dropped 3rd strike
 

Had this happen in a game last week wanted to run it by here.

NCAA fall ball, I'm BU (2-man), R2, two outs, 1-2 count. Pitch is low, catcher turns glove to catch/block, ball short hops (from my angle), batter half swings.

PU doesn't give a "Yes he did" or a "swing" with a point, just give a lazy hammer in the background with no verbal mechanic.

Offensive dugouts starts yelling run run run, for dropped 3rd strike, Catcher rolls ball back to mound.

Chaos for 10 seconds, B/R standing on first, R2 nevers moves, infielders starting to clear the field.

At this point I was confused as to what my partner was calling, I had swing and dropped 3rd. We call "TIME" just to stop anything if theres anything

We get together, he says he has a swing, I ask if he saw the ball hit the dirt, he responds that he did not see if it did or not, he was unsure. I tell him that I saw it short hop the mitt. I then asked if he said anything such as "out" or "catch", he responds no.

So we treated it as a live ball dropped 3rd, kept runners where they were and played on.

Correct? Suggestions for the future to remedy this other then better plate mechanics with a 2-part swing/catch/no-catch mechanic

I felt as the BU I could not offer anything right away such as the open/closed hand. I feel as though that is saying that I have a "swing" on the half-swing and if they came to me I have to say that he went, especically if anyone on the coaching staff are in tune with those mechanics.

You and your partner's decision definitely put the defense at a tremedous disadvantage.

The catcher caught the short hop, 3rd strike, no problem, right? The lack of a call or ruling allowed the BR to reach 1st base. And you left it like that?

And then you and your partner got together and left it like that?

Fix it.

Fix it? How are you suggesting one might do that? How do you unring the bell in this situation?

Catcher knew it was strike three, because he rolled the ball back to the mound. Catcher should have also known he caught it on a short hop and therefore wasn't a caught third strike.

Sure, the plate umpire could have been more definitive with a verbal call. But this is a DMC and continuing on with the half-inning is absolutely the right thing to do.

I don't think there's anything here that can be fixed except learning the proper mechanics on a D3K and check swing situation. Sure, the defense was left at a disadvantage by the improper mechanics, but their catcher was responsible to know the situation too. And this catcher was just as guilty for allowing the BR to reach first base as Josh Paul was on the "Doug Eddings" play in 2005.

Tim.

but, you did have a swing. Indicate the pitch wasn't caught, and hope your partner learns better mechanics.

So....., you leave the BR on first and they score 3 runs or whatever.

Due to the plate ump's failure to say 2 words, "no catch", you end up with a **^#storm.

Get together, call the BR out and then be prepared to explain yourself to the offensive coach.

Also, this is NCAA fall ball. I bet the catcher either thought he caught the ball or he did catch it. The plate ump's failure to say anything confirmed his belief that he caught it.

So you are going to make an out call based on what rule? Cant be on a clean catch by the catcher because neither of you had this. I suggest you (if they ask) advise the catcher and or coach that they are required to know the situation they are in. By the way I cant recall the last time a borderline ball to the catcher in this situation didnt either end up with the catcher throwing to first or turning to me as PU and showing me the ball in the glove to try and convince me he caught it clean. If I am showing the no catch sign then he will then throw it to first.

October 12, 2005.

JM

Why/how could you call the BR out? There was no reversal of a decision that placed a team in jeapardy. The defensive team chose to ignore the situation and the PU made the situation worse with poor mechanics. That's on them moreso than it is on you and your partner.

You're right. Either way, there's gonna be a $hit$storm. It's always better to weather that storm knowing it was called by the book and not with some makebelieve rules.

Still too soon, John?
;)

Oof. Great way to make a bad situation worse.

I'd say it was the lack of a throw that allowed the BR to reach 1B.

No rule basis to unring this bell IMO. Endure the rump-chewing from the defensive coach, and play on. Amazing that six years after Eddings, we still have trouble with this.

Any well coached F2 will apply a tag on the BR when there is a borderline catch/no catch. Regardless of how the umpires handled it, the players are responsible for knowing the situation.

