dozens more plays—real-life plays, not third-world plays—that require knowledge not in the rule book.

Don, think of it as an appeal play. Do you automatically call the batter/runner out simply because he missed a base? I would hope not. First, you have to understand the concept of touching and aquiring a base. The short version is to simply aquire (beat the throw but miss the touch of the base) you may/will be vulnerable to appeal. When you touch a base your no longer vulnerable to the appeal. As for missing a base or the plate and the action is "unrelaxed", that being the runner knows he missed it and is trying to get back and touch the base, the fielder must tag the runner. The runner is trying to do what he is supposed to do, touch his base. It is the defense's responsibility to tag that runner. Simply standing on the base saying, hey blue he missed it before he could reach the base/plate doesnt cut it. The runner that continues on toward the dugout or another base has only aquired that base (he didn't touch it) and hence, out, upon the touch of the base by the fielder, with a proper appeal. Simply kicking dirt off the bag is not a proper appeal. Only in Fed land has that ever been an accepted appeal.

In regard to "those books", it is those books that make you a better umpire. It is those books that help you learn new concepts and develop a knowledge base on how to use and apply the rule books. It is those books that help you develop and understand advanced mechanics. In conjunction with "those books", you should attend clinics outside your association's Saturday social, this is how you do it clinic. Yes, there are some associations out there that are very good in their education, most however lack. I know mine does, we have very little rules and or mechanics discussion, until our Saturday social. Even then, there is absouletly no plate mechanics work. When I talk with some of our instructors about timing and the proper use of eyes, they respond back with, that's pro $hit and walk away. Expand your library, with both books as well as adding the reputable DVD's out there, your be amazed at how your game will advance. I know of no profession that has one or two books as it's only source of reference.

I think most of you missed the point.... I didnt say I dont have any books... I have all the books avail except J/R and BRD.... I have the Balk video, the Virtual umpire CD.. and a few more I cant think of.

I believe the poster was referring to interpretive books, not rule books. Which interpretive books do you include in "l have all the books avail except J/R and BRD"?