Which rules do you enforce

[PeteBooth]

Burried in the OP concerning sectional 1-0 controversy was a recollection of game given to us by Major Dave as follows:

Quote:
The home plate umpire, however, called Irvin out at the plate because a teammate gave him a high five before he touched the base.

According to baseball and NIAA rules, the call was legit, but many questioned the need to make it at such a critical juncture of the game.

The question?

Do you enforce EVERYTHING

Case and point

The Mets played the BOSOX this past weekend. In the top of 9 with the Mets trailing by a run and Sheffield on base, Omir Santos hit what turned out to be the game winnng HR after replay.

After Joe West and company came out after reviewing the replay, Joe gave the HR signal. Out comes Francona of the BOSOX and the announcers wondered what he was doing. After all the decision regarding the HR had been made, however, that was not what Francona was referring to.

Francona was referring to the fact that Met third base coach Manny Acta grabbed Sheffield after Sheffield rounded thrid base thinking that the ball was an HR to begin with.

The HR call stood.

Mark McGwire was also grabbed by the first base coach on way to his memorable HR at that time.

The point is this.

There are RULES but do you call them as in the situation Major Dave referred to. We already know that MLB overlooks some of these "Ticky Tac" rules

Pete Booth

[johnnyg08]

Often times, I think we have to look at the spirit of the rule, versus the letter of the rule. However, based upon that, everybody sees things a bit differently.

For example, at the FED level, do you call every single balk that you see or do you tell the pitcher to "don't do that" on some of the more ticky-tack balks?

Another one...if neither teams says anything about the "gorilla arm" do you just let it go until the other team asks you to enforce it?

I think there are times where we have to enforce the rules as they're written and times where we simply have to play ball.

This could be a very good thread for discussion around the issues you're asking about.

This season, I've watched the MLB guys leave the field on a walk-off HR...w/o even watching the touch at home...did they walk off the field since the runs (3-run walk off) that already legally touched had "won" the game and even if the hitter misses home plate, the game is over anyway?

[archangel]

Originally Posted by PeteBooth

Burried in the OP concerning sectional 1-0 controversy was a recollection of game given to us by Major Dave as follows:

Quote:
Quote:
The home plate umpire, however, called Irvin out at the plate because a teammate gave him a high five before he touched the base.

According to baseball and NIAA rules, the call was legit, but many questioned the need to make it at such a critical juncture of the game.
The question?
Do you enforce EVERYTHING
Case and point

Francona was referring to the fact that Met third base coach Manny Acta grabbed Sheffield after Sheffield rounded thrid base thinking that the ball was an HR to begin with.
The HR call stood.
Mark McGwire was also grabbed by the first base coach on way to his memorable HR at that time.
There are RULES but do you call them as in the situation Major Dave referred to. We already know that MLB overlooks some of these "Ticky Tac" rules
Pete Booth

Thankfully, FED doesnt have a rule against touching (non-assistance type) a runner, i.e. high five when coming home.

In addition there is FED Case Play 3.2.2 A:
B1 hits a HR and while rounding 3rd, trips over the base. Coach helps B1 to his feet. RULING: The ball is dead and, since B1 is awarded 4 bases for the HR, he is allowed to score with this type of assistance.

I'd like to say that 100% of us say "No, I dont enforce everything" but absolutes are......

I dont look to close at a coach's clothes, as long as they are team colors. In Ohio, its cold in the Spring so......
I dont look to see if an on deck circle is legal size. I have enough to do.
And if I were to do youth ball, I'd probably loosen things up a bit(probably).

[Ump153]

Originally Posted by PeteBooth

Burried in the OP concerning sectional 1-0 controversy was a recollection of game given to us by Major Dave as follows:


Quote:

The question?

Do you enforce EVERYTHING

Case and point

The Mets played the BOSOX this past weekend. In the top of 9 with the Mets trailing by a run and Sheffield on base, Omir Santos hit what turned out to be the game winnng HR after replay.

After Joe West and company came out after reviewing the replay, Joe gave the HR signal. Out comes Francona of the BOSOX and the announcers wondered what he was doing. After all the decision regarding the HR had been made, however, that was not what Francona was referring to.

Francona was referring to the fact that Met third base coach Manny Acta grabbed Sheffield after Sheffield rounded thrid base thinking that the ball was an HR to begin with.

The HR call stood.

Mark McGwire was also grabbed by the first base coach on way to his memorable HR at that time.

The point is this.

There are RULES but do you call them as in the situation Major Dave referred to. We already know that MLB overlooks some of these "Ticky Tac" rules

Pete Booth

Let's go back to your premise:

According to baseball and NIAA rules, the call was legit, but many questioned the need to make it at such a critical juncture of the game.


Are you certain that this is accurate?

[MajorDave]

set of rules the call was incorrect based upon my research. I went to web and found NIAA official's site and looked at the state rules. Nevada calls them regulations. Nothing in there to prohibit a touching of a runner on a dead ball. I then spent an hour (slow wet Saturday morning) reading through my FED rules book, casebook and umpires book. There is nothing in any of those three books to prohibit the high five of a player on a homerun trot before he touches home plate. I seem to remember in an old FED casebook from sometime in the last three years that there was a case stating that this was not assistance and umpires were instructed not to call players out for this. Additionally, on a home run the ball is dead thus no prohibition on players out of the dugout. Even if there was the penalty is to first warn then eject and that is for the offending players not the batter-runner.

In summary, this umpire got this very wrong unless there is a secret hidden rule in Nevada that we are not privy to. Sort of a rule myth that a championship series umpire screwed up. I would not have called that, ever.