Bad mechanics is not the same as correcting an incorrect call. The rule in the book that tells us to "fix" things applies to correcting incorrect calls - and has NOTHING to do with mechanics. If an umpire forgets to put his arm up for obstruction, it's still obstruction and we still rule accordingly. This whole situation is simply DMC. Play on.

Here is a perfect example of poor training. How many times have we stated with an anything & 2 count, any attempt by the batter needs to be clarified for the benefit of both teams. Either the PU comes up immediatly and says, "YES, he went" or he must go to the BU without being asked. In the advanced technique, the BU will come up with his decision without being asked by the PU.

Okay, so much for the swing part of this mess. As far as the D3K, if you as the BU see the pitch is not cleanly caught and there is a chance that the batter can become a runner, the BU should wait a moment for the PU. If the PU does not respond with a "no catch", the BU should be coming up with this with verbal ("No catch!") and the safe signal.

Lastly, if a situation like this happens again, you don't call TIME. If the defense leaves the field and there are runners on base, the umpires remain in position with their eyes on the runners. The offense has a possibility of gaining extra bases due to the indifference of the defense. Of course, you will be in a $hit storm and ejecting someone because your lack of being verbal about the swing or no catch caused the whole problem to start with.

And to know this situation the umpire(s) have to indicate what it is.

F2 knew he didn't field the pitch cleanly. Why does he need an umpire to tell him to tag the BR?


Tim.

The batter needs to know too. Should the catcher tell him?

And BTW, the catcher doesn't always know. And maybe the umpire didn't see it the same way.

Why call balls and strikes - the catcher and batter should know.

Similar to the school of thought in some rule sets that says the OT and DT should "know" it is an IFF even if nobody on the crew calls it. And then there is confusion if it is a force or a tag if the runners attempt (or are forced) to advance.

Still, a catcher should assume a no catch call on anything borderline to avoid this kind of heartburn. Just as runners are cautioned to be aware that they should not immediately come off the bag if they are called out running on a 3-2 pitch that might be ruled ball four.

You mean you wouldn't tell your catcher, "Hey, if the pitch had even a remote chance that it hit the dirt first, just tag the batter to be safe." ????

You would think after the Josh Paul/Doug Eddings BS that it would be an automatic reaction from every competent catcher.

Well and true said, SanDiegoSteve,

I suppose if we were coaches, we could say never roll a third strike to the mound until all parties involved acknowledge the third strike.

Since I'm still learning this craft, I also suppose that as umpires, the solution is to be emphatic and clear in our signals on any such third strike situation. The batter is either out on the caught third strike or he's a runner on the third strike not caught. It also helps to have a good pre-game understanding of how to treat these with your partner. But I have to confess, even after we cover this in pre-game, I can't recall ever looking at my partner to confirm. One of many areas I need to improve.

Your ridiculous comment about balls and strikes aside, Rich..............

I'm not saying that the umpires didn't screw the pooch here with their poor mechanics, but I am saying that you can't put all the blame on them. Don't give me this nonsense about the batter either. Apparently he figured it out quickly enough to be standing on first, now didn't he. I played catcher from the age of 8, and continued into my mid thirties, Rich. Your comment that the catcher doesn't always know if he's fielded the ball cleanly is complete BS. He's the only one on the field, in many cases, that is 100% sure whether he fielded it cleanly or not. Time for your daily cheese dose......

Tim.

You tell them that, they usually do it. That's not the issue.

So you're saying sometimes he doesn't know. Thanks. That was my point.


And the real question is what is the umpires opinion. It is the only one that matters, so the umpire should be obligated to let everyone know what it is.

I didn't want to speak in absolutes. There's always going to be a coach too dumb to teach his catchers what to do, or a catcher too dumb to know whether he's caught a ball or not.

Tim.

Curious, but wouldn't the umpire's opinion be at least hinted at by the lack of a verbal "out" call?

If the bat had touched the ball in a potential foul tip situation, the crew would be required to make a definitive call as to whether the catcher properly caught the ball for an out. Why should it be any different if the bat does not touch the ball? Perhaps crews have come to rely on the "automatic tag" by the catcher and overlook the need for a prompt call. It would seem "Strike three, no catch" would be the fairest thing for both the catcher and the batter to hear.

