Granting time to walk the ball to the pitcher

[GA Umpire]

Originally Posted by Steven Tyler

Why would an infielder be scared to throw the ball back to the pitcher? They field it and throw to a base.

What's the difference if he throws the ball to the pitcher and then calls time and runs to the mound? Do you not grant time then?

It makes me wonder why a few seconds are so precious. Makes me think you don't want to be there in the first place. Games vary, so what. I'll bet some will crap their pants if the game goes extra innings.

I have never had a problem with excessive timeouts. When they start playing with a clock and giving each team a certain amount of timeouts, then I will worry more about it.

It has nothing to do with "not wanting to be there in the first place". However, it does have everything to do with not wanting a marathon when there is no time limit.

Also, the game's tempo is better if the game moves along. The defense makes more plays and the offense hits the ball more. If you ever move a game along instead of taking your marathons, you will notice the level of play is slightly better in many cases. Teams just play better when they keep their momentum going.

[PeteBooth]

Originally Posted by GA Umpire

.

I am NOT speaking for Steve but IMO I think he was referring to the following:

F2 says "Pete can I have TIME"

Me ok TIME. F2 trots out to talk to F1. Perhaps he was "crossed-up" on a pitch etc.

Therefore, if we grant F2 TIME why not the "other fielders" I agree I will not call TIME so that the players can "freeze" the runners or throw the ball back to F1 BUT there are certain situations in which fielders need to talk to F1.

Here's an example: F4/F6 notices that R2 is "stealing" signs. F4/F6 requests TIME so that he can convey this to F1 and therefore, change pitching signals. Also, F4/F6 notices that R2 is taking a BIG lead and they want to put a play on.

In summary: I agree if the fielder simply wants to call TIME to "freeze' runners or simply throw the ball back to F1 I will NOT grant it, BUT if a fielder requests TIME to talk to F1 I will most likely grant it because I do NOT know what the fielder wants to talk about with F1.

Common guys remember when we played. I once requested TIME simply to tell my buddy who was pithcing " Hey Tim did you see the blond in the second row".

Pete Booth

[Steven Tyler]

Originally Posted by GA Umpire

It has nothing to do with "not wanting to be there in the first place". However, it does have everything to do with not wanting a marathon when there is no time limit.

Also, the game's tempo is better if the game moves along. The defense makes more plays and the offense hits the ball more. If you ever move a game along instead of taking your marathons, you will notice the level of play is slightly better in many cases. Teams just play better when they keep their momentum going.

Being around a ballfield for almost fifty years, I have a pretty good clue how a ballgame is run. FYI, I don't have marathons, but I don't get my panties in a wad about the length or time of a game.

On the broad average, my typical game will run between 1:30 and 2:00 hours. What happens during the game for the most part dictates how long a game will take. An umpire can only do so much.

I'll tell you what I will do though. I have only broken up one mound meeting in the last five years. Haven't had a problem with coaches abusing their time on the mound. While I don't use the MLB rule of thumb here, I figure a few extra seconds to get his pitcher to possibly throw more strikes is a plus for me. Also, I always ask if the pitcher needs more than the allotted number of pitches on a cold day or night.

FWIW, I don't recall a time when an infielder asked for time to throw the ball back to the pitcher. I don't work Little League or adult ball. Don't even in all my years remember where an umpire has taken issue with timeouts.

Perhaps someone should get with the MLB umpires that work a Yankees-Red Sox game. Their games almost always go four hours.