OOO? I think so. I am still annoyed by this ruling for some reason. I also think that the stupid coach, unless there is some secret rule for Nevada, goofed up too by not protesting the ruling and the game in a timely manner.

My two cents or so, your mileage and analysis may vary.

[Ump153]

This isn't a case of selecting which rules to enforce. This is a case of not knowing the rules, by almost everyone involved...the umpires, coaches, and reporters.

[SanDiegoSteve]

I believe it was an old myth that you couldn't touch the home run hitter until he touched the plate. I remember youth ball teams would always yell at each other, "dont' touch him...dont' touch him!" while lining up at the plate to congratulate their hero. I always thought to myself, "why not?" I certainly would not call someone out for such a petty BS call like that.

This is truly an example of an umpire wanting to inject himself into the game, as if it weren't enough to be a participant in an official capacity.

[David B]

Originally Posted by PeteBooth

Burried in the OP concerning sectional 1-0 controversy was a recollection of game given to us by Major Dave as follows:




The question?

Do you enforce EVERYTHING

C
Pete Booth

I don't think a good umpires ever enforces everything. That's what makes the difference IMO between an average umpire and the one who gets selected to do the "money" games.

You must know when to make the call and when to simply let them play baseball.

But, you must also have the backbone necessary to enforce the right call when it's needed.

At least that's my take.

Thanks
David

[Blue37]

Originally Posted by PeteBooth

The question?

Do you enforce EVERYTHING

Pete Booth

Great question.

I am a firm believer in situational ethics, and I am a firm believer in situational officiating. I take the following into account: The age of the participants, the skill level of the participants, the score of the game, the history between the teams, the presence of an observer, and most importantly, the expectations of the league and the assignor.

I do not want this post to get too long, so I will stick with one example, balks. The older the player, the better the skills, the closer the game, the tighter I will call the balks. If the teams want balks called tighter or if my assignor wants balks called tighter, I will oblige. The presence of an observer impacts how I call. I am fairly strict to start with, and am even less likely to let something slide if an observer is present.

It has been said that our customer is the game itself, and, in part, that is true, but the game does not assign me, and does not write my checks. I try to ascertain what my assignor and the leagues want called and how they want it called, and adjust to those expectations.

[ozzy6900]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

I believe it was an old myth that you couldn't touch the home run hitter until he touched the plate. I remember youth ball teams would always yell at each other, "dont' touch him...dont' touch him!" while lining up at the plate to congratulate their hero. I always thought to myself, "why not?" I certainly would not call someone out for such a petty BS call like that.

This is truly an example of an umpire wanting to inject himself into the game, as if it weren't enough to be a participant in an official capacity.

It was an old NCAA rule (I think softball had this also also) designed to keep the players from lining up down the 3rd base line to congratulate the HR hitter. The schools claimed that this action was intimidating because the offensive players were taunting F1 & F2 during this congratulatory action. Over the years, it was quietly removed but the whole mess filtered down to the lower schools and leagues.

The main thing is to keep the plate clear so we can see the runners & BR touch the plate, just in case the defense wants to make an appeal.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

I believe it was an old myth that you couldn't touch the home run hitter until he touched the plate. I remember youth ball teams would always yell at each other, "dont' touch him...dont' touch him!" while lining up at the plate to congratulate their hero. I always thought to myself, "why not?" I certainly would not call someone out for such a petty BS call like that.

This is truly an example of an umpire wanting to inject himself into the game, as if it weren't enough to be a participant in an official capacity.

When I have a ton of people out to celebrate, I proactively get in there and say simply "Let him touch. Let him touch." Would I do anything if they mobbed him before he touched? No. Am I trying to avoid a near-certain poopstorm? Yes.

[johnnyg08]

How many of you wait to give the pitcher the ball until the batter/runner crosses home plate? Sometimes I wait, sometimes I don't. What is your rationale for doing so? The PBUC and MLBUM says to wait until the runner crosses home plate before giving the pitcher a new ball.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by johnnyg08

How many of you wait to give the pitcher the ball until the batter/runner crosses home plate? Sometimes I wait, sometimes I don't. What is your rationale for doing so? The rulebook says to wait until the runner crosses home plate before giving the pitcher a new ball.

Not me. If the pitcher is looking, I'll throw him a ball while the BU takes the BR around. If the pitcher isn't looking, I'll hand one to the catcher.

[jicecone]

Originally Posted by David B

I don't think a good umpires ever enforces everything. That's what makes the difference IMO between an average umpire and the one who gets selected to do the "money" games.

You must know when to make the call and when to simply let them play baseball.

But, you must also have the backbone necessary to enforce the right call when it's needed.

At least that's my take.

Thanks
David

Couldn't agree more. You can tell the difference between the official that reads the rules and the one that studies them.

When I officiated Ice Hockey we used to talk about those rules that are black and white and those rules that were in the "Grey Area." If you missed the the black and white rule, then it was just that much more difficult to sell the call when the rule was in the "Grey Area." I believe Baseball has a lot more grey area rules however, that means you need to study them more for the intent and application in order to come up with the right decision at the right time. Add hustle, attitude and game management skills to your game, and experience and your ability to enforce the most trivial of rules at the correct time will generally be more acceptable. And yes, there are exceptions to this too but, that is only because we are human.

So in general, I enforce everything when its applicable, as determined by my experience.

[Dave Reed]

Originally Posted by johnnyg08

How many of you wait to give the pitcher the ball until the batter/runner crosses home plate? Sometimes I wait, sometimes I don't. What is your rationale for doing so? The rulebook says to wait until the runner crosses home plate before giving the pitcher a new ball.

Really? What rule and where?