Suicide Squeeze Coverage-Two man Crew

[gsf23]

Had this situation come up in a college game I played in about 10 years ago. We were in the field, other team had R2 at second, R3 and third, no outs, two man umpiring crew.

Suicide squeeze is on, R3 breaks for home, bunt is down the 1B line, PU is watching for the play at the plate and the foul ball. Pitcher comes across pick up the ball, has no play at home so turns and goes to first for the force out which the BU has got. While all this is going on, R2 at second takes off for third and about 2/3 of the way there, cut across the diamond to the 3B line and is safe at home before our 2nd baseman can return the throw to home. Our coach is going crazy, we make the proper appeal for R2 missing third base, and neither umpire saw what had happened.

I was guessing that the plate umpire should have this call since the BU has his back to play and is getting into a position for the call at first. Would that be correct? Personally, I just think that both umpires got caught up in the play and forgot about the runner at second.

Any comments?

[tucktheump]

this is a major fault in the two man system. The plate man is responsible for all touches of third (except the batter runner).

There are several things that the plate umpire is responsible for when runners are on base and the ball is bunted down the 1st base line: Fair/Foul, obstruction, running-lane violations & other interference, and tag/no tag. Most important of all is fair/foul.

The touch of 3rd by R2 should be the last priority - thats simply a disadvantage of the 2-man system. If the coach wines, tell him to pay for 3 umpires and he wouldnt have this problem.

Overall, it's an no-win situation.

[gsf23]

That's what I figured, it is a tough situation for a two man crew. Our coach was going crazy about the kid not touching. He didn't say much of anything after we made the appeal. The PU called our coach over and explained the situation, explained why it wasn't seen, coach couldn't really do much after that and didn't sit and whine about it or anything. Now, we don't know if the runner did it on his own or if he was coached to try that in that situation, but, needless the say, he recieved a fastball in the back his next at-bat.

[GarthB]

In an ideal world, there would have been three or four umpires. In the next to ideal world PU would have been able to see what was developing with the play going to first rather than home and had time to back up a bit up to open his field of vision and would have caught a glimpse of the runner missing third base.

Seldom do we work in an ideal world.

[Bfair]

A stupid play and highly risky coaching manuever for a coach who has 2 players in scoring position. BU can call a lane violation at 1B if he sees it---although he should wait to see if PU is taking the call first. Unless R2 and R3 are moving at exactly the same speed, it's still possible to see both touches on the bases which should occur before any pulled foot occurring at 1B. Some umps may be watching the tag at home while some may watch the tag at 3B.

Which ump did you get today and what will he be watching?
Do you feel lucky?
Do you gamble your team's skill against luck?


Freix

[tucktheump]

Originally posted by Bfair
Unless R2 and R3 are moving at exactly the same speed, it's still possible to see both touches on the bases which should occur before any pulled foot occurring at 1B.

its happened to me. it was a squeeze play, down the 1B line (obvious fair/foul decision) both runners were moving on the play. you have to call it 1B line-extended because you have a runner scoring on the play.
your right, you should be able to see a touch of 3rd in a situation where a pulled foot is a factor, but when both runners are going on a squeeze, and there is a fair/foul decision, it is practically impossible to see a touch of third.

[greymule]

There's a reason MLB uses four umpires.

However, it's hard to believe any coach would teach cutting across the diamond to score. He would be betting that neither ump would see such a gross violation, a possibility (obviously—it happened to gsf23), but hardly a reasonable likelihood.

Even if both umps didn't actually witness the violation, they had to be thinking, "How did that guy get home so fast?"

[Bfair]

So, is the touch of home more important when the runner may easily acquire it, or is the touch of 3B more important to watch? Is there any mechanic that says one is more important than the other? Which "miss" is more likely to occur and have bearing on the play?

Again, a coach doesn't necessarily know which base the official will be watching, and to risk this LL trick with 2 runners in scoring position is not the sign of good coaching. In fact, I see it moreso a reflection of what would be expected of a LL coach who learned a new trick but doesn't really comprehend the potential liability, but wants to show others what he knows about the game.....LOL.

