Here's the situation I was in the other night in a HS game. I was the BU.

R2, less than 2 outs. I'm in position C. Grounder hit to F5. I stay mostly on the left side of the field because there are several possibilities that can occur over there. F5 spends a little too much time checking the runner and makes a rather hurried, last second throw to 1st. It's a poor throw that makes F3 stretch out quite a bit. Although close, the ball clearly beat the runner. But, from my perspective, it was nearly impossible to see if F3's foot was on the bag.

Before calling "Safe" or "Out", I immediately checked to see if the PU was in a position to see the play. He was. I immediately asked, "Did he pull his foot?" He gave me the signal that he DID - which I promptly followed up with "Safe" signal. The play was close and naturally there was the usual amount of grumbling. I immediately called "Time" to consult with my partner to make sure I understood him correctly since he only signaled me and did not verbalize his response. He assured me that he did, in fact, give the "off the bag" signal. I stuck with my call ... safe ... no big deal.

Later, after the game, as we were heading to the parking lot he seemed rather agitated about that play. "Never come to me from across the field like that again!"

"Huh?"

I tried to explain to him that I had a horrible position for that play and that I thought it was accepted to get help on the play.

"You gotta make that call," he said.

I told him that I *did* make the call. I ruled the batter-runner safe. I only asked him a Yes or No question ... *I* made the Safe/Out call.

I was always taught that on the rare occasions where you get a horrible view of a play like this, that the proper mechanic was::
- 1st make sure that the batter-runner didn't beat the throw. If he beat it, there's no point in determining whether F3 was on the bag or not.
- 2nd make sure that your partner was in position to see the play.
- Make no Safe or Out call.
- Immediately ask "Did he pull his foot?"
- He should simply answer "Yes" or "No"
- Call the batter-runner "Safe" or "Out" accordingly.

I was always taught that if you're going to get help, do it right away, before you make a call and before anybody asks. Don't make your call THEN get help. If you make a call ... stick with it ... and don't go to your partner just because the coach asks you to.

I always thought this mechanic was rather standard in a 2-man system. Agreed, it should be used sparingly - but it can happen.

My question is this: Is this just a perpetuated umpiring mechanic myth or is this a legitimate way of handling this situation? My partner was rather adamant that there is NO SUCH MECHANIC and resented being put in that position.

I checked around the internet and found countless articles addressing this mechanic.

I guess my question is simply this: Is this mechanic valid and accepted in the 2-man system?

Thanks!

David Emerling
Memphis, TN

I think you used the right mechanic. Similar mechanic to (did he/she go?) the check swing. I go to clinics every year put on by my association and others and this mechanic is stressed every year as long as it is used sparingly.

Absolutely!
 

You did it exactly right. Your partner is having a brain fart. He should be trailing the Batter-Runner towards 1st for that very call... and he should be doing it with every batter unless there is a potential play coming to 3rd or home. The PU is surely in the best position to see if F3 pulls off the base towards you to make the catch. If the throw is errant to one side or the other, or up, you should have the best look and can sell the call without his aid.

It is absolutely an imperative mechanic for 2-man. And as such it may not always get discussed in your pre-game... BUT IT SHOULD. I'll bet it does get discussed in your next pre-game.

For your situation the PU should have been half way to 3rd for R2's advance but he is still in great position to see a pulled foot.

Good job! Stick to your guns and discuss it in your pre-game. :)

Dave,
 

Were we working the game together?

Just kidding.

While I am from the school that you live and die with your own calls AND in over 34 years of umpiring I have never asked for help on a pulled foot or swipe tag at first base I say:

YOUR PLATE UMPIRE WAS FAR OFF BASE (pun). Even though I do not ask for help when I am the BU I am ALWAYS in position to help a partner who asks for that help.

Your partner's attitude needs a firm adjustment.

He may be like me in the "philosophy" that you live with your own calls but he was dead wrong in his discussion position with you.

Tee

[Edited by Tim C on Mar 25th, 2003 at 02:30 PM]

Re: Absolutely!
 

This is not what is taught by the professional schools. The pro mechanics have the base umpire responsible for both the play at first and any subsequent play at third base.

While many umpires pregame having the PU taking the "backdoor" play at third base, keep in mind that this is not what is taught at the highest levels.

Rich

Rich,

I haven't worked the highest levels but I can't imagine the PU leaving everything from 1st to 3rd to a single base ump.

Do the pros use 2-man mechanics? I just assumed that they always had at least one ump per base.

If you had this play, what would your mechanics/positioning be? Would you cross the direct line between 1st and 3rd to get good positioning along the 3rd base foul line for the tag play at 3rd?

What high level of ball use two-man mechanics? Hmmm, college is three, pro is four. Oh, you might have been thinking JuCo or high school.

Anyway, with two out and R2, PU is staying home. Base hit puts play at plate. An infield hit does not give the PU enough time to get up to third to make a call. So BU has all calls on bases.

PU should be watching the touch of third and the progress of the batter going to first. I wouldn't think he is going up the first base line, this might put him out of position for a call at home (if necessary). He can see a tag or pulled foot from first base extension.

How do the higher levels do this? I am to believe with a guy at the "C" position that the PU has a better chance of getting into position than the BU?

Tony
 

Rich is exactly right on his view of the professional two man mechanic.

This mechanic has changed over the years.

Two schools:

The "Base Umpire" is just that and calls all bases. He leaves the Plate activities for the PU.

The other school incorporates the PU covering third when a "second play" occurs without the ball leaving the infield.

There are several pros and cons for both processes.

PBUC feels that there are inheriant problems in the PU leaving home and they want ONLY their MOST ADVANCED two man crews to use rotations.

When you select either process there are still problems.

The only thing I have been taught differently is how the question is phrased. Say it so "Yes" means "Out."
So the question would be, "Was his foot on the bag?" instead of "Did he pull his foot?"
There is a subtle difference, but more clarity.

D-III here uses two-person.

Doesn't the A level of minors use two-person?

Both of those are "high-level" for the vast majority of umpires.

Re: Absolutely!
 

Huh? You have plate umpires running up the 1st baseline with Runners at 2nd?? I don't think so.

Yes, Single A Ball uses two umpires.

I was doing a semi-pro game last year with a official that was in the pro system for a while. Had the same situation arise and got no answer or help what so ever. I looked around, the runner was heading back to the dugout so I called him out and it was accepted. Why argue with an out.

After the game, I discussed this with him and he said that as a BU, you are taught in the pro system to make that call on your own. Never pursued it any further, but I would be interested in why they teach it that way. ?????

As usual there are those of you who equate "pro" with Major League. Class A use 2-man, as do the Rookie leagues, etc.

