When did they change the balk rule?

[UMP25]

This is more for amusement than anything else.

NCAA D3 nonconference doubleheader (two 7s). Top of 7th in game 1 with the home team trailing 6-4. They've made a slow comeback on Senior Day, where graduating seniors are being honored with their mothers, since it's also Mother's Day. Runners are on first and third with 1 out. Pitcher is throwing back to first base a few times to hold R1 on, for obvious reasons. He finally delivers the pitch, only to race right through the Set without stopping. At all. I call the balk, the pitch isn't hit, and I award bases. R3 consequently scores. I turn around and find the home team's head coach already at the plate yelling, "Why do you have to call a balk in every game you work?" I replied rhetorically, "Why does your pitcher have to commit a balk in every game?"

"You can't call a balk in a tight game like this! You can't call a balk in a situation like this," he tells me. I purposely look to the field where R2 is now on second and say to the head coach, "It's instinctive for me. Your pitcher sees it and I call it. I am not concerned about the position of the runners or the score of the game, but before I call a balk again, I'll be sure to check the score of the game or where the runners are, because I didn't know balks are called dependent on the game situation of runners' position."

"You're phucking...!" He never did finish that comment, which was irrelevant, because as soon as I heard the word "phucking," which followed "You're," I tossed him. He gets madder and asks why I ejected him. I tell him, to which he replies, "Oh yeah? Well, you're phucking horrible! You're phucking terrible!" as he's chest-to-chest with me now.

I literally had to prevent myself from laughing, because I kinda thought this was amusing (I don't get so worked up over such arguments and ejections). I've got to check Evans's manual or the J/R book to see where they changed the balk rule to be dependent on runners' positions or the game's score.

[Ump Rube]

I can't say for sure but I think you can find that ruling right after it talks about the hands being part of the bat. If you make it to the point where the "tie" goes to the runner you have gone to far. You might also want to check around the part where foul tips are dead balls.

[HokieUmp]

Originally Posted by UMP25

This is more for amusement than anything else.

...snip ...

I completely get the issue with the coach - if he wants situational calls, he should be a football or hockey coach. (I love hockey, but the officiating in the NHL makes me crazy - either don't call anything at all, or call it the same way the entire game!)

Anyway, I have a question from the game managment side of the house. I have about 60 posts to your 1,200+, and the only college guys I umpire for would be some summer wood-bat and NABA (where they're hidden among other players) games, but ... if someone like me were to post a similar story, wouldn't the ol.., er, experienced umpires here just rip me for baiting the head coach?

Certainly, the coach proved his rat-hood by going down the Situational Cul-de-sac, but your initial response, followed with the talk about checking the runners next time, walked him right into the EJ.

Or is this some college thing, where we can do that at that level? Again, I'm not a college umpire, so maybe 'the game' is played a little differently there.

[UmpJM]

HokieUmp,

No, UMP25's baiting the coach into an ejection was completely unprofessional - even at the college level.

Also violates the NCAA code of ethics for umpires.

JM

[ozzy6900]

Originally Posted by UmpJM (nee CoachJM)

HokieUmp,

No, UMP25's baiting the coach into an ejection was completely unprofessional - even at the college level.

Also violates the NCAA code of ethics for umpires.

JM

I don't consider what UMP25 said to the coach as baiting. Being a smart a$$, maybe but I would have probably gone the same way with this conversation. I have to be honest, I liked the response!

[UMP25]

To each his own, Ozzy. If I've learned one thing in this forum, it's that no matter what I may have said to the head coach, there'd be SOMEone here to criticize me for it under the category of "unprofessional" or something similar. After all, it's much easier to be an Internet umpire and pretend to tell real veteran umpires what they ought to do on the ball field.

My abilities are well-known by many who have worked with me, so I'm not worried about a couple people claiming they know what's best.

[cardinalfan]

Originally Posted by UMP25

To each his own, Ozzy. If I've learned one thing in this forum, it's that no matter what I may have said to the head coach, there'd be SOMEone here to criticize me for it under the category of "unprofessional" or something similar. After all, it's much easier to be an Internet umpire and pretend to tell real veteran umpires what they ought to do on the ball field.

My abilities are well-known by many who have worked with me, so I'm not worried about a couple people claiming they know what's best.

I never said I know what's best. Just different philosophies, which we're all entitled to.
I think ejections are a good thing. The first 15 years I called, I tossed a lot of coaches & players. Maybe that's why I don't have to anymore.

BTW, since my first post in this thread, I do remember tossing a coach in a Legion game last summer. Didn't have to bait him into it. 1st base coach made a comment about my partner's strike zone. I told him I'd heard enough. He didn't listen. Next time I dumped him.

[Durham]

Originally Posted by HokieUmp

I completely get the issue with the coach - if he wants situational calls, he should be a football or hockey coach. (I love hockey, but the officiating in the NHL makes me crazy - either don't call anything at all, or call it the same way the entire game!)

Anyway, I have a question from the game managment side of the house. I have about 60 posts to your 1,200+, and the only college guys I umpire for would be some summer wood-bat and NABA (where they're hidden among other players) games, but ... if someone like me were to post a similar story, wouldn't the ol.., er, experienced umpires here just rip me for baiting the head coach?

Certainly, the coach proved his rat-hood by going down the Situational Cul-de-sac, but your initial response, followed with the talk about checking the runners next time, walked him right into the EJ.

Or is this some college thing, where we can do that at that level? Again, I'm not a college umpire, so maybe 'the game' is played a little differently there.

Nahhh, he baited him a lil bit.

[johnnyg08]

it's hard to restrain sometimes...but it's not a good idea to bait, then eject.

[UMP25]

I have no reservations about what I said to him. Yes, I'm a veteran umpire, and yes, occasionally I may use some sarcasm in my responses to head coaches in order to get my point across.

[johnnyg08]

obviously it's your choice to choose that style.

[Kevin Finnerty]

Originally Posted by UMP25

I have no reservations about what I said to him. Yes, I'm a veteran umpire, and yes, occasionally I may use some sarcasm in my responses to head coaches in order to get my point across.

If you say the stuff you said to him, then you baited him into it, and it's not professional. Everyone has a job to do, and when a coach overdoes his, it's bad for the game. The same is true when one of us overdoes our job. It's not an acceptable practice. It was way too much talking even if it was appropriate. But it was inappropriate.

I have a few things in my game that I am proud of, and my zero coach ejections is one of them. All of my ejections are of players and they were for malicious contact (6), or unsportsmanlike conduct (2). It's that way, because nothing I say or do while emotions are running high makes the situation get worse. I let the blood cool, and then we have a conversation, and I win and the coach goes away and the game goes on. I am as sarcastic or as blunt as most, but not when I assume the role of umpire. When I assume that role, for the good of the game, I compromise my personality in favor of a game that features the players, and not the coaches or the umpires.