Overthrows with Pressure
 

A good one to cover in pregame for sure, I'm interested what the poll says. Here is the sitch...

No runners, outs don't matter. Groundball hit to the left of F4, BU reads pressure and steps into foul territory. F4 overthrows F3.

My opinion is that BU should take this overthrow, and PU should assume B/R. Here is the reasoning:

1) PU has a free path for a play at 2B, and can also make his way to the 1st base cutout with more ease than BU.

2) The angle of the throw would most likely have the ball hitting a fence about perpendicular to the 45 foot line. PU can't establish much of an angle on this. Although unlikely, the ball could roll through a dugout opening, under the fence, equipment interference, spectator interference, etc. BU, by moving directly to his left, can establish this angle.

3) PU can stare down the B/R for an attempt at 2nd. BU could do this too, but he is moving away from B/R overrunning first. It seems more awkward than PU, who can begin moving into fair territory and is facing B/R the whole time.

Anyone care to offer the other side? Both mechanics are accepted, it would appear anyways.

I chose the 2nd option. Had there been an "it depends" option, I would have chosen that. But, given the choice, I believe it is preferable for the PU to take the ball, and the BU the BR - in 90%+ of cases.

I can, however, imagine an "unusual play" where the converse coverage might be "better".

Oddly, had a HS game last year where I was partnered with the guy I've most often worked with. A long time friend who helped me get started umpiring. We actually discussed "trying" the "alternate coverage" should such a sitch develop ("pressure" in the area of 1B AND an overthrow at 1B).

We figured we'd give it a try and see how it worked if the sitch arose. Sure enough, about the bottom of the 2nd, there's a weakly hit grounder to the F3's right, and the F4, F3, & F1 all started going for it. The vector and speed of the ball was such that he got "pinned" by the 3 converging fielders. Then, everyone realized that F4 was the only one who had a ralistic chance of getting it, so the F3 & F1 both diverted to 1B. Both of them, the BR, and the ball all converged at 1B at about the same time.

As this was unfolding, my partner and I made eye contact and "shook off" the alternative mechanic - we could see the rushed throw from F4 was off line. We would have been screwed had we tried it. As it was, the F2 coming up the line caught the overthrow, fired to 1B, and caught the runner being too aggressive rounding 1B on the overthrow.

Somehow, my partner managed to stay completely out of everybody's way and keep a good view of everything as it developed. When the BR got caught coming back to 1B, he was in perfect position and banged him out decisively.

So, I'm not saying it would never work, but I do think it would be a "rare" sitch where it would be better.

JMO.

JM

Keep the PU on the overthrow. Keep BU w/ the runner. What if there's a play at 3B? now you have PU in the middle of the diamond, potentially in a throwing lane. Keep it simple...my version.

Read and react. Nobody on and the overthrow is closer to BU, PU should have no problem staying in the infield and covering. PU is no more in a throwing lane than his partner would be. If coverage is needed at home?????, BU can get his butt down there easily.

This should not be normal mechanics but, with good communication proper coverage can be provided a lot simpler for this situation than one would think.
Also, no matter how fast the BU is he will always be following the runner to second. The PU has a better chance of obtaining position.

Sometimes you just have to be flexible and make sure coverage is provided. That is what is more important.

I will take option C-

The BU in a 2-man system should never go into foul territory on a play like this.

While I agree with this assertion as a "principle", I disagree with its presentation an an "absolute".

JM

I try not to go into foul. Have to avoid both the runner and base coach, and the runner crossing the base could block me from seeing a pulled foot. However, if my base partner is comfortable with going into foul, I certainly would want to take the batter runner to 2nd and 3rd.

As taught by both schools and practiced by profesional two man crews, BU has B/R.

I suppose amateurs can do whatever they want.

Since a quality was not made the BU would not have come set and there are options to going into foul territory.

I am in JM's camp somewhat - I too could see situations where either/or is better.

Just curious as to the sitch you talked about JM, could the PU not have moved to the cutout for the throw behind the rounding B/R? Seems like a good enough angle to me, considering that is where BU ends up on a throw behind B/R on a single.

And Mr. Umpire, I appreciate the information about what both schools are teaching. The reason I asked is because Evans' book says that both are accepted mechanics, and it is ultimately up to you and your partner to pregame on it.

