“Coach Dad” Shenanigans
 

I have to first preface this situation with the fact that this situation happened during a 13U travel game, in which each pitcher was given a balk warning. "Coach Dad" had already mentioned his stint in AAA to both myself and the plate umpire, the opposing coaches and his players. R1, R2 & R3, with F3 playing back, not holding the runner on.

When the catcher puts the signs down, F3 breaks toward the bag (timing play) and F1 throws the ball to him five feet away from 1B. I call a balk warning. "Coach Dad" questions the call at the time, citing his AAA experience and the fact that I did not warn the other pitcher when he did the same type of play to 3B (this made me seriously question this guy's credentials). In between innings, "Coach Dad" and his posse of five other coaches (quickly fixed that) come out and say this is a legal play. Their justification was that they had already picked off nine runners.

Any good one liners to handle situations like this?

Not in my game.

Big whoop, I say...I've umpired so many former major league players as coaches and as players that AAA doesn't impress me in the least.


"How come you never made it to the big leagues?"

or

"Well, this is how they call it in the big leagues!"

"No it isn't. Rule 8.05."

nah...usually people who brag about what they think is a big deal...pretty much take care of making themselves look like idiots...I wouldn't do anything but continue to umpire.

Just "you're gone" when he cites his AAA experience as a way to argue your call.

Edited to add: I might only eject for this if he yells out loud about his AAA experience.

Exactly, the best way I handle coaches is with the actual rule. Since they don't know the rules it puts them obviously on the defensive.

Thanks
David

Tim_C would say to never cite a specific rule in an argument.

After further review
 

This is not a balk.
What are you going to do now?

If F3 had no play on R1 it was.

I would agree w/ TimC on that one. No need to show him up...he'll probably look it up anyway...or ask one of his buddies at work the next day who "umps" and he'll let him know.

Come on guys - this is not rocket science. We are not talking about quoting verbatim rules to a coach, that would be as Tim would say OOO.

We're talking, coach comes to discuss rule, (with some dumb observations or other comments as was discussed in OP above). Coach, the rule states that (and we give a very quick but concise rule statement) and then we move on.

This gets the job done, without sounding OOO, and definitely puts the coach on notice, I know what I'm doing and that's what we going to adhere to in THIS game today.

I don't spend much time talking to coaches during a game, just my style.

Maybe I made it sound like we going to be quoting rules etc., or as some would do, pull their rule book out .... just kidding!!!
:p

Thanks
David

I just read 8.05 again and I don't see anything on this "move". However, J/R says it is a balk if a pitcher "throws to first baseman who, because of his distance from the base, is (or would have been) unable to try a tag against a runner at first base."

I can envision a possible attempt at a tag in this situation if F1 is catching the ball 5 feet from the bag while moving toward the bag.

If memory serves this "move" is covered in the Evans Balk video as well.

The MLBUM says a throw to F3 not near the bag is a balk, however a throw to a middle infielder or third baseman, not near 2nd or 3rd is NOT a balk!

It also says "and is obviously not making an attempt at retiring the runner at first base". In this situation "F3 breaks toward the bag (timing play) and F1 throws the ball to him five feet away from 1B."

On the Jim Evans balk video, he specifically shows this play and proclaims it legal. I will go with Jim Evans ............. it's legal

I don't think I would try to use a one liner in this situation but if I did it might be something like "I can think of a fair number of former major league players who now announce games on TV and they are very often just wrong on rules."

Coach, as soon as I get home I'm going to read the rules. It'll be a first for both of us.

First off, "one line-ing" your way through an argument can backfire on you.

Second, you have to be careful on a play like this. F3 playing behind the runner and breaks to 1st on the signs. If F1 steps and throws to the bag, this is not a balk! F1 accomplished what he was supposed to do, regardless of where F3 is.

In this case, however, as stated, F1 did not throw the ball to the bag.

5 feet is pretty near the effin bag. I agree with those that have "no balk" on the play as described.

And moving toward it as well. IOW, 5 feet and closing. By the time you call the balk, he's on top of it.

[The coach no matter who has a right to question this balk warning because IT WAS NOT a balk. I realize in many of these Op's we WHTBT but I agree with Bob as F3 was breaking TOWARDS the bag and was MAKING a play. As another said the authorities would have NO balk.

Therefore, be careful when you say


Any good one liners to handle situations like this

Because you were wrong.

Now the next part.

You DO NOT ALLOW this PERIOD. At the Plate Conference make certain the HEAD coach is present and HE is the ONLY one you will speak to. You said you fixed it so hopefully the only conversation you had was with the head coach.

Summary: Study up on the balk rules and if you can get the Jim Evans balk Video. From what you describe the aforementioned play is LEGAL and the coach without saying all the "other stuff' has a beef.

Pete Booth

I made a post this morning in this thread. What happened to it?

Was this it?


It's still there

Pete Booth

F3 was making a play. I also have nothing...

First off, I will order the Evans video as recommended.

Second, I want to clarify this. Can F1 throw to F3 in any position, from the rubber, if 1B is occupied? I was always taught that the throw needs to go directly to the bag in this situation. To clarify my initial post, F3's initial movement (two or three steps) was to 1B. He received the throw in a stationary position, no longer moving toward the bag.

