Thats a Balk - by the numbers

[Kevin Finnerty]

Oh, okay, I'm shying away from a tough call.

Yeah, I have a toughness problem. And a poor grasp of justice.

Anything else you can draw from your gross oversimplification?

A balk is not a balk like a strike is a strike. For every balk, there are at least 1000 strikes. Sometimes 2000. Or more.

Try another equation.

[Durham]

Umpires learn balks in stages. By this I mean we all go through phases and as we grow as officials our understanding of the game, our role, and what a balk is changes. I don't know everything about umpiring, but I do believe that balks are one of the last things that we master in this trade. I think the reason is we don't see them often enough, and our focus and game awareness grows as we do.

Where I am at now with my officiating I see almost ever balk that happens in a game, but I don't call everyone. I often use some preventative officiating, and I might mention it to a member of the defense that he is getting close, or I might mention it to the pitcher if he is close enough after a play or something. And like a football official giving the coach a chance to take care of an issue with one of his players before the flag flies on a similar event, I will use this approach when I can. If a coach makes mention of it, I will let him know that i will look for it, or ask him to tell me what he saw, if he says, watch the front knee, then the defense will often tell the pitcher to clean it up and the game moves on.

On the other hand, if the pitcher flexes that front knee or closes the front shoulder and freezes R1 for even a split second, I'll bang that thing right away.

There is no right or wrong answer to balks, there is only, what does the guy that signs your checks want you to call. Know that, and know your role in the game, and everything else will work out.

[Kevin Finnerty]

Finally, a serious dose of wisdom on the subject!

Thank you, Durham

[UmpJM]

Kevin,

What's not to like about making balk calls? I think it's fun!

Why would you call an "obvious" balk but not a "subtle" one if you saw it?

I prefer to just call it when I see it & not consider whether or not it was "obvious".

JM

[TussAgee11]

Originally Posted by Kevin Finnerty

Oh, okay, I'm shying away from a tough call.

Yeah, I have a toughness problem. And a poor grasp of justice.

Anything else you can draw from your gross oversimplification?

A balk is not a balk like a strike is a strike. For every balk, there are at least 1000 strikes. Sometimes 2000. Or more.

Try another equation.

Does the rules say one is lesser than the other?

Better to prioritize your responsibilities, and if you end up seeing a balk, call a balk. I don't care if anyone else did. Its my JOB that if I see it, I call it.

An umpire's job is, at its basic element, to enforce the rules throughout the game. Nowhere in the book does it talk about "if the game is close." To me, this issue is similar to the issue at the end of basketball games in terms of the supposed "letting them play," which has become an official faux pas.

I rarely draw comparisons from the pro-game to amatuer ball, particularly because balk problems are much more widespread at the amatuer level. But through the grape vine, I have heard that it is better in the eyes of those who evaluate to have the balls to make a tough, non popular call that is correct in a tough spot than pass on it for whatever reason.

Frankly, other than prioritizing my responsibilities on any given play for mechanical purposes, each rule is just as important as the one that precedes it in the book. Some may come up more often, but they are all to be enforced.

[tip184]

It's challenging enough to identify a balk and call it when you see it. Now combine that with having to make a judgment according to the level of play, inning, score, whether it decieved the runner, etc. I think it is too much to ask an umpire to consider all these factors when a player would learn more from having the balk called.

Many umpires will only call a balk if it is completely obvious. A lot of leagues don't want the "picky" stuff called. Calling the game according to how the team wants it called rather than how the rules state the game actually should be called is a challenge all umpires face.

[MrUmpire]

Originally Posted by TussAgee11

Does the rules say one is lesser than the other?

Better to prioritize your responsibilities, and if you end up seeing a balk, call a balk. I don't care if anyone else did. Its my JOB that if I see it, I call it.

An umpire's job is, at its basic element, to enforce the rules throughout the game. Nowhere in the book does it talk about "if the game is close." To me, this issue is similar to the issue at the end of basketball games in terms of the supposed "letting them play," which has become an official faux pas.

I rarely draw comparisons from the pro-game to amatuer ball, particularly because balk problems are much more widespread at the amatuer level. But through the grape vine, I have heard that it is better in the eyes of those who evaluate to have the balls to make a tough, non popular call that is correct in a tough spot than pass on it for whatever reason.