Lastly, going into foul territory on pressure is something you must do if you want to develop a good angle, end of story. If you step into fair, you have an awful angle on the catch and pulled foot, even worse on seeing when the runner's foot actually touches the bag because you will be blocked by F3. Take two steps to your left, and its beautiful (but don't get too close or overdevelop the angle! see 1985 World Series!)

The poll is inaccurate so I will not vote.

In a 2 man system, normally the BU will take the BR But, if your PU has grown roots behind the plate, someone has to take the overthrow and it will probably be the BU.

The poll doesn't address a 3, 4 or 6 man crew. As a matter of fact, it doesn't address anything about the number of umpires.

I'm with Tuss &MrUmp in what they say and their reasoning. I was taught the same way, and have handled that sitch in that manner for a lot of years.
Whether or not BU wants to make that call in fair or foul is really a matter of comfort/personal preference...there's no right or wrong there.
For me it really depends on the angle F4 is taking as he moves to his left to field the ball and make the throw. But let's look at the second part of the play...the overthrow.
BU's first responsibility is the BR...and anything and everything that can happen concerning him. Did he make an attempt to go to 2nd, does he decide to go to 2nd, does he start to go to 2nd and then decides to go back to 1st, possible obstruction? There's no reason for BU to concern himself with the overthrow. One of two things are going to hapen to the ball...(1) it becomes dead or (2) it stays live and in play. PU (who would be moving up the line in the OP's sitch) can easily handle both 1&2 as he's got the play in front of him and can easily move to any position necessary to rule on the ball becoming dead.
BU needs to read & react to the overthrow. If BR goes to 2nd cut behind him and onto the infield grass (if starting from fair territory) pick-up the ball over his right shoulder and let the thorw dictate his angle to make the call at 2nd. If he started in foul territory...it's a straight sprint to the infield grass...and then follows the same process. This should not be a difficult move for BU 99.999% of the time if he has moderate to decent "wheels". If the ball stays live, and BR stated to 2nd then goes back to 1st BR is in position to make the call at 1st should there be a play.

Sorry Ozzy, I was assuming 2 man. Obviously 3 or above it gets alot easier to cover this play adaquately.

Furthermore, I'm not sure if PU has grown roots it should be BU with the overthrow. BU should stay with B/R, if PU isn't moving he sure is heck ain't getting him. Maybe you're saying that BU should take both if PU = Smitty?

Again, apologies. Never worked at Quinnipiac before on polling :p

Nonsense. There is more to the story. Ask the PBUC evaluators some time.

Re:
 

This is so stupid. There is NO QUESTION in my mind that all of you... I do not care if you are an Olympic Sprinter... none of you... as a BU can stay ahead of a B/R if you read pressure and go foul! And if you try you will be on the move for a call at 2nd.

THE RED (PBUC) MANUAL states that the PU will take the B/R if the BU reads pressure and goes foul.

If the BU takes the B/R you will be looking up his rear... and have a bad angle... and be on the move!

GUYS... THINK IT THROUGH!

I agree Maz17...there's no other way to cover this IMO...I guess in my pregames, this is how we'll do it...those who disagree on here can do it their way.

I am totally in agreement. I had this exact play, my partner went foul as I was going to the 45, and I just turned left and told him I had second. There was a play and I was set and at a great angle and was able to get the play right.

He busts toward second with the runner, and just like the man said, he would have been making the call on the run from 75 feet away while I'm doing ... what?

Kevin, were you PU? I'm not sure what side you're taking on this one? Just for discussion...thanks.

PU; two-man.

F4 dove for the ball stumbled to his knees and bounced the throw. I broke for second as soon as the ball got by F3.

okay, so you're on team PU...at least in that sitch...sounds like good communication...which often times trumps "the book"

Team PU ... I love that! That says it all.
;)

did Maz17 change your mind?BTW I voted pu take the BR into 2nd...

Sorry. I apologize for reading right through the part about BU going into foul territory at first read.

I would not have done so. I have learned through some young A and AA umpires and their evaluators that there really is hardly ever a "need" to go foul. (One of the great things about this area is that I can choose to watch a Single A, Double A or Triple A game most days, and get to chat with young umpires with a variety of experience)

I do not go into foul territory.

I am retired and not an Olympic sprinter and even I can bust in and get to the cut out at second ahead of B/R. I don't see the problem.

well, i'm not sure if he changed my mind or not. honestly, in a game I'm doing, BU is going to stay with the runner (at least that will be the original plan)...unless for some reason I'm PU and I realize that he's not going to get there. I'll try to cover for him. If I look over and my partner pushed himself way foul...then i better read that and bust my tail out there. many times you just have to read your partner and the play...if you follow the book, and there's nobody at the base for a play...the book doesn't matter.