Please correct me if I am wrong, but don't some rule sets say that the infield fly still applies even if the crew does not give the verbal call. If so, that doesn't seem proper at all - how are the teams supposed to know if the crew has judged it not to be ordinary effort or just forgot to call it. The "non-call" sounds exactly the same in both cases.

Fixed your post.

Steve, I don't think all rule sets are the same for an uncalled IFF. NCAA and FED "expect" the players to recognize an IFF even if it is not called. In OBR, it is not an IFF if it is not called. According to J/R, the play stands but a DP which might result should be negated. I suppose the main difference is that im OBR the B/R would be safe at first. The problem with the other interpretation is that it is unclear if a force or tag is required if the ball drops.

You verbalize a 'yerrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrout!' on a swinging strike 3?

Hmmm. I see 11 year old's running on 3rd strikes anywhere near the ground. I see 11 year old catchers tagging batters even AFTER a catch, on anything close... Is this a skill somehow lost when one enrolls in college?

Tomato tomaahto... you say school of thought, I say rule. Same thing, right? This is not a "school of thought".

fify

If there's any doubt at all, I either say "catch" or "no catch" (or maybe "ball's on the ground") so the batter and catcher can tell.

Snaqs, the proper mechanic is not to verbalize "out" on a swinging strike 3. The reason is that if the pitch is not legally caught, the batter is not in fact out: he becomes a runner and may try for 1B (unless 1B is occupied w/ less than 2 outs).

So the absence of a verbal "out" would not signal that the batter may run. However, the proper mechanic is to verbalize "no catch!" which could signal the batter to run.

The outcome is dependent on the umpire's call, therefore there has to be a call. Really simple.

Why are so many denying that a call is necessary and/or that it's OK to not make one because the players should know? Why should they know the outcome of this call more than that of any other call?

Even Jim Evans reportedly said there has to be a verbal call because the two guys that need to know have their backs to the umpire. That's the basis of the revised mechanics - which someone should have been smart enough to realize was necessary in the first place.

It's amazing that so many folks realized the necessity of verbalizing it after the Eddings play, but let one of the bretheren goof it up and suddenly the onus is back on the players.

As I read it, most ARE agreeing that the umpiring could have been better in the OP AND are ALSO adding that the player's actions could also have been better.

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.

My strike call isn't verbal on a swing, but you're correct that the "not yet out" verbal is accompanied by a safe signal.

I'm telling both players, not just the batter, that the ball is (or isn't) on the ground.

We do this when there's a close catch in the outfield -- why wouldn't we do this at the plate when they can't see the signals?

Bob,
You are confusing the two mechanics. We do not tell the players that a ball is uncaught in the outfield (I prefer "Ball Down" to "No Catch" for the aformentioned reasons). I am alerting my partners to responsibilities on the play. I could care less about the players. That is why they have coaches.

I was envisioning a half swing strike, D3K rather than a full swing. You are correct about not verbalizing a standard swing and miss. However, I prefer to point and announce "Swing" to indicate the strike on a half swing miss. If the ball is uncaught, the safe signal goes out and all know, or should know, that the ball was not caught. I have never been to a game where a D3K didn't elicit "RUN!" by coaches, teammates and fans. If the batter doesn't know, too bad. The catcher knows if they caught it or not. If the catcher has any doubt, they are taught to tag the BR. I coached U11 this year and all the players we have and saw did this. I didn't see an issue with it this year at HS or college ball either.

I see a player swinging for the fences, missing and dejectedly walking away only to hear you say "Ball's on the ground." The catcher can't find it and the player now reacts to your prompting to safely reach the base. That could get ugly quick.

You know the umpire in question, so no names. In a state playoff game a decade or so ago, he was working 1B in a 3 man. The SS misplayed one deep in the hole and stupidly threw a late toss to first. The runner had just crossed the bag when the umpire said, "Ball's away, ball's away." as the throw skidded under the glove of the fielder. The kid took off for second and was gunned down a half step short. The kid's coaches went ballistic about his verbalization. He had to eat it because he knew he was wrong. No ejections, the out stood. He hasn't had a big game in a long time but still claims he was simply alerting us that the ball was uncaught.

