Home run - missed the plate!!

[STL_UMP]

14u Tournament final
Out of the park 2 run homer and BR is coming around 3rd to be greeted by his friends. Goes to step on the plate and makes NO contact with the white portion of the plate and barely the black. (which probably had about 1/2" showing) and leaves a big 'ol footprint. (just in case I needed some evidence)

Catcher looks at me and says "did he miss the plate?" I say nothing and throw out a new ball to the pitcher. Catcher then says something to someone in the stands about "missing the plate?". I get behind home plate to try and get things going so I won't have to make the call. Catcher gets in his position and someone yells out for him to make an appeal. I'm hoping the pitcher doesn't step off so I can call it a ball.. He steps off, throws to the catcher, he appeal, and I make the out call.

Then the "ruckus" begins. Though I have to say it was not the **** storm I expected. Both base coaches didn't say a thing. In fact the 1st base coach was chatting with the BU about how it looked like he missed home plate. HC comes out and pleads his case but he knows there is not much that can be done.

What was interesting was that the loudest complaints that I heard came from folks in the stands who complained about "taking the home run away from the player." And those complaints were NOT directed at me but at the other team. Go figure. I had one guy say "We have it on video. Do you want to see it." And to his credit, after the inning was over he apologized for trying to "show me up"

Rain came an inning later and they ended up winning 2 - 0.

We even got a compliment or two about how we were some of the best umpires they have had all year. I know, it's coming from the winners but I 'll take what I can get.

[BretMan]

With respect to a runner touching the plate, the black portion is part of the plate. It is the side of the plate, just like all the other bases have a vertical side that rises up from the ground. If the runner had, say, kicked only the side of third base, would you say that he missed third base?

[dileonardoja]

1.05 Home base shall be marked by a five-sided slab of whitened rubber. It shall be a 17-inch square with two of the corners removed so that one edge is 17 inches long, two adjacent sides are 8½ inches and the remaining two sides are 12 inches and set at an angle to make a point. It shall be set in the ground with the point at the intersection of the lines extending from home base to first base and to third base; with the 17-inch edge facing the pitcher’s plate, and the two 12-inch edges coinciding with the first and third base lines. The top edges of home base shall be beveled and the base shall be fixed in the ground level with the ground surface. (See drawing D in Diagram 2.)

So there are no vertical sides of the plate. So if the player doesn't step on a portion of the 216.75 square inch surface area, he technically did not touch home plate. Now since our fields are not maintained by MLB crews we see all kinds of anomalies the cause us to umpire, I would like to see dirt between the plate and the foot before I call it.

[briancurtin]

Originally Posted by STL_UMP

I get behind home plate to try and get things going so I won't have to make the call.

Originally Posted by STL_UMP

I'm hoping the pitcher doesn't step off so I can call it a ball..

Just let things happen as they should and make the right call for the situation. If you don't want to deal with appeal plays - you should state that at the plate conference (this won't go over well).

[Rich Ives]

Originally Posted by BretMan

With respect to a runner touching the plate, the black portion is part of the plate. It is the side of the plate, just like all the other bases have a vertical side that rises up from the ground. If the runner had, say, kicked only the side of third base, would you say that he missed third base?

Nice try. Wrong, but nice try. The plate is mounted flush to the ground so there is no legal vertical side.

If you're using the LL rule book they spell it out in 1.05 for the uninformed.

[JJ]

So if the runner does touch the black exposed part of home plate he still hasn't touched the plate?

What about that pitch that is "on the black"...is that really a ball?

Questions, questions.....

JJ

[TwoBits]

Originally Posted by JJ

So if the runner does touch the black exposed part of home plate he still hasn't touched the plate?

What about that pitch that is "on the black"...is that really a ball?

Questions, questions.....

JJ

"The black" is not supposed to be visible if the plate is properly installed. However I will be the first to admit there are very few fields in my area in which home plate is installed in the correct fashion and I find it difficult to not call a strike when a pitched ball crosses "the black".

[lawump]

Originally Posted by STL_UMP

We even got a compliment or two about how we were some of the best umpires they have had all year. I know, it's coming from the winners but I 'll take what I can get.

You're in the wrong profession if you are in need of, or are searching for, compliments; even if you are just "tak(ing) what (you) can get." The possible exception being an occassional compliment from a crewmate.

[Rich Ives]

Originally Posted by jj

so if the runner does touch the black exposed part of home plate he still hasn't touched the plate?

correct!

what about that pitch that is "on the black"...is that really a ball?

yes - but it's much harder to judge because of the speed of the ball and the lack of contact with the actual plate.
questions, questions.....

Jj

ok?

[MrUmpire]

Originally Posted by BretMan

With respect to a runner touching the plate, the black portion is part of the plate. It is the side of the plate, just like all the other bases have a vertical side that rises up from the ground. If the runner had, say, kicked only the side of third base, would you say that he missed third base?

Wrong. Properly installed, the black does not show. Improperly installed, the black is still not part of the plate proper. Umpiring 101.

[jTheUmp]

Originally Posted by TwoBits

"The black" is not supposed to be visible if the plate is properly installed. However I will be the first to admit there are very few fields in my area in which home plate is installed in the correct fashion and I find it difficult to not call a strike when a pitched ball crosses "the black".

+1

I did game last week (11U, NFHS with some special modifications, namely "no stealing until the pitch crosses the plate") on a field where the plate was installed raised up over a full inch from the surrounding ground.

Naturally, at one point a pitched ball struck the front 'lip' of the plate and ricocheted back to the pitcher. R1 then tries for second, F1 throws the ball into CF. I kill the play and send R1 back to first. (no stealing till the pitch crosses the plate, dontcha know, and the pitch never 'crossed' the plate). Awarded a ball to the batter, chalked the whole experience up to "sometimes you just gotta umpire".

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by jTheUmp

Awarded a ball to the batter, chalked the whole experience up to "sometimes you just gotta umpire".

the ball never crossed the foul line, either.

[BretMan]

Originally Posted by dileonardoja

Now since our fields are not maintained by MLB crews we see all kinds of anomalies the cause us to umpire, I would like to see dirt between the plate and the foot before I call it.

Exactly. And on the play described you would not have seen dirt between the foot and the plate. So I guess you wouldn't call it, even though the 216.75 square inch portion wasn't touched.

[dileonardoja]

Originally Posted by BretMan

Exactly. And on the play described you would not have seen dirt between the foot and the plate. So I guess you wouldn't call it, even though the 216.75 square inch portion wasn't touched.

If you are asking me then my answer is I wouldn't call it unless I was sure. Seeing dirt would provide the certainty. I am not down there with a magnifying glass and micrometer, I'm maybe 4 or 5 feet away and I want to be sure

[BretMan]

No, I wasn't asking you'd call. I was trying to clarify your own statements (which seem to conflict).

First you said that the runner had to touch the white, then you presented a scenario about "seeing dirt" whereby a runner could touch only the black and you wouldn't call that as missing the plate.