Neighborhood plays

[mpeterson_1]

I am posting in regard to two different plays that generally get lumped together in discussion. The first is at 2nd base during an attempted double play. F4 straddles the bag, recieves the throw from F6 clearly before R1 gets there, relays the throw on to first, but never actually touches the bag. I am likely to call R1 out as long as F4 makes a throw on to first base. If, however, no throw is made, contact with the bag is necessary.
The second instance is on a play at first base in which the throw clearly beats the B/R and F3 pulls his foot off the base early to avoid injury. I'm also likely to call the B/R out as long as the play clearly beat him. However, if the play was close, F3 must keep contact with the bag.
These are both examples of ad/disad., no? I'd like to hear some thoughts on this.

[greymule]

Here's how I call those, though others will disagree. In the case of F4, I don't require that he make a throw. If he's "in the neighborhood" such that I can't tell for sure whether he's touching the bag or not, I assume he's touching. But if I see clearly that he's not touching--maybe straddling the bag with obvious space between the bag and each foot--I don't call the out.

With F3, though many plays on TV appear to show the fielder off 1B, he's usually on at the moment the ball hits the glove. I call that one the way I do a softball runner leaving too soon--it has to be obvious. But if it is obvious, the runner is safe.

That's the way I've called them, and I haven't had too much trouble. Now I'm sure we'll hear some opposing views.

[Gold_Spark]

I guess I'm a stickler.

If I see that the fielder doesn't touch the bag . . . I call the runner safe.

If I see that the first baseman doesn't have his foot on the bag . . . I call the runner safe.

That's just me and a response backed by my "brief" experience.

[bob jenkins]

Originally posted by Gold_Spark
I guess I'm a stickler.

If I see that the fielder doesn't touch the bag . . . I call the runner safe.

If I see that the first baseman doesn't have his foot on the bag . . . I call the runner safe.

That's just me and a response backed by my "brief" experience.

At the lower levels, the participants expect the game to be called by the written rules.

At the higher levels, the participants expect the game to be called by the unwritten rules.

[Tim C]

I have found that the "neighborhood play" at second base on the pivot is accepted by 99.99999% of players, coaches and umpires at levels where the players are old enough to shave.

Inexperienced umpires will eventually learn that the game of baseball is NOT always played as to the written rule.

[Gee]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by bob jenkins

"At the lower levels, the participants expect the game to be called by the written rules.

At the higher levels, the participants expect the game to be called by the unwritten rules."
-------------------------------------
Bob, Do you mean the level of participating players or participating umpires? Or both? G.

[GarthB]

Tee accurately stated:

I have found that the "neighborhood play" at second base on the pivot is accepted by 99.99999% of players, coaches and umpires at levels where the players are old enough to shave.

Inexperienced umpires will eventually learn that the game of baseball is NOT always played as to the written rule.

I will add that in my experience some coaches will accept, nay, expect the neighborhood call when on defense, yet protest vehemently when on offense. Very similar to a knee high outside corner strike.

GB

[jicecone]

This is an excerpt from one of Carl Childress's Books
"On The Bases". I read it 10 years ago and it still makes sense to me.

Im not sure if Im posting this properly or legally, but I felt it important enough to share with you.

I quote:

On The Bases by Carl Childress
Working the Bases: Safes and Outs

Finally, let's talk about what is probably the most famous play in baseball: The 'phantom- out at second.

Some umpires don't call the phantom out. Their "perfect game' argument goes like this:

"Probably the most abused of all the force plays is the first half of the double play around second base.

Players seem to accept as part of the game that the shortstop or second baseman is entitled to either tag in the area of the bag or touch the bag early and jump to the side of the base to receive the throw. Both of these are violations of the rules.

Clearly, that's right ... by the book. But real-life baseball isn't always called exactly by the book.

When I was growing up many years ago, I remember listening to Gordon McLendon, the "Old Scotsman." He was sitting in a Dallas studio doing the play-by-play of major league baseball: 'On the Liberty Broadcasting System, direct from Yankee Stadium by wire report...."

