dropped 3rd strike

[MD Longhorn]

This situation has always frustrated me. For some reason, the easiest and most obvious way for an umpire to quickly and clearly unmuddy this situation is anathema to both baseball and softball PTB.

What in the world would be wrong with simply using the word OUT when we have an out... just like every other time that we have an OUT. For some reason, those loftier than me think it's bad form to tell the batter they are out when they are, indeed, out.

The EASY way to fix this messy nonsense with umpires making signals to people that can't see them (Strybel ... why would signalling safe help any player), or having different calls (catch, no catch, NO NO, "ball on the ground!" (Really!?!?!)) etc is to SIMPLY call batters that are out on a caught 3rd strike OUT! If you don't say OUT, they are not out. Easy. Catcher's batters, etc can hear you say OUT, and can react if you don't. (PS - this would also help in the batter running to first to confuse matters with less than 2 outs and a runner on first - saying OUT clearly clears up this sitch too).

We - the umpires and our various supervisory boards - have made a complete muddy mockery of this whole situation. And it's flat out stupid that the easy fix is not the way to handle it.

Then the only difference we would have is "Strike! Batter's out!" (or strike 3 if you prefer), and simply, "Strike" or "Strike 3" (or "Swing!" on checks, etc).

Why is this the ONLY situation we are afraid to use the word "out"?

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by MikeStrybel

I don't see a need to verbalize those things. Your strike call is already verbal, followed by a safe signal to illustrate that the requirement for an out was not completed.

"Catch" and "No catch" sound similar to those wearing helmets. Telling a batter that the ball is on the ground is helping him. His team and coaches will do that.

1) strike calls on swinging strikes are not "already verbal" they are arm signaled only.

2) if anything is verbalized, it would be "no catch." "Catch" would never be verbalized. No Catch only sounds like Catch if the umpire mumbles it under his breath instead of sounding off.

3) why is verbalizing "no catch" any different as far as "helping" than a safe signal? Are we only showing the eight defensive players (who can see it for themselves) that the ball wasn't caught, and the batter and catcher just stand there like idiots?

And yes, Rich, some of the onus IS on the players. After all, they are supposed to be paying attention to the game, and know that when strike 3 has a chance of being uncaught, that as a batter they run and as a catcher they apply a tag. Simple as that. This should take place at about the same time as the umpire is signaling.

The problem is that coaches would rather put the onus on the umpire exclusively, and absolve themselves of having to actually coach their players.

[yawetag]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

TWhat in the world would be wrong with simply using the word OUT when we have an out... just like every other time that we have an OUT.

You verbalize "OUT" on every out call you make?

[Rich]

Originally Posted by yawetag

You verbalize "OUT" on every out call you make?

The word "OUT" only comes out on tag plays and close "force plays" on the bases.

Steve in consistent in his position, but I still feel he's wrong. On a play, the players/coaches, etc. are entitled to a call. Just like a trap in the outfield, the lack of a call can cause a problem for everyone. Especially me. Why have that happen?

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by yawetag

You verbalize "OUT" on every out call you make?

I verbalize "out" when I'm supposed to. Generally that means when there's a play and people need to know what you called. Which, honestly, is VERY similar to what we're talking about here.

No, I don't verbalize cans of corn or easy ground outs. And no, despite what I say we SHOULD do, I do not verbalize the OUT on a strikeout ... I just don't understand the reluctance by TPTB that we do so, especially in cases where it would clear things up.

[MikeStrybel]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

1) strike calls on swinging strikes are not "already verbal" they are arm signaled only.

I explained already, I envisioned a half swing D3K.

2) if anything is verbalized, it would be "no catch." "Catch" would never be verbalized. No Catch only sounds like Catch if the umpire mumbles it under his breath instead of sounding off.

I agree. I have never stated that I would verbalize either. That is why I wrote that it sounds the same to people wearing helmets.

3) why is verbalizing "no catch" any different as far as "helping" than a safe signal? Are we only showing the eight defensive players (who can see it for themselves) that the ball wasn't caught, and the batter and catcher just stand there like idiots?

Once again, the players have coaches. The safe signal suffices. It was evident in multiple NCAA CWS games this year. Many of those umpires are JEA graduates. They did a great job this year.

Take it easy, Steve.

[MikeStrybel]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

The EASY way to fix this messy nonsense with umpires making signals to people that can't see them (Strybel ... why would signalling safe help any player).

I assume that those of us who do are emulating what we see the big boys and our NCAA partners use. It works for us. If you prefer calling "Strike three, batter out." go for it. Do you also alert the batter to a walk by saying, "Ball four, take your base."?

I said it before, use the mechanic that makes you comfortable.

[MikeStrybel]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

My verbal is simply, "NO! NO!" Never caused a problem. F2's not seeing the safe signal and why should he turn around and delay from making a play?

I agree with Bob -- stick with what brought you.

Rich, I wrote that to Bob. I have said it to many others here as well. If your assignor, league, team, etc. demands that you do something different, do it. They pay the way and that's important.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by MikeStrybel

I assume that those of us who do are emulating what we see the big boys and our NCAA partners use. It works for us. If you prefer calling "Strike three, batter out." go for it. Do you also alert the batter to a walk by saying, "Ball four, take your base."?