It's been discussed ad nauseum over the past several years. I'll stick with my (and it's not just mine) mechanic. And, the play at first (at least that specific play) is different.

I never said you shouldn't. I simply pointed out the folly of helping a player rather than just making the call. Stick with what serves you best.

Yes, the play at first was different. Unless we are discussing the same play, all references to similar mechanics fall into that category. It happens all of the time here.

MikeStrybel,

The problem with the visual/physical mechanic only regarding your judgement of whether or not the catcher legally caught the pitch is that the two people with the most urgent need to know, the batter (-runner) and catcher, can't see your mechanic.

I use what Bob J. and Jim Evans suggest, both a physical and verbal mechanic:

Were a coach come out to complain about my mechanics, I'd laugh in his f... I mean, thank him for his input and send him back to the dugout.

The catcher may know whether or not he caught the pitch, but he has no idea whether you JUDGED he caught it unless you let him know.

JM

Three decades later and never had a catcher that didn't know how to turn his head if he had a doubt. I have seen a few coaches get angry at umpires who alert runners to D3K though. Dance with who brought you, J. I hope all is well.

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.

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"?

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?:confused: 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.

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?

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.

I explained already, I envisioned a half swing D3K.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.)

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.

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, 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.

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.

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 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.

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?

I think I'm with Mike on this one, as I use the same mechanic he does. I call the pitch, and then step back and away to my right while giving the safe signal, without a verbal. My take is that the batter now knows I called the third strike on the half swing, and it's up to him to take off for first or not. I'm not going to alert him to it.

Tim.

I typically will say "Yes, he did." or "Swing" while signalling with a point towards the plate. The whole field will know it is a strike call. On an uncaught pitch, I typically take a step away from the action (especially if the ball gets away) and signal safe. I'm 6'4" and 230# so I am easily seen by players and coaches alike. As stated a couple times prior, the pitcher and infield always react to a D3K situation at the levels of ball I umpire. The catchers know when they catch the ball too. Since I work hard to track the pitch to the mitt, I don't have problems selling this call. If I am up and looking at the play, they will know what to do. You can see this same mechanic used in by CWS and many MLB umpires. If it is good enough for them, I think I am pretty safe using it. The guy who taught me to say "Ball down." on trouble plays worked a couple CWS. He also uses the mechanic I just wrote about. Above 12U, it works just fine. Lower level players may need the prompting though.

If the pitch is caught on a swinging strike three, I use a 'gentle' hammer - fist closed and a short sweep down while saying "Out" just loud enough for the catcher and batter to hear. There's no need to embarrass the batter with more than that.

I love the quote. A buddy of mine always closes his clinics by saying, I am primed to umpire after 20 years of marriage. I know nothing and am yelled at for everything.

Kaliix,

Almost, not quite.

1. On a "checked swing" that I, as PU, judge a strike, I usually say, "Yes, he did!" and point the strike. (I don't use a hammer either, same reason as you.)

2. If the catcher did not legally catch the pitch I verbalize "NO catch!", accompanied by the safe sign, as is currently taught in all credible umpire schools, just as it states in the Evans manual quote I posted from earlier in this thread.

JM

What I do, but the verbal in point 2 is only if there's any question. If the ball is at the backstop, then there's no need for this part of the mechanic.

I have a question for those that alert the batter with a verbal on a D3K.

What's the difference between us becoming the 10th man on defense and alerting a team that they have an appeal situation (which we endeavor to not do by giving a safe signal when a BR misses 1st base), and us becoming the 10th man on offense by alerting them that the catcher didn't field the ball cleanly?

Is it simply because you feel that we're the only ones on the field that know the ball was or was not fielded cleanly, or is it more that regardless of what anyone else thinks we're the only ones that make that judgment on a close call?

Tim.

Good point, Bob.

I honestly don't understand the aversion or reluctance to verbalize (for the benefit of the F2 & BR) one's judgment that the pitch was not caught.

The catcher may "know" that he caught the pitch, as Josh Paul apparently did, but the only thing that matters is whether you judged he did.