Bob

I would have to agree with Tim C's evaluation of this situation, since normally I will take this call alone more times than not.
But, even if these tired old feet won't keep up with some of these batter's going down that 1st base line is no reason for me not to at least looking up the line and seeing whether or not the 1st baseman has their foot on the bag.
It has been said that a two man crew is suppose to be team, (i.e. partners) for a reason. If they won't help each other when asked, then you may both find yourselves in a sinking ship very quickly.
I thinking I would run this matter by one of your association board members - discretely.....

Okay, okay
 

Major/minor potato/potato (I can't do the vowel sound variations - you will just have to imagine)

So in two man mechanics where the BU is going to make both the pulled foot call at 1st and the tag play at 3rd, what positioning should he use?

Should he move toward 1st from position C to make the initial call and then toward the 3rd baseline for the tag play at 3rd? There is a pitcher's mound here somewhere to trip over and a thrown ball that could add to the effort. Stand in one spot and pivot?

And No BJ, I wouldn't run to first if there was a runner on 2nd (I personally would run at least half way to 3rd, watching the ball motion so I can see the action at 1st and help with the pulled foot and, be prepared for the play at 3rd. If I had to make a call at 3rd, I would additionally close the gap during the signalling of that call.)

I do feel that watching for a pulled foot is one of my responsibilities as the PU and I do run toward 1st when the ball is hit to the infield and there is no one on 2nd or 3rd.

Two man isn't the best.......
 

but for most of us, it's as good as it gets.

There are some problems with any coverage, even four man when they rotate.

Since most of us will never work the upper levels of the game, we have to be content with the hand we're dealt. If I can't expect any help on a play like you described with the question of a possible pulled foot, I would rather work alone, and leave your disagreeable partner find someone else to work with.

The call you described is one which is usually accepted by both teams when cooperation is exhibited by both Umpires.
If, however, for whatever reason you care to state, you do not go for help, you leave the door open for all types of criticism. I believe the modern thinking is to get the call right, and put the ego aside, if needed, to insure it is right. The old school of thought was that you showed some weakness if you got help, the newer thinking is to make the correct call, even if help is required.


Senior

I'm from the old school . . . the BU has that call at 1st. If you're not sure whether F3's foot was on the bag or not, you should go with the "information" you do have; and make your "judgement call" (after all; that's what it is anyhow)on your own. Experience umpires do pretty well in "reading" the movements and actions of fielders, coach's expressions, etc. and add those clues to their "skill set" when making calls.

Not to be argumentative at all, but what if the PU was daydreaming? Or looking directly at the play but "seeing" something else? (As if THAT never happens!) Now you've got two umpires who aren't sure of what they saw. And you're still "stuck" with making the call. What if he replied, "I think he was off the bag." instead of a "Yes" or "No". Or God forbid, "I didn't see it." (As if THAT never happens either!)

As for the argument that you ask for help on checked swings . . . that's a requirement of the rules in OBR. Most experienced umpires won't do that either. It's enough having coaches, players and managers argue with one umpire, much less dragging your partner into that situation as well.

Jerry

Don't you guys have a signal that you give each other to let your partner know that you can offer help if needed. Then you won't run into the problem of one partner asking help if the other one didn't see it.

gsf23:
When you get on a regular crew, or even with a regular partner, subtle signals are an integral part of fulfilling our duties. Several "out", "safe", "yes", "no", "last warm-up pitch", etc. signals are prevalent in the upper levels of the game. As are our "count" signals. (An example: The PU only shows an odd count using his fingers; 0-1, 2-1, 3-2, etc.; as an aid to his partner in keeping counts. Another example is the BU returning to the A-Position (from his place on the outfield grass) in between innings just as the pitcher is ready to toss his last warm-up pitch.)

On close plays (the "bangers"), one should NEVER, EVER go to one's partner for help or advice. It's your job to "sell" the call AS YOU PERCEIVED IT. There's no signals, asking or second-guessing involved. You gotta make your own call and live with it. My comment to coaches or those who wish to ask my partner is simply, "He's got his own things to watch for. This was my call and I've got it('out/safe')."

Just as an added note . . . aren't there many times when the BU has a better view on whether a pitch was a ball or strike? We certainly don't expect the PU to ask for help then . . . even for the sake of "getting it right". Why in other instances?

Jerry

Ball/strike is a little different, that is a judgement call. I wouldn't ask any umpire for help on a judgement call. I'm sorry but I just don't see the problem if you are at an angle that is preventing you from seeing a swipe tag, or if the the foot was pulled or not or whatever, in asking for help. I'm sorry, but I have just never understood the philosphy of living with the wrong call when you have a chance to make it right.

gsf23

There's nothing wrong with asking others to help us make our calls. That's where we become more experienced at making OUR OWN calls; support for what we had to do anyhow.

For the moment, let's pretend we're doing the game on our own. What would you call? Probably no different than if you had a partner.

Go with your observations, instinct, training and gut. You'll have the same 50% against you!

By the way, #23 is my favorite.

Jerry

When I attended pro school the base umpire had both ends of the play. We were also taught to get across the to the first base side of the feild on all grounds balls. Then let the throw if there is one take you back across the diamond into third or second. I still use this mech. and go over it before every game in my pregame no mater if i am PU or BU. We need to be on the same page when we step out on the feild as the third team.

Pulled foot? Your where your supposed to be as a BU. He might have pulled it? Get help on that one. We want to get the call right? Or is it just an ego thing? Thats what your partner is there for. Just like on the check swing, get help. If coach starts barking about getting help the rest of the game, set him straight. I think Id rather get the call right, and maybe get a little grief from coach, than stroke my ego, ..."hey, its my call, I aint getting any help, hes out."

Chuck writes:

<b>I think Id rather get the call right, and maybe get a little grief from coach, than stroke my ego, .</b>

I don't think Tee or anyone is saying to get the call wrong. They are saying that it is BU's job to get it right and not depend on someone saving his butt. If umpires spent as much time working on their mechanics to make this call as they do whining about "getting it right", they would.

It needs to be understood that the typical play where this is discussed is when BU is starting in C position where his responsibilities of the play can be at 1B, 2B and 3B. He cannot overcommit to any base, and a poor throw can result in F3 coming off the base directly at the BU where he is in poor position to see a pulled foot. Many times as PU I've seen obstinant BU's unwilling to seek help when needed when, indeed, the coach was correct in that the fielder left the base. If that obstinant official feels there is dignity in not needing help and missing that call, then so be it----it's his decision.

Getting help on this call when needed is not wrong.
It should not be used as a regular crutch for lack of good judgment and good mechanics. Needing help should by far be the exception as opposed to the rule.