This has to be covered during pregame. It is an acceptable and taught mechanic for pressure situations. As PU you should be no closer than the 45' running lane. If that is the case, you should have no problem creating an angle for any subsequent play at 2nd. As fast as some of these HS kids are, not to mention college players, the BU having to travel across the diamond and have an angle on the play is nearly impossible. I'm not saying you would not be able to see the play, but it will look like you didn't. This is one of those times that you earn your money as a PU.

Again, Pregame, Pregame, Pregame.

if the throw was terrible though, BU could read that the throw is sailing and pass the ball to PU and bust it in...if you're reading the throw, there's no point and being HOKS if you know there's no longer going to be a play there.

Exactly, almost. There was not a quality in the OP and no reason to come set OR go into foul territory. The proper mechanic remains for BU to bust in and take the runner. There really is no need to "pass the ball to the PU"...it's his.

I voted for what should be the norm here but, I will stick with what I previously stated. Also, there is just no way in hell, even if your an olympic sprinter and not retired, that if your in foul terriitory and the runner breaks for 2nd your going to be in position to even look like you made the correct call.

Depends on where the runner was when the ball went into DPT.

That said, there is no way in hell anyone should have been in foul territory given the OP.

You must be talking about a different kind of play. You bust in and take the runner, and we'll stay out of the way and get the close look at the play at second.

I'm talking about a bad throw to first, as in the OP. As I was taught at school, I will not come set, I will not move into foul territory. Busting in is then no issue unless you're incredibly slow or lazy. I will then be near the 2nd base cut-out and have no problem seeing either the touch or a play.

My partner, plate gear and all, will be doing his job and take the ball and we'll get the play right.

You may have been taught differently.

To each his own.

You are right, there is hardly ever a need. But, were talking about the time when there is a need. If your not flexible enough to adjust your positioning for any situation what-so-ever than I guess your right.

"To each his own."

Mr. Umpire,

If you bust in on a play near the 3/4 hole, [this is not anger, but emphasis] YOU'RE GOING TO INTERFERE WITH THE PLAY!

What's the story? How can you possibly be in position to get everything right by being so stubborn about taking it all, while your partner watches you struggle? What's the point?

I am a former wide receiver and center fielder. I was always one of the fastest guys in any league and any sport I was ever a part of. I am over 50, and I am somewhere near my playing weight and I am still one of the fastest guys anywhere near my age. I love to run and I love the idea that I am even able to still do any kind of a sprint.

I can not go from calling a pressure play at first to calling a subsequent play at second and get close enough to call a banger. It's cool if you think you can just because some manual says you're supposed to.

The best statement was TTS's: "As fast as some of these HS kids are, not to mention college players, the BU having to travel across the diamond and have an angle on the play is nearly impossible. I'm not saying you would not be able to see the play, but it will look like you didn't."

Just as "points of information" here is what the PBUC "Red Book" and CCA manuals have to say on the question:

The CCA manual does NOT discuss the notion of "pressure" but has this to say for 2-man on an overthrow at 1st w. no runners on base:

So, from my read, the two most followed and respected mechanics manuals both suggest that the BU stay with the BR in this sitch.

However, I can certainly imagine a sitch where this would be "sub optimal" coverage because of the specifics of how a particular play developed. If you pre-gamed this with your partner and had good on field communication with him, I could see doing it the other way if the right sitch arose.

The only times I can recall going into foul territory from A is on infield pop-ups down the right field line where the F3 (and/or F4) is coming "right at me" as they attempt to position. I try to stay out of their way and then get back to "the line" by thre time the ball comes down.

JM

The quotations are helpful, indeed. However, the same 75-to-80 feet can be covered by the PU, who, by starting at the 45, has angle the whole way to second base, no matter where he stops to get set for the call. The U1 only has angle after he has busted to the infield, and in so doing, ends up nowhere near as close to the play as the PU could.

So when I called my partner off and sprinted straight to second, I was able to make a call from 15 feet, instead of my partner making it from somewhere between first and the mound. I'll go with the same mechanic most of the time, if that's the result.

Fair enough...a few questions...

So you would make your call while moving into the diamond? Is it still the mechanic to make a safe signal at 1B since this is a force play and there's a play being made there? (people go back and forth on that mechanic too)...