F1 can throw the ball over the top of the bag while F3 is looking out into CF, not a balk, he threw directly to the base. F1 can throw to F3 who is moving toward the bag, and catches the ball 5 feet from the bag, if this is a legitimate "timing play" attempt at tagging R1 off the bag. F1 can throw to F3 who is 5 feet from the bag and stationary if F3 can then attempt a tag on R1.

5' is so close a putout attempt is easily possible. A timing play is just that, fool the offensive player into taking a big lead and then time a pickoff and F3 moviong toward the bag for a catch to get a tag out near the bag.

Evans video shows a couple of good timing plays, and then some that are not.

The Key is this

Was F3 making a play? As other said 5 ft with F3 moving is a deceptive move on the part of the defense - perfectly legal

here's a typcial balk move when F1 is throwing to F3.

Good Lefty up at the plate - Very slow runner on first base F3 is now playing WAY off the bag say 12 feet or so.

We all know or should know that when F1 is on the pitcher's plate he cannot feint a throw to first base. Sometimes F1 forgets the situation and turns to pick-off R1. He KNOWS he cannot feint there so he simply tosses the ball to F3 who is No -WHERE near the bag or making a play.

As Umpires we should know certain situations even though we are NOT playing anymore as IMO that helps us use our judgement better. While it's not a pre-requisite to have actually played baseball to become an umpire it helps

Pete Booth

Here's a one liner for you:

Coach: "Yeah, I was in AAA two years."
You: "Where were you?"
Coach: "New Orleans".
You: "Cool. When we were on vacation down there the car wouldn't start. I called you guys and you sent a mechanic right out!"



I had a h.s. coach recently tell us immediately at the plate conference he played at an SEC school. I told him I know the coach there, asked his name again, and told him I would tell the coach I met him. He kicked the dirt and admitted he "never really made the traveling roster". (No one-liner necessary!)

On Friday, I had a coach tell me that he played pro ball for four different organizations, and that he's never seen a player ejected for doing a pop-up slide and knocking a fielder down.

I said, "Well, that's great. What's your experience with high school baseball? That's what we're playing here."

Why not? It ends arguments almost instantly and prevents subsequent arguments. Follow that advice if you like prolonged and frequent arguments. A quick partial quotation of the wording of an applicable rule has always resulted in a quick and favorable end to an argument.

Unaccountable censorship. Welcome to the club.

If you quote a rule number it makes you sound like a smart a$$, number 1, and also you may be off by a number or get them confused so you'll look like a moron if the coach looks it up.

You should use RULE BOOK LANGUAGE if you feel like quoting a rule number.

"Coach, since his throw was the 2nd play by an infielder, by rule, it's 2 bases from where they were when the throw left the fielder's hand."

Used rule book language and applied it to the situation. If you feel like quoting a rule number, add the optional italics portion of the quote to make it sound more definitive.

better than...

"Coach, 7.05g says blah blah blah..."

Kev,

I re-read your post and it seems like we're on the same page. I think you just misunderstood what the person you were quoting was trying to say. He was talking about rule NUMBERS and not actual rules.

I don't care if God taught him that balk move. It is still a balk.

Unsupported accusation.

I don't see any deleted posts in this thread.

There was a thread where "flowerchild" made one of his usual asinine posts. Someone responded to it. Both were deleted.

If that was mbyron and this thread, that explains it.

My post was on topic and well-reasoned. :)

Probably. But, if it quotes the deleted post, it gets deleted, too.

I never said I quote a rule number, nor would I ever quote a rule number. I said, and follow this carefully, "A quick partial quotation of the WORDING of an applicable rule has always resulted in a quick and favorable end to an argument."

That's what I said and that's what I do. And it works, and I'm never doing it to be a smart a$$, but for resolution and fair play. Why do you have to be disagreeable?

You always censor and refuse or fail to accord any poster the courtesy of simple moderation, or at least personal accountability for your censorship of their posts. No reason stated publicly, and no answer to any PM. Nothing.

Moderating a forum always causes less anger and frustration than unaccountable censorship. You should try it.

Sure. Also not moderation.

Read my retraction I posted directly below that post

Why?

IMO, there have been some persuasive posts explaining why this isn't (necessarily) a balk. Rather than just declaring that it "is still a balk", please explain why you think this is a balk.

IMHO this would be a HTBT situation to start with and both sides of this have spoken. The OP requested some one-liners to use. If this play would have been judged a balk by all of us on this board because we were all at the game and this coach came out and gave that 9 pick-offs crap, this is just a line to use on this former AAA jerkof!.
Many times a pitcher with a good move will not balk 99 times out of 100 but that 1 time he does balk(players are not infallible), and the umpire calls the balk correctly does not warrant the crap about the other 99, and that he has never been called for this before, or he was taught this move by Roger Clemens(feel free to add any other pitchers names), etc., etc. Feel free not to use this line. It may or may not be a line that could or should ever be used at any level, or it may be a line that could only be used at a certain level.

What?!?!?!

Don't really see the problem with this play. It isn't a balk. See the Evans video. If F3 is breaking toward the bag and receives the ball 5 ft away he can easily apply a tag with the next step and in doing so is making a play. What is the problem?

Ahh, I see now. Your first reply was in response to the OP request for a one-liner. With the progression of posts after the OP, it appeared as though you were simply decrying those who asserted that this may not be a balk, and that's how I took it.