A need for help when the situation dictates it does not necessarily mean poor mechanics of the official, but moreso reflects a weakness inherent in the 2-man system. Angle over distance---and sometimes the play develops where BU simply has a poor angle when starting in C while PU has a significantly better angle.


Freix

BFair writes:

<b>It needs to be understood that the typical play where this is discussed is when BU is starting in C position where his responsibilities of the play can be at 1B, 2B and 3B. He cannot overcommit to any base, and a poor throw can result in F3 coming off the base directly at the BU where he is in poor position to see a pulled foot. </b>

That is true when BU is standing in a bucket of cement at the C position. Anyone who simply remains standing in the same "C" position taking root in the grass while all this is going on is always going to be asking for help.


My previous comment stands. Spend as much time solving the problem as whining about it.

[Edited by GarthB on Mar 29th, 2003 at 11:02 PM]

Garth, there are varying levels of baseball out there, and you can't always react to what you anticipate to be the expected play. It's not a matter of feet in cement, but rather not overcommitting on your expectation so you don't find yourself out of position trying to make the call on a close slide play at 3rd. It's also possible to float toward 1B only to find a snap throw going back to 2B on a diving runner.

We are amateur umpires, Garth, of varying levels of experience.
While the more experienced may be able to better read the plays, there are still many in the learning process. If they overcommit they may find themselves in far more difficulty than that pulled foot. If they're willing to understand the weakness of the two man system on a play starting with R2 only, they are more likely to get the call right <u>wherever the play occurs</u> if they realize there may be times when they need to seek their partner's help. As the official gains experience, his needs for help should lessen.

Pure and simple---plays can arise where a BU starting in C has a crappy angle on F3's pulled foot. The PU has a significantly better angle on that play than the BU if help is needed. Angle over distance is a well known standard of officiating.


Freix

Runner on 2nd and I am in the "C" position. Ball hit to F5 and he looks back runner. Runner comes a ways down line which makes F5 react to him momentarily.

After chasing the runner back he hurries a throw to F3 who has to stretch for a weak *** throw.

You are in "C" position area because of potential run-down/tag play there. Now you have to turn and determine if the foot is on or off the base.

This is what I am doing: I figure the PU is at home because of a potential base hit and play at the plate (plus we have signaled this before-hand). I can't quite see the foot on or off the base (because my eye sight and self-expressed experience is as good as Garth's/Tee's).

I make a quick look at the PU to see if he is watching the play. If he is, I ask him what he saw. If he is picking his butt next to the dugout, I make the call at the best discretion I have of the play and make it hard.

"Shock and Awe"...get ready for some Shock from the manager/players, but Awe them with the call.

So many words covering what should be simple mechanics for any base umpire.

It has always been explained to me that in the two-man system the Base umpire should recognise when there may be multiple choices of a play, and never anticipate what the play will be.
Odds are that anticipating the play (or order of the subsequent play's) will only bring up Murphy's Law and more times than not you will choose poorly and be caught out of position.
Under such situations the base umpire needs to hold their position and follow the ball to the play(s) as quickly as they possibly.
If the play is late occuring due to the defensive players stalling, juggling or the ball, etc. the base umpire can only act according to what the defense does with the ball.
If any coach gets upset because you were not where you would have like to have been for such plays, then that coach needs to advised that you are not a magician and you will make the best call possible for such plays.
Okay, let's play......



"you can't always react to what you anticipate to be the expected play. It's not a matter of feet in cement, but rather not overcommitting on your expectation so you don't find yourself out of position trying to make the call on a close slide play at 3rd. It's also possible to float toward 1B only to find a snap throw going back to 2B on a diving runner.
..............
While the more experienced may be able to better read the plays, there are still many in the learning process. If they overcommit they may find themselves in far more difficulty than that pulled foot.........."

All,
 

As a BU I cannot picture not being in the correct "area" to make any call. Call it experience, good guessing, or blind luck I have never found myself being hung out cuz I "assumed" a play would happen and something else came up.

I am not magic, nor am I the greatest umpire on earth . . . what I am is a student of the game to a level that it is a great assist to my umpiring.

From "C" arguments make me laugh. If we believe in "angle over distance" then that argument goes south, fast (but wait, pretty soon will have someone say you can't call check swings from B or C either, another silly argument).

As a BU if you can't take a step, lean, and peak then maybe you better try officiating table tennis.

As a BU you can "get your calls" if you understand the game and work at it. Don't give me excuses.

Maybe as a BU on the next steal of second base I'll stop play and ask my PU, "Hey Stan, did he tag him!"

Lah Me.

Re: All,
 

Sounds logical to me, especially after reviewing the error of my own ways. Those occasions when I got hung out were usually because I guessed (*** u me d) what the fielder would do. Anyone who has done more than a couple of games knows that, youth games are "guessing games" when it comes to what a fielder will do with the ball.....

Tee:

Amen.

Finally a sane voice. I cannot understand why some want to go on and on about this. Again, if they spent even half the time analyzing why they had to ask for help as the do justifying aking, they could avoid asking for help.

And then some feel that being an amateur is an excuse for not fixing the problem.

Lah me,

Here we see the old-timers who are unwilling to bend in the debate. They demonstrate their survival skills of the past by adamently sticking to their guns and refusing to admit there is any call they cannot see. When faced with logical arguments, just like the BigDogs of one's local association, they insult anyone who disagrees with them by labeling them inadequate or incompetent.

But what the old-timers don't realize is that time has passed them by. A new order of officiating has taken over, and they missed it. Attitudes in officiating have changed, and they're still stuck with their old world thoughts and ideas. Once vibrant young umpires at the cutting edge of officiating, they are now simply out of touch with the game and how it is has changed in today's world.

More and more, participants and spectators alike are demanding that the thick-skulled arrogance of the past be replaced by a less brash style of umpire. Today, in demand is an umpire willing to admit his human shortcomings, and do the best he can to overcome those faults. Today, umpires need to be less hasty, and more willing to bend in key areas.

One thing that the old-timers must be struggling with is the reality that Pro schools, as well as just about any clinic or camp worth its salt, instructs plate umpires to follow the batter-runner up the line in order to be there to help on a possible pulled foot or swipe tag. Why on Earth would they waste their time teaching techniques that shouldn't be used? They don't.

Don't get stuck in the past. Avoid being labeled a hard-headed blue. If you need help to get a call right, and the mechanics are designed to provide that help, by all means take it. There is no shame in knowing your own human limitations. In my opinion, it takes a tremendous amount of courage and integrity for an umpire to admit he needs help to get a call right, and then ask for it. That is the future of baseball officiating, ladies and gentlemen. It's here to stay. Embrace it, or risk being left out in the cold with the old-timers.