I said it before, use the mechanic that makes you comfortable.

I know you love misunderstanding me on purpose, but I think I was pretty clear that this was NOT what I actually do, but rather what we SHOULD do (or more accurately, what we should be TOLD to do by TPTB). After all, the batter is (or is not) in fact, out --- why the aversion to saying so, especially when it makes the whole scenario we're discussing a LOT cleaner.

But no, until this ACTUALLY changes, I'll do it "right".

(On ball four, no, I never say Take your base. Just ball. I'm not giving them a head start... on occasion (especially lower level ball), if batter does nothing and the ball is already back to pitcher, I might nudge with a very quiet, "that's four", but only if coaches aren't already doing so. That's rare though.)

[MikeStrybel]

I did not misunderstand you. Others took issues with what you wrote as well.

I don't work lower level ball so I see no reason to tell a batter what is happening, ball four or dropped third strike. They have coaches.

I lived in Texas for a few years and worked baseball. I never saw umpires do what you suggest they should. Then again, they weren't working lower level ball.

[dash_riprock]

Originally Posted by MikeStrybel

I see no reason to tell a batter what is happening, ball four or dropped third strike. They have coaches.

I believe you are confusing coaching with announcing an important and necessary judgment decision - catch/no catch. Coaches do not make this decision. The players (especially the batter and the catcher) are entitled to know the umpire's call the instant he makes it, not relayed from a coach 90 feet away or in the dugout.

You see no reason to tell a batter the 3rd strike was not caught. I see no reason NOT to tell him.

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by MikeStrybel

That is why I wrote that it sounds the same to people wearing helmets.

No, it only sounds the same if the umpire mumbles the "No" part. Nobody has EVER mistaken my NO catch call for "catch." A lot of emphasis on the NO with an emphatic safe sign. Never had one problem. Why on earth would a player anticipate an umpire saying "catch" anyway? It has been "He's Out" or "No Catch" for years now.

Originally Posted by MikeStrybel

Once again, the players have coaches. The safe signal suffices. It was evident in multiple NCAA CWS games this year. Many of those umpires are JEA graduates. They did a great job this year.

I fail to see what JEA graduates has to do with anything. Very irrelevant. I've worked with JEA grads that couldn't carry my jock to home plate. If you want names, I'll send them to you.

[MikeStrybel]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

No, it only sounds the same if the umpire mumbles the "No" part. Nobody has EVER mistaken my NO catch call for "catch." A lot of emphasis on the NO with an emphatic safe sign. Never had one problem. Why on earth would a player anticipate an umpire saying "catch" anyway? It has been "He's Out" or "No Catch" for years now.

SDS, you and I aren't far apart on this. I simply replied to the assertion that you can say, "Catch" or "No Catch" as done on fly balls. That will cause trouble and I provided an alternative, "Catch" and "Ball down" that was done by a colleague of mine and since adopted. There is no confusion. I also pointed out that we DO NOT DO THIS for the benefit of the players, rather it is an umpire mechanic to alert our partner(s) to play coverage.

I fail to see what JEA graduates has to do with anything. Very irrelevant. I've worked with JEA grads that couldn't carry my jock to home plate. If you want names, I'll send them to you.

I responded to the assertion that JE teaches this so it must be the only way to do it. A bit of backreading was in order. You are correct, there is disparity between JEA graduates. I don't need names, I know a few.

I wish you well. Fall ball is pretty much mush ball here. Lots of rain and wind - perfect football weather.

[MikeStrybel]

Originally Posted by dash_riprock

I believe you are confusing coaching with announcing an important and necessary judgment decision - catch/no catch. Coaches do not make this decision. The players (especially the batter and the catcher) are entitled to know the umpire's call the instant he makes it, not relayed from a coach 90 feet away or in the dugout.

You see no reason to tell a batter the 3rd strike was not caught. I see no reason NOT to tell him.

No, I am not. As stated several times now, I will call the half swing and the field will know. It is incumbent upon the batter to know what to do when the catcher lets the pitch go uncaught. He and his coaches can just as easily see my signals. I tend to move out and away from the normal stance on D3Ks. The pitcher and infield can also see my mechanic and are usually just as quick to point out that the catcher needs to recover the ball.

If you want to help the batter, go ahead. I signal what I saw and let the coaches tell them what to do.

[Kaliix]

Originally Posted by MikeStrybel

No, I am not. As stated several times now, I will call the half swing and the field will know. It is incumbent upon the batter to know what to do when the catcher lets the pitch go uncaught. He and his coaches can just as easily see my signals. I tend to move out and away from the normal stance on D3Ks. The pitcher and infield can also see my mechanic and are usually just as quick to point out that the catcher needs to recover the ball.

If you want to help the batter, go ahead. I signal what I saw and let the coaches tell them what to do.

So I am following this thread and want to confirm that for this situation [half swing, possible strike three with the possibility a dropped 3rd strike] you would 1)signal strike (I would point as a hammer indicates an out) while at the same time verbalizing strike, 2) followed by a safe sign, no verbalization?

Is that right?