I'm not sure if Ussain Bolt could get to the inside of the diamond for the safe/out call at 1B...are you implying that's where you'd try to be for a safe/out/touch/no touch?

My understanding from reading your posts is that you're taking B/R into second..but even w/ pressure from F4, there's no way you're getting into the diamond for a play at 1B...

This is what some might refer to as an advanced mechanic, but all that really means is that it isn't in a mechanics book, because those books cover high percentage situations.

These types of deviations are ok and used to best cover situations that can arise on the field the field for what ever reason. When they are covered this way, they are usually done so usually not by pregaming, but simply having game awareness, and a firm understanding of coverage.

Had one in my plate job on Saturday, where U1 and U3 both went out on a trouble ball to straight away center, F8 diving forward. As I was headed up to 1st to cover for U1, and knowing that there was no way for him to get inside even though it was his job too, I communicated to U3 and he got into the cut out for a whacker at 2nd on the BR.

No one on the field or in the stadium knew we screwed up, but in the end, all they knew is that we covered it. And the best part, U1 bought the first 2 rounds at Franky's fine Italian restaurant.

Point, get the situations covered and allow a better understanding of what they are trying to accomplish help you when the stuff hits the fan.

No, I am not going to interfere with anything. I have had this play, I have handled correctly as instructed at school and I have never interfered with this play. Perhaps you're projecting.

Nothing stubborn about handling a mechanic correctly. My partner is doing his job correctly and is knows he has things to do other than watch me doing my job correctly

Perhaps one problem is that you either cannot read very well or don't understand the OP or what I have written. I have stated SEVERAL times that upon recognizing the bad throw, I would not be in foul territory or even in my set position. I would not be standing around waiting for the B/R to reach first. I would be busting in and taking his touch of first from the grass.

I would give TT the benefit of the doubt and assume he also had not read what I had written.

Look, I don't know why you want to get all excited about someone using the mechanic he learned at proschool. Do what ever you want to do. I really don't care. I don't have to work with you.

I read and understood every single word. You would rather do it by the book no matter what, no matter who's running, no matter how the play unfolds, regardless of who's your partner and what his abilities are, regardless of who would have a better, closer angle, or whether it's the best way to get the call right or not. That's cool.

I just think that the guy with the shorter, more direct, more simple route to the proper angle should take the play. Several others agree.

Perhaps the manuals will be changed to make it the standard mechanic. :D

And I am happy that this was brought up, because I'm going to cover it in every pregame and see if anyone ever disagrees with that mechanic.

I'll get back with the results, but I'll bet most of them will agree.

I believe that you are the only one getting "excited." I [we] are just saying that the prescribed mechanic needs to be thrown out much of the time that such a play takes place. The PU has a better angle and a better route.

And let's face it: not every partner is as fast and has the anticipation and cat-like reflexes that you have.

I would be interested to hear what the schools say about this now.

Evans' new book says both are fine, just pregame it (sorry to spoil it! but really, buy it!)

So clearly, some upper people think PU taking B/R is cool. Others obviously feel differently.

As for people who say they never go into foul as BU, well... its in the book that you should and I can't believe that MiLB guys aren't aware of this mechanic or refuse to use it. If you don't in certain situations, you are either a) getting a ball to the back of your head b) getting trampled by B/R c) can't see BR contact the front of the bag.

The pressure debate that has started has surprised me, to say the least. I can change my mind, but nothing I have read here so far has done it!

As for my OP, good healthy discussion! I can see both ways, guess the best thing to do is just pregame and communicate. If I was BU I wouldn't be mad if PU took the ball, and vice versa. As long as I knew it :D

Tuss,

Nice summation, and a good thread.

How does a "college kid" afford Jimmy's new mechanics book, and I don't have one!? You must have gotten better grades than I.

A good discussion from both (or "all 5", depending on how you look at it) points of view and, at least relatively speaking, pretty "civil". Sure made me think about it.

Good question.

JM

Tuss:

Jim's new book was written for amateur umpires. It was not written for use by PBUC. There are somethings in it he would not have written if it were. His book has a number of differences from what PBUC expects of its umpires.

As I stated somewhere in this thread, I don't doubt that amateurs teach that it is appropriate for PU to take the runner on a bad throw to first. I have not yet met a professional umpire who agrees. I have put this to a couple of them recently and was basically asked if I was kidding for even brining it up. The usual response is "I never expect my partner to do my job."

