The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Baseball
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Tue Mar 17, 2009, 10:55am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: NY state
Posts: 1,504
Quote:
Originally Posted by jkumpire View Post
Folks,

For those of you who do not do much at NFHS.org, take a look at this thread:
NFHS Forum: Missed 1B Mechanic

I know we have at least one person with influence on the FED Rules Committee who blesses us with his presence, and there are others who have pull in their state.

IMO, this situation in the NFHS thread is a reason why the FED manual needs to be rewritten, immediately if not sooner. If there are lots of inexperienced FED people who umpire, then their manual needs to reflect that reality.

Any opinions?

Anyone willing to start the rewrite?

Why re-invent the wheel? The CCA and Redbook are both widely available and much, much better. Evans' new Mechanic Bible, based on the Redbook, is the best out there.
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Tue Mar 17, 2009, 11:23am
Do not give a damn!!
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: On the border
Posts: 30,558
Our state does not use the Manual. So who cares what you write.

Peace
__________________
Let us get into "Good Trouble."
-----------------------------------------------------------
Charles Michael “Mick” Chambers (1947-2010)
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Tue Mar 17, 2009, 12:11pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 2,057
Send a message via Yahoo to UmpJM
Cool

Page 1: See the CCA Manual.

Page 2: The End

JM
__________________
Finally, be courteous, impartial and firm, and so compel respect from all.
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Tue Mar 17, 2009, 01:31pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: NY state
Posts: 1,504
Quote:
Originally Posted by UmpJM (nee CoachJM) View Post
Page 1: See the CCA Manual.

Page 2: The End

JM
I used to agree.

What CCA had going for it were its expanded visual aids and discussion. I think Evans' new tome surpasses CCA in both areas and others. It will take some time, but I believe it will replace the CCA and the Redbook as the top alternatives to the FED manual.
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Tue Mar 17, 2009, 06:59pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 2,057
Send a message via Yahoo to UmpJM
Cool

Quote:
Originally Posted by MrUmpire View Post
I used to agree.

What CCA had going for it were its expanded visual aids and discussion. I think Evans' new tome surpasses CCA in both areas and others. It will take some time, but I believe it will replace the CCA and the Redbook as the top alternatives to the FED manual.
MrUmpire,

While I do not own the new Evans/Nelson mechanics manual yet, I understand it is outstanding.

I would suggest the CCA manual simply because it is more affordable and, in addition to 2-man mechanics, covers 3, 4, & 6 man as well. Probably a little more realistic that a majority of umpires might actuallu acquire one.

JM
__________________
Finally, be courteous, impartial and firm, and so compel respect from all.
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Tue Mar 17, 2009, 09:00pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: NorCal
Posts: 338
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrUmpire View Post
I used to agree.

What CCA had going for it were its expanded visual aids and discussion. I think Evans' new tome surpasses CCA in both areas and others. It will take some time, but I believe it will replace the CCA and the Redbook as the top alternatives to the FED manual.
Not at the College level.
__________________
"My greatest fear is that when I die, my wife will sell my golf clubs for what I told her I paid for them."
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Tue Mar 17, 2009, 10:14pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: NY state
Posts: 1,504
Quote:
Originally Posted by Umpmazza View Post
Not at the College level.
I believe I wrote that I thought it would become the alternative for the FED manual. Unless colleges in your area use the FED manual, that's really not an issue.
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Tue Mar 17, 2009, 01:32pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: At the base of the mountains
Posts: 377
why not start with the rule book, then worry about the maual.
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Tue Mar 17, 2009, 01:33pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: NY state
Posts: 1,504
Quote:
Originally Posted by justanotherblue View Post
why not start with the rule book, then worry about the maual.

The answer would basically be the same: Throw it out.
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old Tue Mar 17, 2009, 02:04pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 685
Men, you know better than this

Yes, I know we all have our favorite stuff for mechanics, mine being the six weeks of notes from Harry's in 1985 when I was there.

But you and I all know that FED is not going to adopt CCA mechanics, or an expensive Evans book, also when both are set up for higher levels of baseball than FED is.

And until we all who work BB move to JR's state, we are stuck with FED.
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old Tue Mar 17, 2009, 02:31pm
cc6 cc6 is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 222
If you work FED, and your assocation tells you to use the FED manual, then that is what you have to use. Not everybody owns the CCA or Evans manual, and even if they did, it's still out of line to do things differently than how the league trains you to. The solution to disagreeing with the FED manual is to not work any more of their games, rather than going against the directions of supervisors and evaluators.