Freix:

To make sure you understand my position:

As with Tee, if my parnter ever asks for help, he'll get it.

I am not opposed to getting calls right. I am opposed to lazy umpires who do not learn that they can avoid asking for help by getting the call right in the first place.

If working to get calls right the first time makes me part of some old guard, so be it.

They have always taught the plate umpire to come up the line. There are other concerns besides pulled feet and swipe tags -- there's interference, obstruction, and the like as well. I won't get into running lane issues, since we all know that we'd only make that call on a throw from the box.

The rest is sentimental bullcrap, and gives newer umpires the little blue blanky that there's a plate umpire right there waiting to help out. Maybe the BU thinks then that he can worry less about getting the proper angle at the play at first base.

Starting at B as opposed to C is not relevant. The first move on a ground ball to the infield is to step UP and then turn chest to the ball. Pause. Read. React. Too many umpires forget the pause part and start running towards something, ANYTHING. To third, to second, to first. Any premature move can be fatal.

After the step up, the umpire should be drifting towards the working area from C.

If the play goes to second, make a couple of quick steps and get set. You have the angle.

If the play goes to third, make a couple of quick steps towards the midpoint between third and home. Opens up the angle.

If the play goes to first, FORGET about running directly towards first and instead get as many quick steps towards the midpoint between first and home (start of the running lane) as possible. Best angle for the play at first. Getting close to these plays is not that important.

Now, IF the umpire does everything the right way and still needs to ask for help, great. But instead of being emotional and saying that it's great and accepted that an umpire get help, we should be teaching umpires the best way to NOT NEED HELP. Get angles. Make your own calls.

I don't know if you've read the whole thread Jim, but Tee mentioned that he is ALWAYS ready to give help if needed. I am, too. Now, if we were completely old school, would we do that?

I am for getting the play right, but I refuse to check for the sake of checking. And if I am in what I consider to be a good place to see the call, I'm sticking with the call. Also, I don't know many of my partners and I'm really hesitant to give managers ammunition that maybe BOTH umpires didn't see the play. I'd rather swallow a bad call than to bring that element to play.

BTW, I attended a Jim Evans weekend clinic a few weeks ago and Jim did stress the plate umpire coming up on the ground ball. But when someone asked about getting help on such a play, Jim said that it doesn't happen if the base umpire follows proper mechanics and gets the right angle. They want the plate umpire coming up, but they also teach that you should get your own calls.

And that's where our focus should be.

If asked give your partner help, but after the game show him how to get in position so he doesn't NEED the help anymore.

If you get hit in the rear end with the batted ball, all bets are off (only Jim will understand).

Rich

Rich:

Obviously, since I didn't, I couldn't have said it better.

My focus was not on whether the old school umpire would be willing to give help. Of course he would give help if asked. Just about any umpire would. Many old school umpires would indeed give help, and then rip his partner to shreds about it afterwards. Some would do it to his face, and others behind his back. But I digress.

The new attitude I'm talking about that is pervading baseball officiating is the willingness on the part of umpires to ask for that help. It's mostly about the perception of participants and spectators.

I've seen it too many times - an old schooler on the bases, a play at first, a pulled foot that I can see clearly from my position as plate umpire, and the old schooler calling the batter-runner out. The first base coach going ape-poop pointing at the spot of the pulled foot, the batter-runner jumping up and down in disbelief, the bench in protest, and the old schooler insisting that he saw the play clearly.

The geometry is hard to deny. The further one is away from first base, the more he needs to move in order to gain a proper angle. It is entirely possible and completely likely that even the fleetest of foot might not have enough time to cover the distance required in order to gain that proper angle. Especially in the case of a close play with an on-target throw and a first baseman who over-stretches, there are situations that can arise where even the best of umpires could be caught not knowing if the foot came off the base or not.

Let me get this right. 60' diamond, you're in the C slot. Sharp ground ball to the 5.5 hole. You've got to back up to stay out of the way. F6 gloves it and makes the long throw. F3 stretches out like Gumby, ball beats runner, and F3 has done the splits with his bag side toe somewhere near the base. Your partner, PU, has the perfect angle to see if the toe is on or off, and you're NOT going to ask!?

Me, I like a fast game. In and out, no lollygaggin'. If I gotta wait for a manager to call time, come out to me, request that I get help from my partner, go to my partner yadda, yadda yadda, I'm wasting time. Time better spent playing ball or drinking beer. I'm asking.

Kyle

Kyle ... perhaps too much beer. Bases are at 90 feet. :)

Just funnin'

Yep,
 

Kyle:

I have never been bashful to admit that I have never, nor would I ever, work a small diamond game.

Tee

Kyle,

Ball hit to the 5.56632233 hole on a 60ft diamond does not have much room for backing up. Most of the BU will be on the outer grass for LL.

However, on the 90ft bases, you are on the imaginary line going from home plate through the dirt/grass ring of the piitchers mound. The 5.5854938 hole should be to your right.

So with a sharp hit ball, you are turning right opening up to the play and then slowly drifting as you hear.

I say hear, because everyone is telling the 5.692049 man where to throw so you just drift that way.

just my opinion

More in reply to Jim Porter . . . but if the shoe fits . . . using your "argument" (notice the quotation marks; after all, this is a "discussion board", not an "arguing board".) this call should always be made by the PU and not the BU at all. Since you're of the philosophy that the BU is always in a better position to see the play, why not simply have him/her call it? Noboby's gotta ask anyone for help then.

In fact . . . the same can be said for a lot of plays. Instead of asking for help, simply let your partner make those calls that he/she can see better.

Face reality, Jim. Every single umpire is going to "blow" a call on occasion; not just the "old farts". Using your mechanic opens the door to every coach, spectator, and player who's in a better position to see any close play to yell out, "Hey, ask your partner."

Not to mention those games where you've got 3, 4 or 6 umpires. Do you take a vote to see who's got the best angle? Of course not. Shouldn't be any different here; no matter what school you went to.