Good coaching is teaching solid mechanics of play.
There is no need to intertwine "tricks" of the game.
Doing so merely proves a coach's inability.


Just my opinion,

Freix

[gsf23]

Greymule--

They both knew something was up, the runner from second was comming in to home just as our 2nd baseman was pulling the ball out of his glove to throw home.

When we made the appeal to the PU he immediately asked the BU for help. The BU kinda just shrugged his shoulders and said sorry I can't help. That's when they called our coach over to explain things.

Like I said whether he was coached to do it or not, I don't know, but he did get the message we weren't too happy about it his next at-bat.

[bob jenkins]

Originally posted by Bfair
So, is the touch of home more important when the runner may easily acquire it, or is the touch of 3B more important to watch? Is there any mechanic that says one is more important than the other? Which "miss" is more likely to occur and have bearing on the play?

Unless there's a play at the plate, I seldom watch the runner touch the plate. There's no advantage to be gained by missing it, so runners don't. There is an advantage to be gained by missing other bases, so runners (sometimes) do.

[tucktheump]

Originally posted by bob jenkins

Unless there's a play at the plate, I seldom watch the runner touch the plate. There's no advantage to be gained by missing it, so runners don't. There is an advantage to be gained by missing other bases, so runners (sometimes) do.

Bob, I can't take it...more than half of the time, the PU has no other responsibilities than to watch the run score. How can you say you seldom watch a run score. Most of the time, the PU would "gain no advantage" by NOT watching the touch of home.

[Bfair]

Originally posted by bob jenkins

Unless there's a play at the plate, I seldom watch the runner touch the plate. There's no advantage to be gained by missing it, so runners don't. There is an advantage to be gained by missing other bases, so runners (sometimes) do.

Thanks, Bob. That was the exact point I was trying to make.
I can read the play to determine which is more important for me to watch in terms of the overall impact of the play. Knowing baseball and reading the play comes from experience---not reading books.

That's not to say I can't take care of multiple tasks---that needs to be included in every resume.
Still if choosing home to watch in that moment of touch of that must decide situation, I'm likely to see the cut start short of 3B or see him ending it into the 3B line from the infield before having to look for the touch of home. I shouldn't miss both.

The play will help me determine which I'll be watching, and with no play at the plate, it's not likely to win out if a choice needs to be made. Action at 1B should follow all this action.


Freix

[Bfair]

Originally posted by tucktheump

Bob, I can't take it...more than half of the time, the PU has no other responsibilities than to watch the run score. How can you say you seldom watch a run score. Most of the time, the PU would "gain no advantage" by NOT watching the touch of home.

Tuck, when there are no other responsibilities then there should be no reason for not watching the touch of home. Unfortunately, that doesn't seem to be the situation that was being referred to in this thread nor in Bob's response.


Freix

[bob jenkins]

Originally posted by tucktheump

Bob, I can't take it...more than half of the time, the PU has no other responsibilities than to watch the run score. How can you say you seldom watch a run score. Most of the time, the PU would "gain no advantage" by NOT watching the touch of home.

No other responsibilities in a two-umpire system?

Depending ont he specific play, PU needs to watch other runners touch third, help with a pulled foot or swipe-tag at first (association dependent), get to third on a first-to-third run by R1 (and no R2), help BU with obstruction or coaches interference, watch the out-of-play lines, ...

In HS and bove games -- how many runners have you seen miss home (other than on a slide away from a tag)? How many runners have you seen miss other bases?

I know where I'm going to look.

[blarson]

Originally posted by gsf23
Greymule--

Like I said whether he was coached to do it or not, I don't know, but he did get the message we weren't too happy about it his next at-bat.

I don't call college ball but in discussions with college umpires, some colleges have a guy on the bench who's job it is to make sure that the umpires are covering touches. If they aren't they try to cut corners to take advantage.

Bob