![]() |
FED UMPIRES Manual, Let's Start the rewrite
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? |
Quote:
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. |
Our state does not use the Manual. So who cares what you write. ;)
Peace |
Page 1: See the CCA Manual.
Page 2: The End JM |
Quote:
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. |
why not start with the rule book, then worry about the maual.
|
Quote:
The answer would basically be the same: Throw it out. |
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. |
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. |
Quote:
That said, if your association has endorsed FED mechanics, perhaps you are stuck. My sympathies. |
Quote:
The answer to FED's crappy manual is to, as an association, adopt another one. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Our association uses the red book. |
I greatly appreciate what you are saying men..
However, you are missing the point. Nobody I know of uses pure FED baseball mechanics, and everyone says "Amen."
But, even though we all teach mechanics differently than FED, we have to remember that: 1. Most FED umpires don't work at it as hard as we do. 2. Most FED umpires need to be told how to do certain things in clear terms. I mean how many of us really needed to know that you call people safe at 1B if they miss the bag as they go by? Well, there are a lot of FED guys who don't know, and won't know until it is in the FED mechanics book. Also, there are some good points to the FED manual, at least for umpires who work and study only for FED baseball. The manual could be so much better then it is, if someone (TEE?) would start pushing for changes in what the manual has in it. |
Quote:
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 |
Quote:
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 ??????????????????? |
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. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
In Alabama, we have our own mechanics manual also. This is used state-wide, not association to association. |
I've never seen a FED manual. We don't use them here. We use CCA and Red Book, along with whatever is gleaned from pro school grads and the pro umpires in our association.
After the things I've read here over the last few years about the FED manual, and the awful mechanics portrayed in the rule book, if I ever see a copy of the manual in my house, it will be deposited into the round file. |
Quote:
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 |
Quote:
|
Quote:
And that is another problem with the FED manual- editing. It was originally written years ago, so some of the instruction is just plain outdated. Bits-and-pieces have been revised through the years, creating a sometimes disjointed or conflicting document. I do totally agree with the premise that any state or local association is free to adopt whatever mechanics they see fit. I wonder if you were to take the FED manual and, say, the CCA manual side-by-side how much of the content would be in agreement. 75%? 90%? More? It just seems that with a little updating, editing and reorganization the NFHS could have themselves a first-rate umpire manual. |
Quote:
Same reason. |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Peace |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
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. |
Quote:
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. |
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 |
Quote:
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. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
They keep making Fed manuals because there are still places out there that use it. If you work in those places you probably are stuck with it until you convince those in charge there should be a change. |
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
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." |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
I would love it if PIAA would come up to speed on some issues. How about carrying the stopwatch on the field this year to make sure that pace of play keeps up. I think this one is going to carry a lot of difficulties.
|
Quote:
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:40am. |