What we unsophisticated country boys didn't realize is that "wire report" meant Gordon was recreating the game from telegrams. I remember his discussing back then that major league umpires always called a "phantom” out at second. Most still do.

Since both sides accept the "out' as the legitimate result of the play, what do I gain by insisting on a literal interpretation of the rule? Rather, baseball tradition makes that play one of the easier ones I have to call in any game.

My advice: When the throw beats the runner a long way, don't worry about whether the fielder kicked the base after he released the ball or before he got it; don't even worry if he skipped kicking it altogether. Just hunker down and get ready for the play at first, where you're going to earn your money. In other words, the key consideration is: Could the fielder have made the play? If your answer is "Yes," you've got an out.

Naturally, if the throw is wild and it pulls the pivot man away you'll call, "Safe." And naturally, if that force play at second is not a part of a double play but the only chance the defense has for an out, or if it's the third out to end a half-inning, then once again, what I see is what they get: If the fielder doesn't have the ball when he tags the bag he doesn't get an out.

[PeteBooth]

Originally posted by mpeterson_1

I am posting in regard to two different plays that generally get lumped together in discussion. The first is at 2nd base during an attempted double play. F4 straddles the bag, recieves the throw from F6 clearly before R1 gets there, relays the throw on to first, but never actually touches the bag. I am likely to call R1 out as long as F4 makes a throw on to first base. If, however, no throw is made, contact with the bag is necessary.

The second instance is on a play at first base in which the throw clearly beats the B/R and F3 pulls his foot off the base early to avoid injury. I'm also likely to call the B/R out as long as the play clearly beat him. However, if the play was close, F3 must keep contact with the bag.
These are both examples of ad/disad., no? I'd like to hear some thoughts on this.

Your thread comes under the category of the "neighborhood play" or Calling that which is expected.

If the play is a "banger" then F4/F6 better be on the base, however, as others have mentioned if the player is out by a mile THEY ARE OUT unless the DEFENSE prooves to you that they are not.

This means that if the throw is a good one, and F4/F6 are where they are supposed to be - We have an Out. If the throw is bad pulls F4/F6 off bag etc. then we could have an out / safe depending upon the reactions of the fielders.

Is this Cheating ? NO because the same philosophy holds true for BOTH teams.

This type of play separates the inexperienced from the experienced umpire. I will give you an example.

When I first started umpiring for prime time I looked to make certain that F4/F6 touched the bag etc. on the routine stuff. On one particular play the runner was out by a mile but I call safe saying F4 didn't touch the second base bag, however, you talk about emabarrassing moments, by the time I called the runner safe, the runner himself was halfway to the dugout meaning even He knew he was out.

That was a lesson well learned. Also, as Bob Jenkins points out, this method is not understood by kids who don't shave so you have to rule accordingly.

Pete Booth

[Gold_Spark]

I think that's total crap. If you don't call the game by the rules . . . you're a hipocrite if you ever site a rule.

Unwritten rules? That's bologna regardless of how high the level of competition goes.

Maybe I am blind to reality, but I call the play as I see it and I expect others to do the same whether I'm coaching or playing.

[PeteBooth]

Originally posted by Gold_Spark

Maybe I am blind to reality, but I call the play as I see it and I expect others to do the same whether I'm coaching or playing.

Gold_Spark,

have you ever umpired a game by yourself?

If you did, then you KNOW you do not call'm as you see'm because you can't see everything.

When your solo, you have what I call "givens" meaning ball where it's supposed to be and the tag where it's supposed to be - WE HAVE AN OUT. The opposite is also true, meaning if throw is not good and fielder tags runner up high - We Have a safe call.

IMO the game deserves consistency and in a way the BU's calls on the bases should be consistent similar to a PU calling balls / strikes.

example; Let's assume you have 5 plays in which the fielder tags runner UP high. On 3 out of the 5 you call runner out and on 2 of them you call runner safe. In almost all instances when a tag is up high, the runner will be safe - That's what everyone EXPECTS and is an easy SELL for the umpire. Also, it is consistent. Now sometimes you call runner out and sometimes you call runner safe.

