What would you call?
 

Situation: R1, outs don't matter. R1 running on the pitch, batter grounds the ball through just past the pitcher. F4 was was cheating toward second base, reactinig to the running R1, and attempts to field the ball approximately five feet from the base on the first base side. The ball, F4, and R1 all get there at the same time, resulting in a huge collision between F4 and R1 with the ball rolling in shallow center. The collision, as hard as it was, was not judged malicious.

Too easy.

Interference on R1--he's out, BR on first.

Ditto: interference on R1

That's what was called (eventually). My partner, a rookie, made a no call since "runner has a right to the base line". Defensive coach was livid, of course, even more so because his second baseman was rolling on the ground in pain. I took my partner to the side, straightened him out, and had him change the call. Offensive team was fine with the change since they knew it was the correct call.

Followup question: Same situation, this time R1 legally slides into second base but still contacting F4. Same call?

Yep, if I'm envisioning the change in scenario correctly.

Whoa!

Did he ask for your help? The manager properly protest the ruling?

As much as it killed me, last week, I let a horses--- call by a partner stand, because he refused to ask me for help. It was the most blatant kick I have ever seen, and it was hard to walk away when he refused to ask me for help. I have never just straightened him out and changed a call without being asked.

I have mixed feelings on this.
Since the OP said "rookie partner", I'm assuming its a lower level game. We can agree that when we make a mistake, we now "own" it, hopefully insuring it wont happen to us again.

So whats the best way to handle this? Either let the rookie eat it, and face the HC's anger to the point of possible ejection (dont recall anything about the coach requesting help on the call), knowing that we look good or bad as a crew.....or giving the rookie some unasked for info? (seems easy to do during the injury/deadball.

Other posts talk of "signals" from one to another when info is available. Would a rookie in this sich remember the signal EVEN IF gone over in pregame?

Now, if this was with an experienced partner, well....thats another matter.

You wouldn't approach him for an obvious, critical misapplication of the rules? I guess I would if I felt that was what happened :o Maybe I'm in the minority

-Josh

I hope you're in the minority.

There are acceptable, established means by which a misapplication of a rule can be rectified. Throwing a partner under the bus is not one of them.

[QUOTE]I disagree with this approach.

We all have to learn sometime. if you want to "straighten him out" then do so in POST GAME, NOT during the game.

Now, throughout the remainder of this game and perhaps future games as well, whenever there is something controversial involving a call by this umpire, BOTH coaches are going to request TIME and ask YOU to straighten out.

A rookie has to LEARN how to deal with managers even if that means an EJ. if the rookie called TIME and then asked for your opinion is one thing but for you to take the rookie aside and straigten him out is quite another.

Also, how do you know that the ball was NOT deflected off of F1 first. In this play it would not have made any difference since another fielder EVEN though the ball was deflected had a chance to make a play, however, the point is WE do not know what another umpire sees.

Case and Point:

I had a tournament game this past weekend. B1 hits a slow roller up the first base line and the ball TOUCHED him (way out of the box area where it's customary to call FOUL) . I call TIME, that's interference and B1 is out. Other runners return to TOI bases (It was a FED game)

Every-one (except F2 who saw it as well and the BR) is looking around thinking WTF until I went and explained what happened. The point is there are many calls which on the surface appear to be "wrong" until the facts are told.

Rookies have to learn

Pete Booth

[QUOTE=PeteBooth;594462]So if both managers and you (and most likely Grandma in the upper deck in right field) know it's bogus (it's a rule misapplication, not a judgenent call also) you'll just clam up and let the rookie suffer? You don't think that reflects on you? You don't think one of the managers (or both) will ask you after the game why you didn't fix it?

Then you ask them why they didn't file a protest or ask him to ask for help.

You stick your nose in your partner's call, you cut his legs out from under him. It's that simple.

I am confused on this play. If this same senario happened at home, I would have nothing. The catcher is entitled to the base line or plate with the ball and the base runner is entitled to the base line. Since everything happened at the same time, i would just call the play, either safe or out.

Explain why this would not be the case at second??? Base runner in the base line has a right to his path and the fielder would have his rights with the ball.

remember I'm fairly new..so be easy on me

TwoBits:

I have a question for you: Who was the BU on this play, you or your partner?

MTD, Sr.

The runner does not have the right to his path on a batted ball. A fielder attempting to field a batted ball has the unfettered right to do so, assuming he a) is the fielder more likely than any other to field the ball, and b) he has not misplayed the ball so that it is outside of his immediate position (defined as a step and a reach.)

