FED UMPIRES Manual, Let's Start the rewrite

[jicecone]

Originally Posted by justanotherblue

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 ???????????????????

[bossman72]

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.

[Publius]

Originally Posted by bossman72

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).

If you are saying:

1) the crew pre-gamed CCA mechanics, and
2) a missed call or rotation resulted from conflict borne of one umpire's use of the FED mechanic and another's use of the CCA mechanic; and
3) the umpire using the CCA mechanic is to blame for the foul-up...

I heartily disagree.

[bossman72]

Originally Posted by Publius

If you are saying:

1) the crew pre-gamed CCA mechanics, and
2) a missed call or rotation resulted from conflict borne of one umpire's use of the FED mechanic and another's use of the CCA mechanic; and
3) the umpire using the CCA mechanic is to blame for the foul-up...

I heartily disagree.

This is how it would happen with a PIAA evaluator in the stands (PIAA uses FED mechanics book as standard): Let's say for instance I (who likes CCA) am the PU and I don't cover 3rd on a clean triple with nobody on, assuming the BU (from another chapter that uses FED mechanics) will take it as CCA instructs. His FED-programmed mind doesn't cover third assuming that I would be there and we blow a call.

Evaluator: "Bossman, that's your call at third. That's your fault."
Me: "Yeah, but we pregamed CCA mechanics and that was supposed to be his call."
My partner: "Yeah, my fault. I should have got that call. I'm so used to using PIAA mechanics that I forgot."
Evaluator: "Bossman, why are you using CCA mechanics and not what the PIAA wants you to do?"
Me: "Because I like them better."
Evaluator: "You are to work the mechanics you are supposed to work. If you want to do your own thing, you won't be working playoffs for us anymore."


That's something how the convo would go (if that ever were to happen). I don't like it, but that's how it is.

[JRutledge]

Why would you pre-game a set of mechanics that your state or organization does not want applied?

Also we must keep in mind that there are not many variations in mechanics. Usually the mechanics involve where you stand before the play starts. After that we go where the play takes us and try to cover plays the best of our ability. Baseball mechanics are not complicated. At least with two person mechanics, one person watches one thing, the other person watches the rest.

Peace

[cc6]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Why would you pre-game a set of mechanics that your state or organization does not want applied?

Agreed completely.

[Publius]

Originally Posted by bossman72

This is how it would happen with a PIAA evaluator in the stands (PIAA uses FED mechanics book as standard): ...

That's something how the convo would go (if that ever were to happen). I don't like it, but that's how it is.

That doesn't change the fact that the guy using the FED mechanic is to blame for the missed call. The PIAA evaluator might disagree, but given the circumstances he's wrong. The PU's mistake would have been conducting a pre-game based on CCA mechanics, not "missing" the call at third after having done so. That's assuming working PIAA playoffs carries more weight with him than than adhering to what was agreed upon in a pre-game, and if that's the case I'd ask him the question Rut raised.

Your particular play will no longer be a point of departure between the two before too much longer, I'm guessing. With the NFHS now having the base umpire make the call on the second play in the infield, I have hope that they'll soon move to the 21st century on this one, too.

[bigbeardedbryan]

Originally Posted by bossman72

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

While we're at it, let's get him into the 19th century regarding uniform colors and white trim on shoes so that our rules interpreter can get off of that kick and on to learning rules he hasn't gotten to yet, like interference.

We enjoyed a 45-minute discussion at our last meeting about whether under Fed rules interference is an immediate dead ball and where runners should be placed because he "doesn't believe in the case book."

[bossman72]

Originally Posted by bigbeardedbryan

While we're at it, let's get him into the 19th century regarding uniform colors and white trim on shoes so that our rules interpreter can get off of that kick and on to learning rules he hasn't gotten to yet, like interference.

We enjoyed a 45-minute discussion at our last meeting about whether under Fed rules interference is an immediate dead ball and where runners should be placed because he "doesn't believe in the case book."

Ugh, I hope that's not true! That's our state interpreter! If so, Uncle Marty might have to step down. I've only met him once, so you would know him better than I.