In my experience, which "tops out" at JUCO/D-III, verbally communicating tends to eliminate goat rodeos, and I don't especially like goat rodeos in the games I do. I would guess Doug Eddings feels the same way - now.

As Mike S. says, it's your game and you get to live with the consequences, so do as you think best.

JM

others didn't make smart@$$ inferences like, "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."?"

Wow, you're thick. Did I say they did? Did I say I did? Good god.

Except by the two players immediately affected by your (non) call.
Irrelevant. What they need to know is whether you judged the ball was caught or not caught.

And there are plenty of upper level umpires who use and teach the verbal no-catch mechanic.

Big difference. A call is warranted when and if an appeal is made, not when the missed base occurs. No appeal - no call. A catch/no catch call is always warranted (if it isn't obvious) when the event occurs.It is because there are players on the field who might not know the result of an important judgment call and they are entitled to receive that information - from the umpire. I don't think it should be a secret.

Really. You said you like to call the out. Good for you. Others asked why you do that. After reading your smarta$$ comments on this forum, one would think you'd know better than to display thin skin.

Some seem to think that it is acceptable to alert the batter to a D3K. JE may teach it but plenty of the best umpires in the world ignore that advice and call it like I do. If your assignor/partner(s), league. association, team wants you to do it, go for it. I provided an example of a batter walking away after a hard swing, disgusted at the miss he is a step out of the box when you say, "No catch." The ball is on it's way to the backstop, the runner on third is coming home and the batter realizes he has another life, thanks to you. The run scores and he is safe. The defensive coach is now a foot from your face wanting to know why you prompted him. Be sure to have the JE book there to show him.

Meanwhile, on my field, the same thing happens and I have an out once Junior strides away from the dish. I don't feel the need to coach. The offensive coach will be pissed - at his player, for forgetting what to do.

Sorry. I was a catcher and knew how to tag players when I didn't catch the pitch cleanly on a third strike - swinging or not. I could also see the big umpire standing there with just a turn of my head, as I got up to throw the ball - to third for the K, to the pitcher if men were on base or to first for the put out.

When I batted, I was aware of the D3K. I also could see the umpire, he was wearing the blue shirt four feet from me.

Yes, they will know that by the lack of an out call. Sheesh.

I'm sure there are. I also see some upper level umpires who call the fair foul caught by pointing foul and then signalling the out. I see many more who simply make the out call. One book says you should do it while other camps say not to. There are plenty of other examples. In the end, if you are just starting MiLB, follow JE. If not, do what you need to move the game along and get the job done. Please those who matter. I wish you well.

You are correct. Absent an out call, the pitch was obviously not caught. Which means that you are conveying the same information as other umpires who choose to verbalize no-catch. Both mechanics alert the batter and the catcher, among others, to the D3K.

Do you all say "ball" on a pitch 1/4 outside the zone? And if you don't, do you silently call called strikes?

And I guess then there is never a need for signaling safe at any point during the entire game. If you don't call him out, then he is safe! It will be up to the defense to know to look at you during the play to signal such, silently mind you.

If you (or your association) want(s) to be at the top of the profession:

1) If the pitch is snared out of the dirt by the catcher on a swinging strike out, step back to give the catcher room to make his play and signal "Safe" while verbalizing "No catch" or "No" as you would any other catch/no catch decision during a game.

1a) If there is a question as to whether the batter swung, make that call first as you normally would do. If that means going to your partner for an appeal right away, do it. He should be already coming in with his call anyways if you don't jump on a swing right away. The emphasis of your call should be reflective of the closeness of the short hop just as you would do on any play.

2) On a swinging strike three, if the pitch is caught in flight, but close to the dirt by the catcher, give your normal strike 3 swinging mechanic. Its okay if this is a closed fist. Verbalize "catch" or "yes" just loud enough for batter and catcher to hear so as not to show up the batter on a play he may have already given up on. You wouldn't yell "out" on a guy who is out by 15 steps at first, so don't do it here.