Here's an excerpt from a post made by Jon Bible, an ex-professional and reknowned veteran college umpire, that he posted 5/6/02 at URC (a different forum):
<ul><i>A couple of years ago I banged the back end of a double play at first, with the first baseman stretching toward me (toward right field). As soon as I did, all hell broke loose and here came the first base and head coaches. Right there I had a small hint that something was not right. When I looked up and saw David Wiley at second base easing toward me, it was immediately apparent from his body language that he was coming not to get the troops off of me and make it a one-on-one, but instead to tell me something. So I immediately put my hands up and said "Wait a second. . . " and asked Wiley if the foot had come off the bag. He said, "only about two feet or so," so I immediately changed the call. The point is that Wiley did not jump right in yelling "his foot was off the bag," but instead created a situation in which I would know to ask for help and then do so. IMHO, that is the best way to handle judgment plays, unlike rule plays, where I continue to believe what I have already said earlier.</ul></i>
Getting help should not be a continued crutch for poor judgment and mechanics, but even the best of 'em can make mistakes and/or need help when an offline throw causes a poor angle. In fact, knowing he could seek that help when needed <u>might be why</u> Jon is ranks amongst the best of 'em. He didn't stand around looking like an arrogant a$$ when all others knew the call was missed.

All major sets of rules have addressed the need for an umpire to get the call right instead of protecting his <u>perceived</u> dignity. <b>There is no dignity in missing an obviously blown call or refusing to seek help <u>when there is doubt in your mind</u> regarding the accuracy of the call.</b> While not all situations allow for help to be given or calls to be reversed, a pulled foot at 1B is a situation that frequently has no impact on further play since F3 is left holding the ball in the infield.


Just my opinion,

Freix

Steve,
I have the utmost respect for Jon and other professionals of his ilk. You may have noticed in his anecdote, he had already made a call . . . "Safe". It was afterwards, when the 2nd baseman, the coaches, his partners and all God's children look at him incredulously that he thought it best to gather the troops to reconsider.

That wasn't the question of this discussion. I agree; it's a whole lot better to make a call, see the enemy coming at you in force, and then reconsider your judgement. What Jon didn't do . . . AND RIGHTFULLY SO . . . is to ask his partner(s) for help BEFORE THE FACT. There are many, many plays and calls that can be "reversed" after thoughtful consideration. My suggestion is only that the BU should be responsible for making his/her own call . . . which is exactly what Jon had done!

In retrospect . . . and in many years of umpiring . . . if I have some thought that F3 pulled his foot, he pulled his foot! I won't ask for help; I'll call the runner "safe" and sell the call by emphatically showing that F3 was off the bag. "Off the bag, off the bag, off the bag; runner safe."

Much less arguing in that scenario, wouldn't you agree?

Jerry

<i> Originally posted by David Emerling </i>

As you can see this type of question gives a variety of responses but IMO the one BIG ITEM overlooked is:

1. Continuous action vs. dead ball situation

Changing a call on a continuous action play is almost impossible to get right or try and sort out.

Example; using the pulled foot / swipe tag analysis.

SITCH: 1 out r1/r2 - hit and run on.

B1 hits one right at F6 for the old fashion 6-4-3 DP. Since it was a hit and run R2 (having a good lead at second base)continues advancing towards home.

Now let's freeze.

We have the throw from F6 or F4 (doesn't matter) to F3 which isn't a good one. F3 stretches or trys a swipe tag.

The call at this point by the BU is Crucial. If the BU signals out, then the inning is over, however, if the BU signals safe chances are F3 will try and get r2 advancing towards home.

Now the play is over and let's also assume you as the BU called the BR out for an inning ending DP and now the coach starts to go ballistic and argue.

<i> "GET HELP! GET HELP" </i> Now you are in a no win situation. If you do change the call to safe then you have just handed the offense a "cheap run" because the defense did not even bother to try and make a play on r2 rounding the third base bag since the BU signalled out for an apparent inning ending DP.

Therefore to sum up IMO it depends upon the nature of the inning. If the play involves continuous action ie; numerous runners then IMO right or wrong you stick with the call because to do otherwise <i> opens up a can of worms </i>

If the play ONLY involves the one runner or it's a dead ball situation ie; changing a HR to a 2 base award then change it. Don't make a habit out of it.

Continuous action - Stick with it and learn

Pete Booth

Asked a long time umpire buddy about this, and told him about this topic. He said a couple things that stood out:
"Id rather achieve excellence over arrogance"
and...
"What am I looking up the baseline for if thats not one of the things Im gong to be looking for? I might as well be talking to the scorekeeper (said in jest of course).

And to Tim C: You need to keep your day job and dont even think about trying out at open mic night at the comedy club. You quite often seem to feel it neccessary to put sarcastic remarks, and ridiculous statements, that you know is not relevant.

Chuckfan
 

Personal attacks aside I guess you do deserve an answer:

Your "long time umpire" buddie's answer is correct. When Garth, Jerry, myself and others work the dish we are always in position to help our BU if he needs help.

We have all posted that several times . . . I guess you just missed that point.

Chuckfan what I need to make clear is that I believe in personal responsibility. I believe in spending more time working on your umpire skill to make the call rather than giving a bunch of "mooshue bullcrap" about feeling good about ones self and separating umpires into "old guys" and "progressive young'uns!"

Jim Porter and Steve Feix and very good writers. They are impassioned people . . . they have made a name for themselves on the internet by going the extra step to help young, emerging umpires understand what they beleive is the "right" way to umpire.

I come from a school that says "put political correctness aside" and really learn how to do something. I do not believe in teaching to the lowest common denominator.

I have no idea why you made a personal attack on me . . . but that is fine. I handle my own issues on the field or in life. I don't ask for help.

This arguement reminds me of an old Mary Tyler Moore episode where Ted Baxter enters the newsroom. Murray says, "Ted tonight's editorial is about traffic safety!"

Ted looks at him and says, "are we for it or against it?"

That is where some like to try to place this never ending argument. The real issue chuckfan is not about a one time request for help on a call . . . it is however, about the weakening of personal pride, commitment, and standing of umpires.

I don't care really what any other umpire does -- I do what I think is right and live with it.

Sorry that that offends you so much.

Tee

[Edited by Tim C on Apr 1st, 2003 at 08:25 PM]

Certainly not. That's why the BU should ask for help before he makes a decision. Once he gets more information from his partner, the BU makes the call. This isn't a situation where play stops, the umpires confer, and then a decision is made. It is done right on the spot.

BU: "Was his foot on the base?"

PU: "No, it was not."

BU: "Safe."

Oh, and this is not my mechanic.

Oh, golly, I disagree with that. Sure, if you really need to, you can reverse your decision after the fact and after getting more information from your partner.

But it is infinitely better, rather than making a guess, to ask for help before you make a decision if at all possible. When done crisply and clearly, it looks damn professional. It really does. The only people who don't think it looks professional are the umpiring old-timers, and we aren't working games for them.

I did not say that the PU is in a better position to see the play. I said he was in better position to see a pulled foot than a BU starting from "C". How anyone can deny the truth of that, and the simple geometry involved, is beyond me. A BU could <b>never</b> gain a 90 degree angle on a pulled foot, and the PU starts from that angle! By golly, just be willing to go to the guy who can see the play rather than taking a guess and arrogantly sticking with it.