Play in question involves a fielder in the act of fielding a BATTED ball. The fielder's right to field the ball unimpeded is absolute. The runner must not interfere.

Your play at the plate involves the catcher receiving a THROWN ball. A fielder does not have the same protection from interference on a thrown ball as he does on a batted ball.

(Which it looks like Matt posted as I was typing my response! :) )

I have INT also, in both cases, but let's discuss the bigger question that has been raised here.

Let's say you are BU, and with R1 stealing the batter interferes with catcher's throw. PU properly calls INT, then calls R1 out and leaves the batter at the plate. No one argues, clearly the defense is better off so if the defensive coach knows the rule he is not saying. Offensive coach clearly does not know the rule and PU does not either, but you the BU do.

No judgment call involved here, clearly rule mis-application. And some will stick that info in their pocket and post game this?

For instance, a few weeks ago...R2 stealing on the pitch with two outs, B3 swings at the pitch and misses. F2 attempts to throw out R3 and is interfered with by B2. PU calls runner out on the interference. I approach PU and discuss the situation with him. He corrected the call, B2 is out for interference. Are you saying I shouldn't correct that error? We should start the next inning off with B2 at bat? There is a difference between throwing the partner under the bus (ie "Hey Randy you're wrong!" from 30 feet away or telling the coach he screwed that call up) and getting the call right because of a rules interpretation/knowledge error.

-Josh

Both of these have the same key difference with the OP--this is a matter of enforcement, not of the application of the rule as to the circumstances of the play. In both of these cases, the correct call is made; it is the penalty that is incorrect. Enforcement of penalties is concurrent jurisdiction--look at the more common example of balks and obstruction. Often, the calling umpire is not the only one that will have enforcement duties--if BU calls obstruction, PU will often have a better ability to determine the base to award in the case of that runner attempting to advance multiple bases. Likewise, if PU calls a balk, it is often BU that calls "Time" when appropriate and awards bases.

In the OP the poster initiated the consultation on his own. Do you really think the offended manager, knowing the rule, wouldn't have initiated an "ask for help" request?

In the OP it got fixed before it got to the protest point. A protest wasn't necessary.

Would you let a partner get away with a "strike two- - you're out" call?

It's that simple.

You said "There are acceptable, established means by which a misapplication of a rule can be rectified. Throwing a partner under the bus is not one of them." I certainly felt like you were in the "don't mention it camp" by this statement.

Another example. First batter of a middle inning grounds out. Offensive coach comes out with scorebook in hand, defensive coaches joins in. No argument, just gentlemanly discussion with PU. They separate to their respective dugouts and the next batter comes to the plate and PU shows and says "2 outs". Now if you were BU would you wonder how we could have one batter and 2 outs and call time to ask the PU, or would you post-game this so it would not appear to be throwing the PU under the bus?

Which was absolutely wrong.

The OP makes no mention of whether that manager knew the rule or not. I've seen plenty of times where knowledgeable managers have chosen not to pursue a legitimate issue after perfunctory argument.

Oh, yes, it was.

I wouldn't have to. If it was a case of a missed count, then he can rectify it--it's his count, and if he wants my input, he can ask for it. If it was a case of knowingly calling an out with two strikes, it's going to get to the stage where I am required by rule to provide input. If, by some happenstance, the offense doesn't protest, I'm not saying jack.

Neither. I give him the "what's the situation?" signal, and when he flashes two, I flash back one.

There is no way, I can know that my partner mis-applied a rule unless he tells me so, for this sceneario. Therefore, unless he initates a discussion, I am not taking him to the side and straighting him out. This seems more as though the PU decided that his partner made the wrong call and stepped in to make sure it was changed. Wether he intended to or not. The rookie was thrown under the bus. As already stated, unless the rookie called time and asked, then the situation lended itself to a post game discussion only.

"What's the situation sign?" What does that look like? And when he flashes back two again you give him the "what's the situation" signal again?

Situation 1: R1 stealing, batter interferes with catcher on the throw. PU properly rules INT and calls the runner out and batter remains at the plate. You are BU.

Situation 2. With runner on 1B and 1 out in the 7th inning of tie game between two conference rivals. Visiting team batter comes to the plate and takes ball one. Defensive coach comes out to PU with scorebook in hand, defensive coach joins, gentlemanly discussion and then PU calls the batter out. You are BU

Situation 3. Fly ball to F7, F7 catches the ball below the waste on the run, snow-cone style, ball touches the dirt but he comes up with the ball no bobble. BU rules no catch. You are PU.