2a) If it is a called strike 3 dropped 3rd strike, give your usual called strike 3 mechanic and immediately signal safe. Then verbalize "no catch" if it is not obvious to all the ball has not been caught. *This is where people who use a closed fist "out" mechanic for called strike 3 can get in trouble*

3) If a strike 3 pitch goes to the screen or rebounds far away from the catcher, no need to do anything. Everyone should know what to do on plays that are obvious. You wouldn't signal "no catch" on a routine line drive base hit because you do not have a judgment concerning if a ball was in flight or not when it was controlled by a player. So don't do it here.

3a) If it was a called strike 3, go ahead and give your A+ strike 3 mechanic because everyone is going to wonder how it could be a strike when its rolling around 30 feet from home plate.

All this being said, do what you want. This information is written for people who want to learn and improve their performance. The great thing in life is that you get choices. If you or your association don't agree or want to do otherwise, its your choice.

Hyperbole much?

1/4 what? A quarter foot? Sure. A quarter inch? Probably not. Coaches and players have accused me of missing pitches, so I say 'probably'. As for silent called strikes, stop looking silly.

So, I guess the guys working the CWS and MLB are not at the top of their profession. (sigh)

I'm pretty sure that has already been stated.

My raised arm and hammer will tell the players all they need to know. If you feel the need to say those things, go for it. It is ridiculous that some of you think your mechanic is the only one that should be employed. I have repeatedly stated that an umpire should do what the people paying the way want. It is arrogant to pretend that your way is better when many of the best umpires in the world don't use it.

[QUOTE]2a) If it is a called strike 3 dropped 3rd strike, give your usual called strike 3 mechanic and immediately signal safe. Then verbalize "no catch" if it is not obvious to all the ball has not been caught. *This is where people who use a closed fist "out" mechanic for called strike 3 can get in trouble*

Sure thing, coach. I'll let him know that he should run on a D3K. Got it.

My safe signal indicates that the ball was dropped. It is now obvious to all that the ball was not caught.

This has already been stated in the thread.

??? I don't believe anyone here has ever written that an umpire should do this.

This has already been stated in the thread, numerous times now. My mechanic is not better than anyone else's. It is comfortable and I have never had a problem with it. If you can say the same, ride that pony.

I recall a similar discussion on the 'proper' mechanics for calling foul fly balls that are caught. Some maintained that JE and the best mandate that you should indicate it is foul and then the out. Others contend that the foul call is irrelevant since it is an out. That topic became heated too. I'm sorry this one has since all along I have preached that one should do what gets the job done. Umpiring is tough enough.

So you think ruling by not ruling or signaling on a close catch/no catch on a ball in flight is good umpiring? Would you do that in any other situation ever on the baseball field?

Cause as your partner I'm going to have no idea what the hell is going on or what your decision was. Neither will the players looking at you. How is anyone to know that by not doing anything, you are telling them something. They don't know if you know what you are doing or not. You have a call to make. Make it either way. Just like you are supposed to.

Furthermore Mr. Strybel, I said if YOU or YOUR association want to get to the top of the profession. What people at the top the profession in MLB or anywhere else does not disqualify my statement. I was speaking to those who want to get there. You can't get there anymore if you don't use these accepted advanced mechanics. So twist words around that others write like you normally do, but don't do it to mine.

Secondly, you said I spoke in hyperbole. I feel as though I didn't. The purpose of an umpire or official is to judge action, apply appropriate rules, and convey your decision to participants, officials, and spectators. Hence my comparison.

By not making any signal or voice at any point when it is a close play, you are not serving your purpose as an umpire. Plain and simple.

Let's face it, rather than looking at the new and accepted ways of doing something he is relying on the way it used to be done and practices accordingly. Hmmm, what's the name that comes to mind ..... oh yeah, Charlie.

When Crawford muffed the catch last night, U3 could clearly be seen giving an emphatic safe signal. Is the mechanic for him to also say "no catch"?

Why wouldn't the PU use the same mechanic for a D3K? Not only do the players need to know what is going on but the spectators would like to know as well.

The Academy continues to teach pointing to the side followed by a verbal "no catch" accompanied by the appropriate visual signal.

However, this year, for the first time since the mechanic was introduced, evaluators have told MiLB umpires, at least at AA and AAA, to drop both the verbal and the visual "no catch", but continue to point to the side.