Mr. Porter,
Who are the arrogant ones? Never in any of my replies did I resort to name-calling or pigeon-holing to make a point. Nor did I ever say that I'm "guessing" at a call. What I suggested to the youngsters, such as yourself evidently, is to read all the clues available to you rather than simply ask your partner for help. Whether you agree with how we "old timers" conduct ourselves is certainly your perogative, but to blindly dismiss our suggestions as "arrogance" serves no constructive purpose whatsoever.

Perhaps we should talk about the "home runs" that were really ground rule doubles, or foul balls hit over the fence . . . but were changed after discussion with our partner(s). In the scenario listed in this thread, all the BU was doing (it seemed) was to get confirmation from the PU for what he (the BU) probably saw, felt and thought anyhow. (i.e. F1 pulled his foot).

As Tim pointed out above, a lot of decision-making goes into our call . . . including the ramifications of timing if a call is reversed from "out" to "safe". None of us old-timers advocated making a call that we're not sure of. And certainly none of us (I don't think) are adverse to changing a call that was obviously in error. (Such as a ball being thrown into a dugout but we're thinking the fielder still has it.)

Peace,
Jerry

Whom Do You Ask?
 

Jim,
The following is from your recent posting:
"I did not say that the PU is in a better position to see the play. . . . By golly, just be willing to go to the guy who can see the play . . ."

I'm not entirely sure which one of us is confused. Please 'splain.

Jerry

Mechanics has the PU looking for a pulled foot.
As Jim stated, it's because he's in the best position to see that part of the play. Evidently those doing the training know instances can develop where the need for that help can and does arise.

Is it an arrogant attitude for one to say that they are always ready as PU to offer that help to others when needed, but that they themselves as BU will never need it while in the field? I certainly find some arrogance in that attitude.

Hmmmm............
Perhaps you are just better than those doing the training ever imagined, or perhaps you'd prefer to risk blowing the call when help from the best angle is readily available to get the call right when in doubt but refuse to seek that help. Of course, if you have <u>never</u> had doubt on a pulled foot then you are certainly above and beyond most whom I know that umpire.

When help is properly obtained before the call is made (as explained by Jim), it shows great crew coordination in covering a difficult play from all angles. When the help is obtained per the mechanic Jim states, I've <u>never</u> seen it criticized, and often seen it complimented as to the crew coordination. It looks great when done right and is well respected in making the best effort to get the call right.


Freix

Steve, Steve, Steve, Steve, Steve:
To say that all the calls I made have been correct is absolutely hilarious. What I said was, experienced umpires analyze all the "clues" and information at their disposal to make an informed and proper JUDGEMENT CALL! I can count on one hand, how many instances of a POSSIBLE pulled foot occured in my 20-years of officiating. And I've used the "crutch" of asking my partner too. (Didn't avoid arguments; simply deflected the shouting toward him instead). What we "old timers" are suggesting is that we all become more experienced and comfortable with making our own judgement calls, rather than relying on someone else who has a different angle or view of the play. Face it . . . we've got pulled feet and phantom tags at second base and no one questions it. We've got foul balls where our partners could probably be in a better position to view it, we've got balls that hit the ground and go over a fence and our partners may see it better than we. There are many, many calls where we could be "second guessed" by our partner, but we need to learn how to make our own calls. That was my only point.

Jerry

P.S. And I believe the proper mechanic under discussion is actually, "IF you need to go to your partner for help, do it before you make the call." I seriously doubt they're teaching "If you don't think you're going to make the correct call, ask your partner for help."

Steve,
 

I find that this has become a trade of mental masturbation between the "come on guys, getting the call right is the ONLY important thing" and the group that says "learn your trade and you will not have to ask."

When the great arbitor Bill Klem was asked "Have you ever missed a call?"

His answer made basball history when he answered, "In my HEART I have never missed a call!"

You would probably call him arrogant (we also know that Mr. Klem also refused to allow any umpire to work the dish when he was on the crew) by simply not understanding the way that "some officials" see their duty.

Have I ever missed a call? . . . I try to keep it to a "countable" few in every game.;-}

When did it become arrogant to know how to train, to spend the money to train, to work on your trade enough that you are in position to make calls? When did that become a bad thing?

In closing, the same schools that train for the PU to move into position to "help" on the swipe tag and pulled foot are the exact same schools that tell BU's "Don't EVER ask! Live with your own calls!"

We will never agree on this situation (just as Evans and Roder can't agree on the catching of a foul tip (ball) after a pitch has bounced to the hitter or Evans and Roder failing to agree on where a throw comes from to make the runners box rules active) and there is nothing wrong with that.

We "old" guys seem to have come the farthest in the discussion (saying we would at least "help") and we don't call you or your partners names (arrogant).

Steve we just believe that an umpire can get the angle, every time, and make the call. Pretty simple too me!

Tee

re: Using your mechanic opens the door to every coach, spectator, and player who's in a better position
to see any close play to yell out, "Hey, ask your partner."

Who is to say that they where in a better position; or, that they really saw the play?

I know this never happens; but, what if a manager, coach, player, fan (aka fanatical)
is just testing the umpire to see if they can draw the call -
or they flat out lied about seeing the play!

re: That's why the BU should ask for help before he makes a decision.

Why would an umpire ask for help on a call that they feel they can, and did make?

Never have I heard an umpire ask a player why they took a fastball right down the middle.
Nor have I ever heard an umpire ask a player why they tried to steal against a catcher with a cannon.
Nah, do your homework then take the call yourself.....

Re: Steve,
 

You're a piece of work, Tee. You took the first shots in this thread by stating that if we couldn't see a pulled foot at first by taking a simple step, lean, and peak, we should try officiating table tennis. That's big, fat arrogance my friend.

You also said that you can, "get your calls," if you understand the game and work at it, intimating that anyone who asks for help (which is a widely accepted mechanic nowadays) neither understands the game nor works at it. Once again, your arrogance shines through.

Arrogance. That's how umpires are seen in a general way by participants and spectators all over the world. They expect us to be arrogant because at one time arrogance was the way. Well, it's not anymore. The times they are a-changin'. Now, we train to understand our human limitations and overcome them, rather than arrogantly dismissing that they even exist. Today, we use the prescribed mechanics and we work as a team with our partners to overcome our limitations and maximum our coverage. We have heard the cries of those who employ us to adopt a more willing position to get the call right, and we heard.