Frankly, other than prioritizing my responsibilities on any given play for mechanical purposes, each rule is just as important as the one that precedes it in the book. Some may come up more often, but they are all to be enforced.

This post, unless I misunderstand it, makes you appear to be a "black and white" rules umpire.

Would that be correct?

Do you have this same philospohy, "Its my JOB that if I see it, I call it.", with every rule?

[TussAgee11]

Originally Posted by MrUmpire

This post, unless I misunderstand it, makes you appear to be a "black and white" rules umpire.

Would that be correct?

Do you have this same philospohy, "Its my JOB that if I see it, I call it.", with every rule?

Here's my deal. I will prioritize my responsibilities in accordance with my anticipation for a particular play. For example...

I'm PU, R3, 1 out. Fly ball down the LF line. Guess what will be last on my priority list. The tag up at 3rd. I got a fair/foul and then a catch/no catch on my plate first. So when I get to my tag responsibility, how could I still be "black and white" with the rules? Unless I see something glaring here, R3 ain't getting called out, even if I suspect it was a second early.

Same idea goes for balks. Am I going to get balks that I am 80% certain about? Heck no. Only 100%. And if I'm 100% about it, chances are it was what some other posters claim would be "obvious." Maybe it won't be, but to me it was, and that's all I care about.

I'm talking JV/Vars and up.

[tip184]

Originally Posted by TussAgee11

Same idea goes for balks. Am I going to get balks that I am 80% certain about? Heck no. Only 100%. And if I'm 100% about it, chances are it was what some other posters claim would be "obvious." Maybe it won't be, but to me it was, and that's all I care about.

If you are 80% sure about it, then it probably was a balk. Trust yourself.

[TussAgee11]

If I make 3 80% balk calls over the course of a week, I have a pretty low chance of getting them all right.

Baseball, most of are calls, there has to be a call (ball/strike, safe/out, fair/foul). Things like balks, OBS, INT, we make either a call or a no call, very similar to basketball. Basketball guys will tell you, only call what you know you have. Its not a trust issue, its an understanding of yourself and the limitations that surround you on the field.

Dissent within balk philosophy isn't anything new, I don't suspect we'll clean it up in this thread.

[tballump]

Dyou see it, dyou call it, dyou splain it. Thats all you have to do.

[UmpJM]

Originally Posted by TussAgee11

If I make 3 80% balk calls over the course of a week, I have a pretty low chance of getting them all right.

Tuss,

If I follow your logic, you would actually have a better than 50% chance. Do the math!

Baseball, most of are calls, there has to be a call (ball/strike, safe/out, fair/foul). Things like balks, OBS, INT, we make either a call or a no call, very similar to basketball. Basketball guys will tell you, only call what you know you have.

I believe the analogy is inapt for the point you are trying to make. The basketball principles you allude to primarily have to do with officiating contact in basketball games. While there is often (but not always) contact in interference and obstruction sitches in baseball, the underlying rules - and principles of application - are very different between the two sports.

And balks don't have much to do with contact at all. Balks are more like basket interference or traveling or backcourt violations in basketball. You have to know the rules and apply them to what you see. Advantage/disadvantage doesn't enter into it.

Its not a trust issue, its an understanding of yourself and the limitations that surround you on the field.

To me, it's a "trust in yourself" issue. I believe that balks are generally "undercalled". Primarily, because the umpires don't have confidence in their understanding of the balk rules and/or the presence to call it when they see it.

I have found this to be one of the more challenging aspects of learning how to umpire for myself. It's still an area of focus on improvement for me. I don't believe I've ever called a balk that "wasn't", but I know I've seen definite balks that I did not call. I am dissatisfied with myself when that happens, and it happens less than it used to.

Dissent within balk philosophy isn't anything new, I don't suspect we'll clean it up in this thread.

There are certainly a lot of different philosophies on calling balks. Personally, I subscribe to the one that says balks are "level dependent" - I would use different criteria to rule on whether or not a pitcher had balked in a 13U game than I would in a HS game - but the rule would be the same.

Anything above HS Frosh that I work, the expectation is that balks will be called. So, I try to call them when I see 'em. "80%" is sure enough for me.

Unfortunately, a lot of umpires use "balk philosophy" as an excuse for not understanding and properly officiating the balk regulations. And the coaches!?!? I can't believe some of the stuff I hear!

Anyway, try calling some more balks (only if you see 'em, of course). It's fun!

JMO.

JM