Do you flash the "what's the situation signal" for these too, or call time for discussion? 1 and 3 are clearly misapplied rules and 2 has potential to be.

I cannot be the only one that consistently has partners of at least average intelligence. What is wrong with your partners that they can't take a hint? Do you seriously have a problem finding umpires that don't drool all over themselves unless you remind them to close their mouths?

Already answered.

I've got nothing for him, since I don't know why the out was called.

It's entirely his call. For all I know, he could have seen the ball be dislodged momentarily upon contact with the ground.

No, 2 and 3 aren't "clearly misapplied rules." All of these are plays in which the other umpire has responsibility, and is the one who has to make the call, and has better position to see all relevant factors. You seem to ignore the fact that the offended team has the ability to get any misapplication rectified--and my responsibility starts at that point, or the point where my partner asks for help, and not before.

Without being too flip about it:
 

I would flip the coin, call "heads" in this situation, then make my call... :D

You mean that "Enforcement of penalties is concurrent jurisdiction" is your already answer?

Answer a straight question. Would you post-game an obvious mis-application of rule or have discussion during the game to potentially correct?

Yep.

That's not a straight question. If I have shared or primary responsibility for a decision, then I would rectify it at that time. If not, it goes after the game. I'd be giving the "I have something for you" signal throughout the ensuing discussion, but no overt input.

I can see you excel at misdirection. Both umpires have responsibility for proper application of the rules.

You have "what's the situation" signals and now "I have something for you" signals, but will apparently NOT call time and have a discussion with your partner about a potential rules mis-application.

If I pooch a rule (not likely) you will not tell me during the game, unless I ask, which I will not because I don't know I pooched. And the coaches don't know so there is no justice and we, the team, did not do our jobs.

If I pooch a rule I would rather you throw me under the bus and I will learn from the experience, and I will be happy to throw you under too and maybe you will learn too, or not.

This goes in the "whatever" pile.

You seem to aspire to be "whatever". Good luck.

I'm pretty sure I've done just fine and will continue to do so, personal attacks notwithstanding.

Wow! You took the time to write all that down and then post it where other umpires would read it? And you're serious? Even about that last part?

Whatever.

A few answers from me, the OP:

This was a 14 & under USSSA "AA" game. Its not exactly the place you would put a rookie, but we've got a lot of new faces umpiring around the ball park. Some new guys are coming in to make a little extra money, some seasoned veterans not umpiring because they are working extra hours on the weekends in their regular jobs (gotta love this economy, don't you?)

I was plate umpire, my partner on bases. Defensive coach came to me first, and I directed him to my partner since it was his call. I was prepared to accept whatever judgment ruling he had unless he asked for help. However, when he loudly proclaimed that the runner has a right to the base path, I felt the need to step in in a private conversation with him while the coach attended to his injured player.

Had this been a veteran that I'm used to working with, then the situation would never have happened because the proper rule would have been applied. However, with a rookie umpire, an injured player, a rule misapplication, and an upset coach, I felt the need to offer my opinion to ward of a potentially volotile situation.

IMO -- if it's a rules issue, I step in (and want my partner(s) to come to me).

The NCAA book lists other situations where an umpire can step in, even on judgment calls.

I don't know...I think you are a crew out there...a team if you will. Safe/Out is a bit different from a rule application...if I see safe, and my partner saw out, (assuming the ball isn't on the ground and I didn't see it), then we live with those calls...sometimes we miss them, sometimes we get them right. If my partner misses a rule, that makes the crew look bad and it could make your assocation look bad. If your partner gets the count wrong, gets the outs wrong, misapplies a rule, I feel that it's my duty as a partner and my partner's duty to let me know as opposed to letting me look like a donkey on something that easily correctable. Work one-man if you don't want to work as a team and hang your partner out to dry.

If the interference was as obvious as it sounds, and I clearly saw it, I would probably call it immediately after seeing that my partner was not going to make a call. There are times when a partner may miss something, and if its that obvious why wait for it to get to the crapper stage? Maybe your partner had a brain fart, whatever the case was. (in this instance he did not know the rule). In this case you either have interference or obstruction. If you see it call it...........
Had the partner made a call on it as it occurred you could then wait and offer your insight in a brief meeting.