Now, you can continue to umpire the old way. You'll still get jobs. After all, umpires are always needed. But will you be considered at the cutting edge of your profession and in the top 10% of your peers? Will you achieve the excellence many of us strive for? I don't think so.

Yep,
 

I am cocky, conceited and arrogant . . . and probably more than that.

I have also been in the top 10% of umpires (now, that is in the top 10% of the umpiring level that "I" wanted to be in -- i.e. umpires that work non-professional games) in my area.

Thanks for noticing.

Tee

[Edited by Tim C on Apr 2nd, 2003 at 06:29 PM]

Re: Yep,
 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Tim C
[B]I am cocky, conceited and arrogant . . . and probably more than that.

I have also been in the top 10% of umpires (now, that is in the top 10% of the umpiring level that "I" wanted to be in -- i.e. umpires that work non-professional games) in my area.

Thanks for noticing.

Tee</b>

Me too Tim. We have 10 umpires and I'm one of them. That makes me in the top 10%. ;-)

[Edited by gobama84 on Apr 3rd, 2003 at 09:10 AM]

From another site
 

Asking for Help and Changing Calls
by Tom Anstett

Too many times I see umpires make a call on a close play and the coach will come running out insisting on the umpires go get help from their partner. "Come on Blue, you need help on that, just ask your partner he had a better angle, he can help". Trying to be a nice guy, or perhaps being a little intimitated, you go to your partner for help.
MISTAKE!

First off, if you make a call, you are telling everyone that you saw the play, you've processed the information from the play and you made you're decision. If you weren't sure about something on the play and you don't have all the information you need to make your decision, you ask for help before you make your decision, remember it's still your call, you're only asking for help to get more information in order to make a decision. Don't throw your responsibilites on your partner.

If you ask for help just because the coach wants you to, you will be asked to go for help on every close play, by both coaches, all game long. If you constantly ask for help, you might as well leave the field, because your partner doesn't need you if he has to do your job also. Don't let the coach push you around, tell him or her that "I saw the play, I don't need any help, this is my call and the call stands" Whether your decision(judgement) was right or wrong, stick with it, if you change one call, the coaches will want you to change every call that they don't like. Also, when you change a call you have to deal with the other coach who now also has an argument with you.

Remember, you can change your own call in certain situations, but you must do it immediately. For example, if you make an out call, and your timing was to quick after the call you see the ball loose on the ground - change your own call immediately, get the play right. This is never going to look good, but you'll get the call right. Never, never make a call, think about for a while and then change it, you will loose all your credibility.

T Alan casts his opponents in this friendly discussion as umpires who believe that "getting the call right is the ONLY important thing."

That seems to be a mischaracterization. This is one specific situation, and certainly there are many others which might cast one as a "correct-at-all-costs" umpire.

I would cast us as those who seek to get a certain call right vitrually 100% of the time in a situation where it is very easy and popular to do so. Many pulled feet can be seen by the BU; many cannot. For those that cannot, the question can be asked and answered in 2-3 seconds, and everyone is happy.

<point> "Bob, did he pull his foot!"
<sweeping motion> 'He pulled his foot!'
"Then he's SAFE!"

P-Sz

re:
"Bob, did he pull his foot!"
'He pulled his foot!'
"Then he's SAFE!"
So, do you ask on everyone of these calls?
If not, then expect to hear this
(or a reasonable fascimile) - - -

Coach: "Hey, blue how come it seems that you always ask for the other team ans never for ours?"

I choose to leave the lid on Pandora's box.....

Patrick:

I may regret re-entering this thread, but here goes.

1. I don't believe Tee ever said, and I certainly don't believe that one can never ask for help on this call. Indeed, we both have stated that if asked by our partners, we've got them covered.

Now some have insinuated that we would then degrade our partners for asking. Not true. What I would do is ask him after the game if he can see in retrospect if he could have had a better position on the play. I would want to get him thinking about improving his mechanics. Is that wrong?

2. What we have said, and what I have seen missing from some others is that we believe that umpires should be trained and encouraged to learn from their mistakes and correct their mechanics so that they don't need to ask in the future. Is that wrong?

3. It appears to me that several of the other posters have chosen to disregard point one above and downplay point two.


This is why I have suggested that some umpires appear to spend more time and energy justifying asking than they do teaching better mechanics. I believe it should be the other way around.

Given that asking is allowed, is my above point wrong?

I don't believe it is reactionary, old school, arrogant, stubborn or inappropriate in any way to encourage and advocate umpire education and training.

I'm not against communicating with one's partner. I'm not against post-game discussions. I'm not against learning to improve.

But I am against the mindset that believes something is wrong with an umpire, his abilities, or his knowledge if he feels it is necessary to go to his partner, using the prescribed mechanics, for help on a pulled foot at first. There is nothing, "wrong," with his mechanics. There is no area that needs improvement. Anyone who believes there is just might be living in the past. The game isn't officiated that way anymore.

Now, the participants, the spectators, the league administrators - the people who pay us our game fees - are pretty much demanding nowadays that us umpires do everything we can to remove all doubt about our calls, including changing our calls when possible and proper, as well as going to our partners when the mechanics allow.

Now, I keep hearing from those on the other side of this argument about how the sky will fall if we go to our partners, and the next thing we know the coach will be out
there every five minutes, etc. However, I sit in a position of great insight. I have used the aforementioned mechanic on numerous occasions. I can tell you that, when done properly, it looks crisp, clean, and extraordinarily professional. It is a delight to your employers, and there simply isn't a reason on God's green Earth not to use it.

Garth, what you are saying is that if an umpire has a poor angle that it is due to HIS actions. That is not the case. The two-man system sucks when in C position. There are too many possibilities for first play in the infield that a BU may have to handle that it's very possible that a poor throw to 1b (should the play go there) results in a poor angle on a pulled foot.

<b>It is not an umpire weakness.</b>
It is a problem <u>inherent</u> in the 2 man system.
It is an exception, not the rule, when help is needed.

You will never make me believe that you have never had doubt in your career on making such a call after starting in C position. Therefore, to say that you would not seek help on such a call is stating that you feel it more important to sell your ability to guess (based on the available clues, as someone said) rather than opting to a partner who has an excellent angle to aid in getting the call correct.


Freix

Jim, "Did he stay on the bag?" "No".

"Safe".

Defensive Manager: "You gotta to be kidding".

Plate Umpire. "Coach are you upset that we got the call right or that your first basemen didn't stay on the bag?"

His answer was garbled. Play on.

Same scenario has happened several times and I DID NOT, NOR WILL I entertain a discussion about it. Take control, especially when you get it right. IMO, that thats the only way.

I was right. I regret re-entering a thread where very little listening and a lot of talking goes on.