Both coaches will probably be scratching their heads because they don't how to instruct their players since there is no consistency from call to call.

Also, as was mentioned all of this depends upon what leagues you umpire in. I agree with your concept for youth leagues as the kids at that age only understand one thing. However, as they get older and learn more about the game they will come to know the neighborhood play etc.

Most games are umpired using the 2 person mechanics and therefore, we need consistency in the game. No one is talking about a fielder who is off the bag by a half a foot or so, we are talking in the vacinity or as the name says in the neighborhood

It's been around ever since baseball was invented. Today, because the kids don't play pick-up games like we did it's only accepted at certain levels. When I played even at the youth age we knew the term why! because we played baseball everyday unlike the kids of today.

Pete Booth

[GarthB]

Sparky sez:

I think that's total crap. If you don't call the game by the rules . . . you're a hipocrite (sic) if you ever site (sic) a rule.

1. Is your strike zone 17 inches wide?
2. Are the top and bottom perfect by the rule book?
3. When working one man ball do you get to second to see if the tag was made on the steal or do you judge by whether the glove got down in time?
4. What do you think is meant by running out of the baseline to avoid a tag?
5. On a bang bang play what do you call when the ball and touch arrive at the same time?
6. Do you eject every coach who leaves his spot to "discuss" a judgement call?
7. What do you do when a pitcher rubs the ball on his uniform?

Please, let us know if you call each of these "by the rules". If not, sign your post "bigger hypocrite."

Then, come back in three years and, provided you have three years of additional experience and not one year's additional experience three times, we'll discuss the subject again.

GB

[Gold_Spark]

You call it how you see it.

1.) I call a strike, if I think it's a strike.
2.) As perfect as humanly possible.
3.) Use my bst judgement from the position I am located.
4.) Runner establishes his own baseline. There is three foot given on an attempt to avoid a tag. If by my judgement the runner runs more than 3 feet away from the fielder to avoid a tag . . . the runner is out. I use my best judgement.
5.) The possibility of the ball and player arriving at the EXACT, PRECISE same time is near impossible. I make the call to the best of my ability.
6.) If a coach leaves his spot to question a call . . . during our meeting I'll ask him to call Time out on the next question before he comes to me. If he disobeys my request . . . I'll then send him to the dugout for the rest of the game.
7.) Pretty much the same thing. I warn him not to repeat the action. I'll check the ball. If in my judgement he intentionally distorted the ball by the action . . . he's ejected.


Finally . . . What I MEANT with my post . . . is that if you don't call the game by the rules, TO THE BEST OF YOUR ABILITY, then you are a hipocrite. But to deliberately "forget" a rule . . . that is still total crap.

[His High Holiness]

Gold-spark;

Recently, Carl Childress sent me an email and asked me to write an article for eumpire entitled "So you think that you're an umpire" He wanted me to do it without "pi$$ing off the entire world".

I sent an article back to Carl and told him that umpires only pi$$ off half the world with each of their calls. Since I am an umpire, I promised to pi$$ off only half of his readers with my article.

I have a feeling that you will be among the half that are pi$$ed off. Therefore, when the article gets published, you may want ot ignore it. However, from your writings, it appears that you need to read it more than most.

Peter

[jicecone]

"Then, come back in three years and, provided you have three years of additional experience and not one year's additional experience three times, we'll discuss the subject again."

As the gentlmen have tried to tell you, at some point you will appreciate experience as much as you appreciate following the rules to the letter of the law. This holds true for all officiating. It is good that you are reading and following the rules, now go that extra step and learn intent and history of the game your officiating. I guarentee you, you will see things differently.

Many treat the rule books as contracts, or legal documents,
or cook books to play a game. They are guidelines. When the day comes that you can read in between the lines, then you will find that your just starting to become a good official.

GOOD LUCK