The concept of getting the call right is not a new one...........

At the level of play cited (14 yr old) and a young umpire involved, I cant believe anyone would call fixing this a case of throwing a partner under a bus.

What if your partner clearly saw something else? What makes you right and him wrong?

By sticking your nose in your partner's business, you undermine his authority. You've just told everyone watching or participating in that game that he is not as competent as you are, and that will hamper his ability to umpire, at a minimum, for that game, and depending on word of mouth, for a longer period.

I had this happen to me--as BU, I had a clear balk that my "partner" couldn't see. Because the defense didn't like it, he chose to question my call of his own volition. The next two balk calls (one was a non-call) were much more controversial as a direct result of that, resulting in an ejection that would never have happened if my "partner" had kept his mouth shut.

But how do you know if it's a rules issue? What if your partner knows the rule, but has adjudged the facts differently than you?

I think I address this in my line 4.

Line 4 "Had the partner made a call on it as it occurred you could then wait and offer your insight in a brief meeting."

And you're still telling everyone, "Hey, I don't think my partner knows what he's doing."

This was a 14 yr old game......
And I guess our egos are more important than getting it right............

Note: Umpires that would make this big a blunder (base umpire) at a higher level of game probably wont get another game at that level anyway.......

As I've said, there's proper ways of getting it right. This isn't a matter of ego. It's no different than parenting--you don't undermine your spouse's authority in front of your kids.

R2 and R1. I am PU, 3 balls on batter. F1 pitches and BU calls "that's a balk". I call the pitch a ball. BU then calls time and starts awarding bases. I was 99% sure he called a balk for not stopping. So I ask "are you calling a no stop balk?" He says yes so I say well the pitch was ball 4, batter and all other runners are advancing so we'll ignore the balk. He agreed and all was well. It was possible he was calling a balk for something before the pitch so I just had to ask. It wasn't a big deal at all.

In the case you present, I would agree with you...questioning your balk call would be undermining your authority. I think there are ways to discuss certain plays in baseball where you are working as a team w/o undermining one's authority.

There's a proper procedure for getting calls right. It involves the manager either requesting help, or protesting the ruling. Failure to follow the proper protocol will, eventually, lead to chaos.

I work with rookie umpires (and managers) all the time. And yes, I'll let them blow rule interpretations, even though I'm 60' away. No problem. I'll put the blame squarely on the manager, if he doesn't hold up his end of the job.

But I do mostly LL, and I'm there to help EVERYONE get better. If a manager wants to do it the right way, great. If not, I'll school him(if he's open to it) after the game, and everyone gets a little smarter for it.

But you were asking for clarification, not interjecting what you saw, so that you could both properly enforce the rules.

Thank you. I have been trying to make this point unsuccessfully. You simplified greatly. This is the way it should be and it should not be considered throwing your partner under the bus. I'm through with this post because some are just not listening.

A few years back, a famous, beloved local umpire was working the plate. I had worked many games with him over the years. One night, working a Pony game under the lights, I called a balk on a pitcher for throwing to F3 who was playing 15 feet off the base and was not even close to having a play on R1, who was only a few feet off the base. The pitcher thought F3 was holding the runner. My partner came out and made a big spectacle of overruling me. He said he'd never heard of such a rule. I stood my ground, and did not back off my call. He told me that I was responsible if there was a protest and I said "fine with me." I brought the play up at the next association meeting and was vindicated. He then grudgingly admitted that I had gotten the call right.

That was throwing me under the bus for making a correct call.

That's the part that's "throwing you under the bus."

In both situations (the OP "interference" and your "balk"), PU should approach BU, say privately, "what do you have?" (or, more probably, "whatchya got?") and go from there to discuss the rules.

That way, if PU has the right rule, but BU has seem something to make the rule not apply, the original call can stand.

[QUOTE]Rich it's not called "letting the rookie suffer" and NO it does not reflect on me.

There are many rulings in which EVERYONE sees something that they think is BLATENT EXCEPT the particpants involved as in the example that happened to me over this past weekend.

NO-ONE but me F2 and the BR KNEW that the ball TOUCHED the BR.

Rookies have to learn. Now if I am 100% CERTAIN of something I will do my best to get the rookies attention but NO I will not AUTOMATICALLY step in until he asks me to.

IMO, once the 'floodgates" open and it becomes acceptable for umpires to start over-ruling one another the games will become nightmares.

