Help a broadcaster out (re: baseball myths)

[voiceoflg]

From another thread...

Originally Posted by Larry1953

There should be a league directive to the announcers with a list of myths they should stop perpetuating!

What are common mistakes we broadcasters make that need correcting. Because of this forum, I never say "the hands are part of the bat" and wince when I hear it. But what are some others?

[Larry1953]

Common Baseball Myths

This is a good place to start :-)

[Larry1953]

This situation often causes incorrect comments from announcers and I saw it in an Astros game about a month ago: the left fielder made a fairly long run for a fly ball toward the wall at MMP. He caught it near the heel of his glove with an outstretched arm. He took a step or two and in the motion of transferring the ball to his throwing hand dropped it. Ump ruled no-catch. The announcers rambled on about "while transferring" and "he took two steps" to explain why they thought it was a catch. I think the confusion comes with how readily out calls are made at 2B when DP throws are muffed. There is a difference between catching a batted ball and a throw and the degree of "control" required.

[kylejt]

I'll give you my top three:

Foul tip: A foul tip is a ball that goes from the bat, sharply and directly to the catchers mitt (or bare hand, ouch), and is caught. Most announcers think that any ball fouled off at the plate is a foul tip. Not so, only the ones that are actually caught.

Ground rule double: Ground rules are those local rules that only pertain to that certain ball park. Tarps on the field, over head wires, domed stadiums, etc. A ball that just bounces over the fence is not a ground rule double, just a two base award.

Check swings: This is a tough one, because the definition of an attempt to strike at the ball is fuzzy. What it isn't is the bat going past the plate, the batter breaking his wrists or other myth. It's just did the umpire think the batter attempted to strike at it.

[Larry1953]

Milo Hamilton always makes it a big deal to call it a "book rule double" or a rule book double", usually with a lengthy explanation of why it is that and not a ground rule double. I'd much rather he just say GRD and spare the other stuff. We get the idea already. What bugs me is when the announcers don't know the ground rules of their own park.

I don't mind at all if an announcer says, "he swings and tips it back foul". That paints the perfect word picture. If it is really a "foul tip" it is for all intents and purposes a swing and a miss - unless the catcher drops it in which case it's " swing and a miss, strike three .... nope he's still alive, he must have tipped it". Again, a perfect word picture even though it is not technically correct. I have never heard an announcer argue that a foul tip is a dead ball.

[Rich Ives]

Originally Posted by Larry1953

Milo Hamilton always makes it a big deal to call it a "book rule double" or a rule book double", usually with a lengthy explanation of why it is that and not a ground rule double. I'd much rather he just say GRD and spare the other stuff. We get the idea already. What bugs me is when the announcers don't know the ground rules of their own park.

I don't mind at all if an announcer says, "he swings and tips it back foul". That paints the perfect word picture. If it is really a "foul tip" it is for all intents and purposes a swing and a miss - unless the catcher drops it in which case it's " swing and a miss, strike three .... nope he's still alive, he must have tipped it". Again, a perfect word picture even though it is not technically correct. I have never heard an announcer argue that a foul tip is a dead ball.

The problem is that misuse of the phrase "foul tip" by the announces creates the impression to the viewers that any tipped ball, foul or foul tip, is a foul ball and dead.

[Rich Ives]

Originally Posted by Larry1953

This situation often causes incorrect comments from announcers and I saw it in an Astros game about a month ago: the left fielder made a fairly long run for a fly ball toward the wall at MMP. He caught it near the heel of his glove with an outstretched arm. He took a step or two and in the motion of transferring the ball to his throwing hand dropped it. Ump ruled no-catch. The announcers rambled on about "while transferring" and "he took two steps" to explain why they thought it was a catch. I think the confusion comes with how readily out calls are made at 2B when DP throws are muffed. There is a difference between catching a batted ball and a throw and the degree of "control" required.

Larry - if he drops it on the transfer it's a valid catch.

[Larry1953]

Originally Posted by Rich Ives

Larry - if he drops it on the transfer it's a valid catch.

From Baseball Digest: " Generally speaking, umpires want to see the player reaching into his glove. Veteran umpire Tim McClleland goes one step further. He says, "Voluntary and intentional release is when a player actually reaches into his glove and is in the act of pulling it out." Frequently, when a fielder is trying to rush a throw after making a catch he will drop the ball but is given credit for the catch because he was in the act of making the transfer which demonstrates complete control."

I take this to mean that for some minuscule fraction of a second, the glove, ball and throwing hand are all in contact at the same time. In the Astros game the VT LF was in the act of bringing his hands together - outstretched glove arm down to his throwing hand when the "sno-coned" ball in the heel of his glove fell out.