They believe it is the player's responsibility to know the status of play.

Do the evaluators send a memo to the players after they advise a sudden change in the mechanic or are they responsible to get it by osmosis?

Evaluators work with umpires.

Osmosis it is then.

While MrUmpire and I rarely agree, I appreciate him coming forward with the CURRENT instruction from JEA and the MiLB evaluation team. Thank you.

To those who insist that you must follow the guidelines of the best training academy for umpires, what now? It seems that the umpires who want to rise to the top - at least those in MLB and the CWS use the mechanic I do. I find the company comforting. If you decide that you still want to alert a batter to a dropped third strike, by all means do it. Be ready for the opposing coach to make you pay for that mechanic though. Unless of course, the assignor/team/league/association/partner wants you to coach the game too. Ask for more money.

I suggest Linda McMeniman's from Inquiry to Argument. It will help you argue effectively and with logic. To answer your first question, no. I have already stated that I signal. Please don't pretend I didn't. Your second question is more complex. Yes, there are plenty of calls that aren't signalled. Cans of corn, pick offs without a tag, runners scoring at home on passed balls and the aformentioned foul fly ball that is caught. I hope that helps.

If you can't see a 6'4", 230# umpire holding his arms out at his shoulders or don't know what that means, you really should consider selling your gear.

I don't work 11U baseball. The players I encounter know what the signal means just fine. So do the players in the pros and those who played in the CWS where that mechanic is used.

Seriously? Really? Do you verbalize your out calls, even the cans of corn? How will they know it's an out if you don't. You'd better get on the phone with Joe Torre right away. I saw a number of plays at first Wednesday night that simply had the umpire make a casual fist pump for an out, no verbalization. He will need to fix that so everyone will know what happened. Just like you are suppsed to do.

How's that crow?

It seems my advice is pretty solid given the evolving mechanic. Apology accepted.

Really? Worry about what the opposing coach thinks or says? I think you're getting way too dramatic over such a simple thing here. I haven't had a coach ever comment about it.

Do it or don't do it, the sun's still going to rise in the East tomorrow.

(All we need is another Eddings play to shift the tide back towards making a different call, though. Time makes people forget the backlash that came from that "it's my mechanic" nonsense he spewed at the press conference.)

No crow, no apology.

I have a hard time believing that this mechanic is no longer wanted at the upper levels of MiLB. While I am out of town I will get the correct answer.

Mike,

Were you to read what MrUmpire actually wrote, you would see that is not quite what he said.

He said JEA is STILL teaching the verbal and physical mechanic on the "no catch", while AA and AAA evaluators are teaching to simply "hold the point".

JM

No John, I read it just fine. They are telling their crews not to verbalize. The point is still a visual demonstartion that a swing occured but not an out. All along I have maintained that there is no need to verbally alert a batter to the dropped strike. We are not coaches.

The last line of MrUmpire's post: They believe it is the player's responsibility to know the status of play.

That is what I have written all along. It's nice to see that the MiLB directive is being invoked given that the top collegiate and MLB umpires have used it for the past year or so.

And a dropped third strike is not always the same is not a can of corn or a runner scoring at home without a play. It can often be a very close decision.


F2 fields out of the dirt and fires to 2nd for a play on R1 who is stealing with 2 outs.

How do I know that you aren't signaling "that's nothing" on a potential interference? You better be coming out of your shoes with a no catch here so everyone knows the status of R1, including me. Otherwise I'm going to watch the play and then look back at you to know what I have to do.


Why should a batter or catcher have to turn their attention away from the action so you can render a decision? On a catch/no catch in the outfield, so you not verbalize either? All runners look at Mr. Strybel now, its his time to shine.


Your favorite past time, twisting up my words. I've asked you not to do it twice now. Seriously. Really.

As I said earlier, a dropped third strike out of the dirt is alot closer than a can of corn or a guy who is out by 15 steps.

At no other point in the entire game do we not verbalize the status of a close play or decision. Not doing it here is playing with fire, plain and simple. By saying "no catch" you aren't telling the runner to run to 1st, you are telling him your decision on whether or not the pitch was caught in flight. He needs to know that so he knows whether or not he can advance to first base or not.