Pete Booth

One of our jobs as umpires is acting as arbiters of the rules. If there is a misapplication of the rules, and I am certain about it, I will get together with my partner and enforce accordingly. He will still learn what he did wrong. By letting your partner "eat" his interpretation, it opens it up if it happens again in the same game, maybe to the other team. Maybe the other coach will know the rule and point it out. He points it out and you correct it. Now, the whole crew has lost credibility. Credibility can still be lost if you let the rule infraction go against one team and the other team knows it. If a rule is misapplied, and you know it, fix it immediately.

The discussion here is not wether the rule was mis-applied because, once again, you are not going to know it until you converse with your partner. If your partner asks for help and you explain to him that his interpretation was incorrect, then the proper way would be to let him handle the correction. The TEAM has then rectified an incorrect application of the rules and nobody has been thrown under the bus. Of course one coach will think the TEAM is screwing him and the other will be saying "good job." But, thats baseball.

Its when the officiating TEAM, works as a TEAM, that this can be handled smoothly. if your partner elects not to correct his call then there is not much more you can do but get back to playing the . move on.

It is our job to get the call right, and if I know my partner is kicking a call (not a judgement out/safe) I am going to help him out and make us both look good. What good does it do to let him kick it...helping your partner and getting it right to me is not throwing him under the bus, not helping when you know there is something wrong is like running yourself over with the bus.

I agree with jicecone 100%.

At THAT "moment" we do not KNOW what your partner saw or what rule interp is being questioned UNLESS your partner comes to you and then you can intervene.

As Jicecone said we need to act as a TEAM.

Allow the manager to do his job meaning "Lodge a protest" then we can get involved.

As mentioned ONCE we as umpires take it upon ourselves to ARBRITRARILY OVER-RULE one another or STEP IN WITHOUT being asked the floodagtes will open.


Pete Booth

Again, there's a protocol on how these rule misapplications are handled. If you want to side step this, go ahead, but it's a slippery slope once you start doing this. There's a right way of "getting the call right", and that way should be followed by all concerned.

Disagree 100%

Whose to say who is right.

LET'S GET REAL

if your partner does not come to you THAT means that he thinks HIS Rule interp is CORRECT.

Now you step in WITHOUT being asked (even if you are right) and now the 2 umpires start arguing with one another on the field of play.

How does that look.

Remember the call STILL belongs to the umpire who made it.

In addition you are violating a rule.


OBR Rule 9.02

There is a reason the aforementioned rule exists.

I am going to help him out and make us both look good

And you would be violating a rule that we are supposed to uphold.

Pete Booth

Maybe I'm just taking an approach from basketball and misapplying it to baseball but if the following situation occurs, this is how I would handle it:

I didn't undermine the PU by yelling across the field at the PU. I calmly approached him (would have stepped away from players if they were in the area) and asked him what he saw. If I something that he needed to know (for instance, on a tag play the ball was dropped but he was blocked from seeing it), I would approach him, ask him what he saw, and then tell him what I saw. The calling umpire will make the final decision on what to call. I'm just providing what I saw and then s/he makes the decision.

-Josh

Why are baseball umpires so stubborn and unwilling to change a call when it is obvious the call or rule applied is wrong? In football and basketball we get together and exchange information and try to get the call right...but in baseball we would rather be wrong than get some help and have to swallow a big peice of humble pie.

I've got no problem changing my calls. Let's just do it the correct way.

You are missing the point

Yes baseball officials should get together however, do it the correct way.

To use a comparison.

Suppose a basketball official ruled a charge on the offensive player but you were 100% convinced is was a blocking foul on the part of the defense. Are you going to chime in unnanoucned and over-rule your partner?

In baseball you cannot have officials arbritrarily over-ruling one another or injecting themselves in a rule interp UNLESS asked. That's the way it is and should be.

Remember if the coach does not agree with a rule interp then protest. It's no BIG deal. Once the coach protests then we can assist by RULE.

If the coach does not know how to file a valid protest then shame on him.

Pete Booth

You've hit the nail on the head with ypur basketball comparison Pete. Well put.

jicecone and Pete,

I understand what you are saying, and agree when there are other extenuating (sic?) circumstances. I was refering to when there is an obvious rule misinterpretation. I was making a general statement overall and not taking into consideration the entirety of this thread discussion.

You still need the manager to do his job. Is that too much to ask?

What other balk call would make a difference in this situation? I'm focused on FED so OBR has gone to the back of my brain.