Take the Baseball Ontario umpire's manual for example. It might be a bit different than what is taught in the pro schools, but we go by the Baseball Ontario manual because the majority of people who are carded under OBA haven't been trained PBUC mechanics. For example, PBUC says to go out on any flyball that pulls the center fielder towards the right field line. OBA says to go out on any flyball that pulls the right fielder towards the line. We do things the Ontario way because that's what we are told to do, not because some umpires decide that their way is better than the rest without consulting the book publishers.
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old Tue Mar 17, 2009, 04:02pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: NY state
Posts: 1,504
Quote:
Originally Posted by jkumpire View Post
Yes, I know we all have our favorite stuff for mechanics, mine being the six weeks of notes from Harry's in 1985 when I was there.

But you and I all know that FED is not going to adopt CCA mechanics, or an expensive Evans book, also when both are set up for higher levels of baseball than FED is.

And until we all who work BB move to JR's state, we are stuck with FED.
I haven't been "stuck" with FED since....ever. I have never seen a mandate from FED that their manual must be used. From what I've seen on this board, many areas do not work FED mechanics. I believe someone posted that the entire state of Oregon has abandoned them. It also appears that at least parts of Wisconsin, Illinois, New York, California and other states also have left FED mechanics behind.

That said, if your association has endorsed FED mechanics, perhaps you are stuck. My sympathies.
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old Wed Mar 18, 2009, 02:26am
Do not give a damn!!
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: On the border
Posts: 30,558
Quote:
Originally Posted by jkumpire View Post
Yes, I know we all have our favorite stuff for mechanics, mine being the six weeks of notes from Harry's in 1985 when I was there.

But you and I all know that FED is not going to adopt CCA mechanics, or an expensive Evans book, also when both are set up for higher levels of baseball than FED is.

And until we all who work BB move to JR's state, we are stuck with FED.
States can change any of the mechanics that they want to. The NF does not care or cannot stop you from doing it. The NF creates these books to have a standard if individual jurisdictions choose not to create their own mechanics. There is nothing that says you must follow the FED mechanics or else.

Also keep this in mind, it is not like baseball mechanics are that far off base from each other. The mechanics differences are really minor at least from the CCA Manual to the FED Manual. And just like anything in mechanics, these are guidelines, they are not mandates. There are situations not covered clearly in the mechanics and if your partner does one thing, you have to adjust to cover plays properly. For example the FED tells umpires that are in the A position to go out on every hit to center field to right field. The CCA Mechanics basically says "Read, Pause and React." All I care about is if my partner goes out, I cover what they cannot cover. It is not really that complicated if you ask me.

Peace
__________________
Let us get into "Good Trouble."
-----------------------------------------------------------
Charles Michael “Mick” Chambers (1947-2010)
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old Tue Mar 17, 2009, 08:08pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 2,716
Quote:
Originally Posted by justanotherblue View Post
why not start with the rule book, then worry about the maual.
I agree.

I learned a long time ago that there are many, many complainers about, well just about everything. Ask them to step up to the plate, run for an office, take the lead role, re-write a manual, etc, etc. they are nowhere to be found.

Start the re-write yourself. Go for it.

However, if the acceptable mechanic (whatever it may be) is something that is not explicity covered in the rules and manual, (and I agree it is not), for missing a base is your main reason for re-writing the manual, then????

Lets look at the practical side of this. Exactly how many times have you had to make this call and use whatever mechanic you choose to use. Once?
Twice? Threee times?. In twenty something years I am lucky if I remember once. I know some may say that is because of my age but, I haven't quite lost it yet.

I think most officials get a good understanding of the intent of the rules and the proper way to handle a missed base infraction more sooner that later. I also do not know of any Professional Federation Umpire.

So if it is perfection you are after, go for the re-write. Some will be happy, some will care less.

But, putting things into perspective here, Welll ???????????????????
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old Tue Mar 17, 2009, 08:16pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 1,226
The problem lies when you deviate from the state association's standard. PA uses the FED manual as the standard, which should only be used for kindling.

Here is the catch: you work CCA mechanics in your chapter. You work playoffs or with someone from another chapter and they work FED mechanics. Even though you pregame CCA mechanics, if you blow a rotation and subsequent call, YOU (the one who uses CCA) are in the wrong because you didn't use the FED standard (even though it sucks).

PA guys - we should submit something to "Uncle Marty" and ask him about changing the standard.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
J/R Manual johnnyg08 Baseball 29 Tue Aug 26, 2008 07:47am
MLB Umpires Manual cityofficial Baseball 11 Sat Aug 23, 2008 10:37am
Rewrite of 9-9 Backcourt DownTownTonyBrown Basketball 0 Wed Nov 12, 2003 12:28pm
CCA MANUAL brianp134 Basketball 2 Sun Sep 21, 2003 08:55pm
OBR rewrite? Patrick Szalapski Baseball 5 Tue Apr 10, 2001 02:03pm


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:12pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1