Again...To each his own. There are the excitable few who just can't stand to see people work differently than they do. I don't care how others handle this. They can let the PU take the runner and have BU shoot home if they want to. It doesn't matter to me. I'll continue to work this play as I was trained. I'm sincerely sorry if that coninues to upset the southern California contingent.

I fully expected you to somehow make the distinction between you professionals, and all of us lower-level, and therefore, lesser umpires.

I guess my amateurishness is what makes me instinctively employ the better and more effective mechanic and prefer it to the one that the professional manuals have neglected to change to what even Jim Evans believes is a better mechanic.

Kevin,

You're doing it again.

Really.

Now, if you'd rather have a serious discussion about umpiring than a pissing contest....

Cite please.

I believe your assertion to be incorrect. While I believe he would term it an "acceptable" mechanic, I believe he would say the other is "preferred". Maybe he's changed his position on the question since I attended his training.

Cite please.

JM

Sorry, sorry, JM ... you're right, the word was acceptable and not preferred. And I also should have used one of these: :D

But the point's the same.

Tuss started a great debate, and I truly believe that the PU taking the runner on that play is easily preferable to a B1 possibly interfering with the defensive play, the baserunning play and possibly even the throw to second, all while getting an angle later and being farther away from the potential play at second.

So the PBUC manual says that's the way, and the best defense of it so far has been that the base umpire should take it because he's too proud to have the guy with the head start to second and the better angle take the play.

Jim does a great Job at what he does, I was one of his honor grads in 2000, and I had this play in Lakewood, NJ in the SAL in 2001. I was at the 2nd base cutout and my partner was in front of the 1st base dugout with the catcher and the ball. We were being evaluated that night and complemented on out Instincts and not ridiculed for using a mechanic that wasn't covered in the "Red Book". We were also seen the night before and I was complemented for not pivoting on a HR ball to the left field gap, that ended up coming back onto the field and my partner mistakenly ruled in play. The "Red Book" says pivot, and the way most pros are taught to do it at PBUC is eyes on HR balls. If I would have pivoted I would have missed it and we would have missed it in front off 12,000.

In my 1st base job on Friday with no one on, there was a screamer that went down the 3rd base line and pinned my partner out side, so I held him up and got inside, F5 over threw 1st and I took the BR into 2nd and my U3 was in perfect position at 3rd for the play on the BR at 3rd. U3 is a former PCL guy, between innings he thanked me for picking him up, and I laughed and said he would do the same so no big.

Mr U, I understand why you wouldn't, and I agree that ppl get pressured to easily, but please don't speak for all pro's past and present. And KF, settle down man, just issue a warning, eject and walk away.

From Maximizing the Two-Umpire System copyright 2008 by JEAPU, authored by Jim Evans and Dick Nelson, pg. 52

4.16 Overthrows at First Base

On all throws which originate from the left side when the base umpire is in fair territory, the plate umpire is responsible for the overthrow. When the base umpire is positioned in foul territory on throws originating from the right side, there are two techniques for handling the overthrow:

1. The base umpire busts into fair territory onto the infield grass as the batter-runner overruns first base. He is responsible for any follow-up play on the batter-runner except at home. When moving into position, it is important that the base umpire observe the batter-runner who has overrun the base. It is critical that the umpire knows whether or not the batter-runner attempte to advance. In this case, the plate umpire is responsible for the ball and must determine whether it goes out of play or is touched by a spectator.

2. An alternate procedure shifts resposibility for the overthrow to the base umpire who is in foul territory and requires the plate umpire to take all subsequent play responsibility on the batter-runner. With no runner on base and a ground ball hit to the right side, the plate umpire should always advance up the first base line so that he is in position to initiate an interference call, take resonsibility for an overthow, or help out whith a swipe tag. Since he is up the line and has a chance to get ahead of the batter-runner if he attempts to advance, some feel that it is more efficient to shift responsibility for the batter-runner to the plate umpire.

Regardless of your personal feelings, it is imperative that these two mechanics are thoroughly disussed prior to the game and each umpire fully understands his responsibilities.

BTW, when I have gotten trapped, and I as the BU have to go to 2nd on this rare play, I find that it is best to go straight to 2nd on the outside and in the dirt. I will get the best angle and distance on this screwed up play.

BTW, I posted that just for informative purposes.

FirstEnergy Park's listed seating capacity is 6588. They have only twice hosted crowds larger than 10,000. One was last season, and the other was in 2002.

Maybe it was televised.