[Larry1953]

For example, say F1 is covering first to retire B/R on a grounder to F3. F1 clearly catches the toss from F3, touches the bag with his foot and the runner runs up his back. This causes him to take a couple of stumbling steps and fall. Bracing his fall with both hands causes the ball to come out of his glove on impact. Now, maybe the proper call is no catch/no out, but I doubt there would be much argument from OT if it was ruled an out. Compare this to a stumbling outfielder where it would most definitely be ruled no catch.

[Larry1953]

I don't know how to search for MLB videos, but the play I described is on the highlights clips on MLB.tv. It was Rays @ Astros 6/25/2011. Sam Fuld was F7 and Carlos Lee was the batter. Anyone know how to link to a specific date/game?

[DG]

Originally Posted by voiceoflg

What are common mistakes we broadcasters make that need correcting.

Not having a competent umpire in the booth with you to whisper in your ear before you speak about rules. It would be a small price to pay.

[dash_riprock]

Originally Posted by Larry1953

From Baseball Digest: " Generally speaking, umpires want to see the player reaching into his glove. Veteran umpire Tim McClleland goes one step further. He says, "Voluntary and intentional release is when a player actually reaches into his glove and is in the act of pulling it out." Frequently, when a fielder is trying to rush a throw after making a catch he will drop the ball but is given credit for the catch because he was in the act of making the transfer which demonstrates complete control."

I take this to mean that for some minuscule fraction of a second, the glove, ball and throwing hand are all in contact at the same time. In the Astros game the VT LF was in the act of bringing his hands together - outstretched glove arm down to his throwing hand when the "sno-coned" ball in the heel of his glove fell out.

A voluntary release does not necessarily entail a reach for the ball or simultaneous contact between glove, ball & bare hand.

Example: R2, less than 2 out. F4 dives and backhands a line drive up the middle. As he is still sliding, he flips the ball to F6 in an attempt to catch R2 off his base. F6 does not catch the ball.

The batter/runner is out because F4's release of the ball was voluntary and intentional. The bottom line on determining a catch is secure possession of the ball coupled with control of the body. A voluntary release is proof of such control.

[aceholleran]

Originally Posted by voiceoflg

From another thread...



What are common mistakes we broadcasters make that need correcting. Because of this forum, I never say "the hands are part of the bat" and wince when I hear it. But what are some others?

Of course, the "foul tip" erratum is #1 on my list.

Another is "That's interference!" when a runner is obstructed. The only defensive player who can interfere is the catcher.

A few years back, when A-Rod karate-chopped F3 and INT was called, the announcers couldn't understand why the runner originally on 3B was sent back.

In the Pine Tar game, Phil Rizzuto had no clue as to why Tim McLelland laid Brett's bat across the dish.

[jicecone]

Originally Posted by voiceoflg

From another thread...



What are common mistakes we broadcasters make that need correcting. Because of this forum, I never say "the hands are part of the bat" and wince when I hear it. But what are some others?

Well you asked?

Depends. TV announcer? Well probably the best advice I have for them is to shutup more. Most people watch baseball over the TV because they can't be at the game, not because they want to listen to someone talk. When I go to the game I really don't need someone there to tell me what I am looking at. The same applies to watching on TV. Keep your opinion to yourself and announce the facts. There are enough entertainment shows on TV, I don't think for one minute you have to take on that roll for the average fan.

I think it would definitely enhance your broadcast by having people more knowledgable of the rules in the booth with you. Someone who could explain them as
written and not from a bais opinion.

Now if your a radio broadcaster you have slightly a different job. You are the eyes and ears of the listener. You have to actually talk more to describe what the listener can't see. Again though, stick with the facts and report what is happening, not what you think should be happening. get an official to sit with your broadcasting team.

[Rich Ives]

Originally Posted by Larry1953

From Baseball Digest: " Generally speaking, umpires want to see the player reaching into his glove. Veteran umpire Tim McClleland goes one step further. He says, "Voluntary and intentional release is when a player actually reaches into his glove and is in the act of pulling it out." Frequently, when a fielder is trying to rush a throw after making a catch he will drop the ball but is given credit for the catch because he was in the act of making the transfer which demonstrates complete control."

I take this to mean that for some minuscule fraction of a second, the glove, ball and throwing hand are all in contact at the same time. In the Astros game the VT LF was in the act of bringing his hands together - outstretched glove arm down to his throwing hand when the "sno-coned" ball in the heel of his glove fell out.

So you've never seen a fielder flip the ball to another fielder directy from his glove?

You've never flipped a ball from your glove to your hand?

You're using Baseball Digest as a rules source?