Horrible Mechanics

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by Reffing Rev.

I agree that is what the book says...
I disagree its the best way to cover this play. (and you are free to disagree with me)

Okay, I disagree and here is why:

Originally Posted by Reffing Rev.

I have enough intelligence to in the context of a proper pre-game adjust the mechanics to better cover the play.

This is the problem. You use one set of mechanics, confuse your partner, he tries using it with a different partner. Pretty soon, you have too many different ways of doing what should be STANDARDIZED throughout the baseball world.

The best way to cover the play is the way the mechanics say, and that is to go to the library, read the book, go home if it is not a catch/tag/advance. This is the only time PU has 3rd on this play. He needs to retreat home on a base hit, whether a clean hit or a trapped ball, whatever. This is the best coverage on this play. The only time the PU should have to bust as$ home from the cutout is on an overthrow at 3rd after a tag from R2 at second. Otherwise, the PU shouldn't be anywhere in the vicinity.

Originally Posted by RichMSN

Personally, I don't care about evaluations. I don't have people watching me work around here and I know more than the people they'd get anyway.

Amen on that one.

Originally Posted by RichMSN

I care more when a plate guy has happy feet and feels like he needs to help in places where it's not called for.

My biggest pet peeve while I'm the BU is to have the PU come up the 3rd base line when he isn't supposed to. Like on a naked triple, and I'm chugging into 3rd, look up and see the PU flying up the line about to enter the cut. That frosts my poptarts, I tell ya! Here I'm busting my butt from A all the way around, well ahead of the runner, and here this guy is assuming I can't run or something. I make sure to give them a look that shoots daggers, then talk to them about it later.

Originally Posted by RichMSN

If a ding would be in order, it would be labeled "false hustle."

Yes, false hustle is exactly what it is. Just like it is false hustle for the PU to run all the way up the 1st base line past the 45ft. line on a ground ball with no runners on. Instead of coming to a set position as the throw approaches F3, the false hustler continues running toward first base to give the appearance that he's a real jackrabbit. All the coaches oooh and aaah about how he hustles, but he isn't set to see the play he's running up there to watch. I see it all too often, especially from the young "fit and trim" umpires trying to show off their speed.

[GA Umpire]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

Okay, I disagree and here is why:

This is the problem. You use one set of mechanics, confuse your partner, he tries using it with a different partner. Pretty soon, you have too many different ways of doing what should be STANDARDIZED throughout the baseball world.

The best way to cover the play is the way the mechanics say, and that is to go to the library, read the book, go home if it is not a catch/tag/advance. This is the only time PU has 3rd on this play. He needs to retreat home on a base hit, whether a clean hit or a trapped ball, whatever. This is the best coverage on this play. The only time the PU should have to bust as$ home from the cutout is on an overthrow at 3rd after a tag from R2 at second. Otherwise, the PU shouldn't be anywhere in the vicinity.

I'll have to agree with this. Go figure. I agree with Steve on something. Even though I think the PU is in a very good position when he comes up for the play at 3B, it will cause less confusion. I don't see it as "false hustle" b/c it is covering as many bases as possible with only 2 guys.

However, it does remain consistent and until they change it to how I think this type of play should be handled, then I will remain with the book and even then, I would be with the book. And, I am assuming this is a generic way to just cover all plays instead of trying to pick and choose when a deviation is needed.

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by GA Umpire

However, it does remain consistent and until they change it to how I think this type of play should be handled, then I will remain with the book and even then, I would be with the book.

Don't hold your breath.

[GA Umpire]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

Don't hold your breath.

No doubt. Maybe if I get on the committee. Hmmmmmm... Who do I have to bribe for that one?

[Rich]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

Yes, false hustle is exactly what it is. Just like it is false hustle for the PU to run all the way up the 1st base line past the 45ft. line on a ground ball with no runners on. Instead of coming to a set position as the throw approaches F3, the false hustler continues running toward first base to give the appearance that he's a real jackrabbit. All the coaches oooh and aaah about how he hustles, but he isn't set to see the play he's running up there to watch. I see it all too often, especially from the young "fit and trim" umpires trying to show off their speed.

Well, I'll plead guilty on this one. I really think coming set is overrated.

I make calls on the run in football and basketball all the time and I'll frequently run "through the catch" when I'm out in the outfield. I'll frequently run until the play is completed at first and continue on through a U-turn back to the plate. But I'm not doing it to show false hustle. I'd just rather keep moving.

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

Well, I'll plead guilty on this one. I really think coming set is overrated.

I make calls on the run in football and basketball all the time and I'll frequently run "through the catch" when I'm out in the outfield. I'll frequently run until the play is completed at first and continue on through a U-turn back to the plate. But I'm not doing it to show false hustle. I'd just rather keep moving.

On 99% of the routine plays at first, this is okay, and as you say, you are just making a U-turn. But if you, as the PU, see that it's going to be a real nut-cutter at first, don't you think you would see the play better from the "standing set" position than running with your head bobbing up and down?

[MrUmpire]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

Well, I'll plead guilty on this one. I really think coming set is overrated.

Too many studies have shown the effect that body motion has on visual perception and accuracy. Just because other sporst don't allow the luxury of coming set doesn't mean it should be downplayed or discarded.

One doesn't need to come to hands on knees set, but one should at least come to a standing set (motionless) at the time of play. Even on DP's one should be at a standing set for the play and them move while signalling the call at second and then come set again for the play at first.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by MrUmpire

Too many studies have shown the effect that body motion has on visual perception and accuracy. Just because other sporst don't allow the luxury of coming set doesn't mean it should be downplayed or discarded.

One doesn't need to come to hands on knees set, but one should at least come to a standing set (motionless) at the time of play. Even on DP's one should be at a standing set for the play and them move while signalling the call at second and then come set again for the play at first.

I agree. I have tried (especially in basketball) to be set or stationary more often, especially as lead, on drives to the hoop and other plays where there's a lot going on. I find it helps me see what's going on.

Football is another story, though it's often possible to get set as a pass comes down.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by MrUmpire

Too many studies have shown the effect that body motion has on visual perception and accuracy. Just because other sporst don't allow the luxury of coming set doesn't mean it should be downplayed or discarded.

One doesn't need to come to hands on knees set, but one should at least come to a standing set (motionless) at the time of play. Even on DP's one should be at a standing set for the play and them move while signalling the call at second and then come set again for the play at first.

I agree, when I'm making a call or when I read a bad throw in the infield or a trouble ball in the outfield. But if it's a can of corn or a true throw? I'm not needed anyway, why stop?