Steve, at least do me the courtesy of not telling me what I am saying. Feel free to state how you choose to interpret what I am saying, if you'd like, but do not put words in my mouth. I will try one last time.

I am simply saying that I believe anytime an umpire needs to ask for help, he should look back to see what he could have done to not need that help. If you choose to believe that this is impossible, then let's just disagree and get on with our lives.

[Edited by GarthB on Apr 4th, 2003 at 12:31 AM]

Garth/Tee,

In what situation will you ask your partner for help then? Do you two umpire on an island and leave the other ump (either BU or PU) to fend for himself and make a two-man system literally two men using a system?

There is nearly a need for a little help at some time or the other. When would you ask for help, if ever?

The reason they use more than one umpire in certain levels is for the "help" that each gives.

<b>In what situation will you ask your partner for help then?</b>

When I need it.

<b>Do you two umpire on an island and leave the other ump (either BU or PU) to fend for himself and make a two-man system literally two men using a system?</b>

Despite a minor in English and some study of rhetoric, I have no idea what you are trying to say here.

<b>There is nearly a need for a little help at some time or the other. When would you ask for help, if ever?</b>

Asked and answered.

<b>The reason they use more than one umpire in certain levels is for the "help" that each gives.</b>

While I have read and heard numerous explanations of the two man system, that is one I have never seen written or heard said before.

I don't think that anyone here can honestly say that they have always been in the right postion to make every call. Everyone, sooner or later is going to be out of position to make a call no matter how hard they work. It just happens. I've had a few instances in this very situation when I thought that I was in the right position, then at the last second, the 1st baseman makes some goofy stretch, or loses his balance as he is stretching and falls over, or whatever and now I cannot see the play and there is no time to react to get into a different spot. It happens to everyone.

I don't think anyone here is saying that you should get help ALL the time, I don't think anyone is saying that you should be lazy and never work to get into the right position. This is one instance where the mechanics of the two-man system allow you to get help from your partner.

All of you that are saying "well why not get help on every call then..steal of second, ask your partner if he tagged him or not." That is probably one of the stupidest things I have ever heard on this board.

Garth, you're entirely too reasonable. Everything you say in your 3 Apr 2:20 PM post is right on. I understand that Tee or Roger as an UIC answer appropriately if asked; however, I also understand that they will never ask as a BU. Here's where we disagree. I don't think a base umpire with perfect execution of mechanics can see every pulled foot beyond a reasonable doubt.

That specific comment would be ignored, but in general: "I saw that one all the way, coach."

P-Sz

[Edited by Patrick Szalapski on Apr 4th, 2003 at 09:19 AM]

"That is probably one of the stupidest things I have ever heard on this board."

You haven't read a whole lot of the postings on this board, have you?

One thing on which we all agree . . . there are those umpires that feel more comfortable asking for help; and there are those that are more comfortable making their own judgements. After years of asking my partner for help, I've learned that his perception is really no better than my own; only a different view and angle. Now I'm very comfortable in making my own decisions and replying to coaches if they choose to disagree with my ruling.

Others may do however they feel more comfortable. If you think you need help, ask for it. If you think you can do it alone, do it. "Ain't no big deal." either way.

I've been thinking(uh-oh), and lot of this comes down to who you're working with. Most of the folks I work with are top notch. If I'm taken out of position by the circumstances of the play, I can be assured, most of the time, that my partner has me covered. Dropped ball, pulled foot and missed tag are the only three I'll go for help on, and only if I can rely on my parnters positioning. If I'm working with a rookie or a sleeper, I'll make it and sell it myself.

I tested it out last night. Had a play almost like I quoted before. LL majors championship(first half)game. I'm in the C slot(for those who don't/won't work LL it's behind F6)and the ball was hit to F6 backing us both up. Long throw to F3 with a long stretch. I point to the PU(with my left hand, of course) and call "was he on the bag?". He comes back with "yes he was" and I bang him out. It took 2 seconds extra and took all doubt out of the call.

Now I wouldn't do that with everyone I might get paired with. But only ones where I knew the PU (my son this time)had me covered. Again, it all comes down to how good you and your partner are.

I feel sorry for those who just refuse to ask for help. You must work with a lot of dolts. ;)

Kyle

And I can imagine what your evaluation would have been if you had not gone for help, was therefore wrong in your "guess" about the foot (since you apparently weren't sure if F3 held the base), and most others with better angles, including your evaluators, were well aware of seeing F3 stretching off the base by perhaps 6 inches............

It's a Catch 22, and the I feel there's no dignity in making a call that can be obviously wrong to many when the correct answer is readily available if I choose to seek it. I can't comment on pro vs. amateur in a 2-man system since I've never seen a 2-man pro crew. Still, I doubt if pros have dignity in making an obviously wrong call. If not seeking help and booting the call means looking professional, then I prefer to look amateurish and get the call right for the very few times the situation arises.


Just my opinion,

Freix

Re: ".....I understand that Tee or Roger as an UIC answer appropriately if asked; however, I also understand that they will never ask as a BU. Here's where we disagree. I don't think a base umpire with perfect execution of mechanics can see every pulled foot beyond a reasonable doubt."

Never say never!!!!! Yes, there are those "rare" occassions when I may go to my partner for assistance.
But just because a manager, coach, player, fan yells out to check with my partner does not dictate me doing so.
If I absoutely feel that my view was not clear enough to make a call then I will ask for help.
The reality of the situation is this - - -

Coach yells out: "Hey blue, you can't see from clear across the infield to make that call!!!"

Me: "Coach, the sun is about 92,897,000 mi away - and I can see it just fine from here!!!!!"

"Let's play....."

This whole thing seems to be coming down to how you are perceived by your evaluator/assignor and/or coach.

Real simple, if officiating contributes to your income suffficently enough that you have to depend on it for a living, do what the man who is paying the bill wants. For the rest of the officials, Get the dang call Right.

Your evaluation would probably say the same thing. If you go for help, they will say that you were out of position and needed to get help. If you don't get help, and make the wrong call, they will say that you were out of position. So if the evaluation is going to be the same regardless, I would get the help and get the call right.

(Fed Ball)The pre-game conference helps to cure these evils. SO DOES VERBALLY COMMUNICATING WITH YOUR PARTNER DURING THE PLAY. My partner and I utilize the PU's rotation to cover third in several situations. There are still times however, when rotation is not possible. Example: R1, base hit. PU rotates to cover third. Alot of guys do this. Now consider the same situation except that the ball is hit down the right field line. As the PU, you must stay home and make the fair/foul call. Therefore, you can't rotate.
Talk before, during and after the game. It certainly beats dumping coacher because your communication skills are lacking.