No TV? You can see the non-verbalization in use by MLB, NCAA and MiLB guys on cable almost every day. Around here we get MiLB games on Versus, one of the ESPN channels, and MLBTV.

I figured you wouldn't admit it. It is so easy to insult fellow umpires and find fault with their work. When it turns out that they are doing what is correct, you pretend that it isn't so. Enjoy the crow, there's a heap there for you.

Not sure why I try... maybe I'll stop.

For about the fourth time... no - I did NOT say that. Your propensity for putting words into other peoples mouths might work in your regular life - but it's rather stupid on line, don't you think, considering that the words the other person said are right there for everyone to read.

And many times it is not. You wanted to lump them all into one. I showed you how that is not the case.

Nah, if you can't see my outstretched arems and lack of an out call then I will be making your calls for you anyway. If the MLB and NCAA guys do it, why contend that you need more to do your job.

First question: Ask the MiLB, MLB and NCAA instructors and umpires. I have an 11 year old who plays and he knows to run to first on strike three swings. So do his coaches.

Second question: No. if you werbalize all of your outfield catches, good for you. I leave cans of corn alone. In fact, many of those calls don't even result in the oustretched arm out call anymore. This mechanic too is on display at MLB and NCAA ball parks across the nation.

Shining. Thanks.

I am hardly twisting your words. You write in absolutes. When shown that you are mistaken, you insult or pretend that the conflicting ruling doesn't apply to you. I have never once said that my way is better than yours. I find that the best umpires in the world don't verbalize the D3K any more and that's pretty good company to keep. If they want Rookie and Single A guys to do it and your ambition is to join those ranks, go for it. Call it the way you want but stop insulting those who disagree.

Come on, you wrote another absolute and I showed you that there are plenty of times when we don't verbalize the call. Now you want to say I twisted your words. Sad.

Ugggh. I see plenty of bangers in the bigs and collegiate ball where the call is physical only. The call at first with the dramatic pump across the body is a fine example. Plenty of outs on second base steals are done the same way. Are you saying that they don't know what to do because they didn't hear the call? Really? Really?

"They believe it is the player's responsibility to know the status of play."

from mbcrowder post #46 of this thread:

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).

You are right, it is difficult to pretend you didn't write something when the words are right there for everyone to read. Thanks for illustrating the point. I feel no need to put words in your mouth.

Calling the out on the batter alerts the catcher - verbally - that he does not need to throw because you judged the pitch was caught. How is that different from verbally alerting the batter that he is entitled to run because you judged the pitch was not caught?

As a point of information, I just heard back from a AAA umpire I know who said he had not heard any MiLB supervisor say not to use a verbal on the "no catch", and that it is his practice to verbalize "no catch" in situations that are not obvious.

In accordance with "...the guidelines of the best training academy for umpires, ...".

JM

Yes, that's exactly what I said. Thanks.

I did NOT state that I DO this ... I stated that the powers that be (the people that are telling us the proper and improper mechanics in situations like this) should CHANGE their direction and instead have us actually say OUT when the player is OUT. I stated (at least 4 times) that I currently do what we are told, but that changing what we are told to do would EASILY clear up this admittedly muddy scenario. If that can't penetrate your thick skull, I don't know what can.

Try decaf, please.

From now on, I will assume that when you offer advice on a mechanic it is not something you do, but rather what you believe should be done. Got it. Thanks for clearing that up for us.

I hope you had a chance to watch the AAA National Championship series last week. Columbus defended last year's trophy by beating Omaha in a great match up. Versus carried much of it. The D3K happened a few times. No verbalization. Maybe the directive hasn't filtered down yet to those who weren't assigned the playoffs. A bunch of the CWS guys are former AAA and JEA graduates. They used the point effectively, after stepping back and away. One even had his mask off for the call. That's moving! This past CWS was one of the most professionally umpired series I have ever seen. Hope all is well.

The number of posts in this thread likely exceeds the number of applicable calls in MLB this season :-).

I dunno...from the perspective of just being a fan, it would seem a verbal "no catch" lets both the B/R and F2 know they need to do something without having to turn around and look for PU's pantomime.