JM...do you have a diagram 2-12 in your copy of the red book? what's in the diagram is not written anywhere in the mechanics text, it only appears in the box. :)

Durham:

I speak for myself. I do not speak for you or any other professional umpire.

Nor do I make false claims about proschool owners or instructors.

Neither do I tell others that they cannot possibly work this play in any other manner without screwing it up. I've been doing this long enough to know that some people will just do it "their" way no matter what. That's fine with me.

He!!, its been over ten years since I attended school, they may have changed a lot of instruction by now. I undestand that. I'm attesting to what I do.

Well it was no televised, but it was July 4th 2001, I remember because I was living in Holden, MA at the time and my wife was out for the week. So google the attendance and get back to me.

bobby,

My diagram 2-12 shows the "2 steps fair" technique with the pitcher covering on a play at 1B.

Perhaps it's time for me to spring for a new red book?

JM

Which Red Book do you have?.. the one I have says if the BU is in foul when a overthrow happens then the PU takes the BR in 2b...

Mazza,

I believe I acquired mine in 2005. The copyright inside the front cover says "1991-1999". What's the copyright on yours?

JM

I bought mine in 07 copyright 1991-1999 and then it says copyright by the PBUC 200-2006.. if you look on page 15 diagram 2-12 it shows a great pic of the PU taking the BR back into 1st or into 2nd.

mazza,

Thanks. It would appear my copy has become "outdated".

JM

Yep.

Another "benefit" of the new edition...it's spiral bound.

I wish Evans had either done that or saddle-stitched his book. A friend's book has already begun to separate at the glued binding. I took mine to kinkos and had it "drilled" and put in a three ring binder.

the spiral bound is nice. i think J/R is spiral bound too. BRD is...I'd like to see that on the PBUC and the Red book

Wow, you posted my choice in the fifth post of the thread! Why in the world should the BU ever feel that much pressure from F-4 to move into foul territory? If F-4 is that close to the line, and F-3 can't get to the ball, then start moving in towards the cut. I always hated it when the BU would automatically figure he would move into foul ground any time F-4 moved to his left to field a grounder, making me run my butt off on the overthrow. I am of the same philosophy as Big Tex here: Option C.

Oh, in the poll, I voted that the PU takes the runner, because good old BU already stepped into foul territory, and you can't get the pooh back in the bear.:)

No runners on with BU in foul territory with an overthrow there's a strong possibility BU will be "delayed" (may have to dodge the ball, BR or 1B) in his ability to take BR into second. This is an easy play for the PU taking BR into second.

not all PU's!!!

As PU you better be busting your *** to get to the 45 foot line. If your partner gets PINCHED (ie. impeded in some way, trips etc.) you better be prepared to take BR to second. Easy coverage from there. No different than when your partner goes out on a fly ball.

Geez, another seasoned umpire is using logic rather than clinging desperately to an outdated mechanic that they haven't gotten around to changing.

SAump
 

Part I
I know some of you may be smarter and faster than some of us. But let's not turn this into an age or physical difference type of argument between PU and BU. If BU and PU are both on the foul line, then both are the same distance away from 2B. Okay, so both are identical clones and "almost" the same distance away from a place near 2B. The overthrow is toward the PU. Who should follow the ball into the fence and the carrom towards the backstop behind the plate? Who is already there to see a ball go dead? The PU would also have a hard time running in the opposite direction from a ball thrown in his direction. Now I can't see how a PU knew a bang-bang play was about to occur at 2B and how he felt he should hustle on over there to get the call right. I can't see why a BU would decide to go near a 1B coach in this situation.

Part II
Even if a player collides with the BU, PU taking runner to 2B has "covered BU's ask" written all over it. The BU must be standing too close to the action and not correctly reading a bad throw. If BU continues to mess the coverage, mess the bangor, and mess the coach's explanation; then only in private consultation would the PU provide a view of the play.

The area in which U1 is working has F4, F3, F1, the BR and the base coach to contend with. The PU has no one to contend with and a clear, straight shot, with an angle all the way to wherever he comes set.

So what? Distance is not the deciding factor.

BU, since he's looking in that direction anyway.

BU has the same problem in your situation. Either way, if the ball caroms towards the backstop, the umpire covering second is going to have, at best, a peripheral look at the ball.

Again, so what? Once the throw is botched or the collision occurs, everyone knows that standard coverage might be out the window.

You're acting on a faulty premise that BU made a mistake.

So, you advocate PU giving information from a lesser position in a more haphazard way.