Tie goes to the .... ?

[Lonewolf986]

Originally posted by GarthB
As taught by both pro schools, there is no tie. Make a decision.

Thank you.

AGREED!

Baseball is black and white, Umpires are the judge, pass a verdict, get on with the game!

Theres NO SUCH THING AS A TIE!

*this post in no way, alludes to the fact that this guy WENT to the pro schools, i saw an ad online for them though

[Warren Willson]

Clearly none of the posters in this thread are paid active members of Officiating.com, or you would know that I posted a two-part series on this very subject entitled A Victory Sash.

The fact is the rules cover four (4) separate circumstances in which a perceived tie goes one way or the other by rule - you'll have to read the article to find out which rules are involved. In two cases a perceived tie goes to the fielder and in two cases it goes to the runner.

I also advised that current pro instruction says that any perceived ties always go to the defense - if in doubt, call the out. For simplicity and for the sake of keeping the pro game entertaining, the pro's rule only one way despite what the rules themselves say. Now isn't that just like them? *grin*

Cheers

[Warren Willson]

Originally posted by bob jenkins

By rule, the tie goes to the runner at first; the tie goes to the defense at other bases.

Not quite true, Bob. Compare OBR 7.10(a), for example, where by rule any perceived tie should go to the runner - at any base.

Cheers

[GarthB]

Warren:

In none of the rules referenced do the words "perceived tie" exist. The perception is solely in the mind of the reader. Not one pro instructor or rules interpreter I have spoken with acknowledges that the rules are "intended" to award a so-called "tie" to anyone.

As you know the rule book is filled with inconsistency and error. Add to that, room for reader inference.

Since I do not subscribe to officiating.com I haven't read your piece on the matter, but from a practical, everyday, non-mental masturbation point of view, I'll go with the pro schools....there is no tie. There are only decisions to be made.

[Warren Willson]

Originally posted by GarthB
Warren:

In none of the rules referenced do the words "perceived tie" exist. The perception is solely in the mind of the reader. Not one pro instructor or rules interpreter I have spoken with acknowledges that the rules are "intended" to award a so-called "tie" to anyone.

As you know the rule book is filled with inconsistency and error. Add to that, room for reader inference.

Since I do not subscribe to officiating.com I haven't read your piece on the matter, but from a practical, everyday, non-mental masturbation point of view, I'll go with the pro schools....there is no tie. There are only decisions to be made.

Since our readers are, by and large, human beings with separate individual perceptions of the same event, isn't it conceivable that there are observers who may look at a particular event and be unable to distinguish and make a decision based on the physical evidence alone?

The rules do not mention "ties" because the rules are written in black and white. As far as possible, those who made the rules have tried to cover all of the possibilities. But officials see events in living color, and that admits the possibility that two competing actions may occur so closely together that they cannot be separated or distinguished by an observer based on physical factors alone. That is why I said "perceived ties".

The fact remains that the rule language precludes ties by giving the umpire a factual basis for his decision, even when he cannot perceive a distinction between the two competing events.

• The runner must touch the base BEFORE being put out - if he touches it at the same time he is out [OBR 7.01].

• The runner is only out when tagged while OFF the base - if he makes it back into contact at the same time as he is tagged then he is safe [OBR 7.08(c)].

These terms alone clearly dictate that ties are impossible by rule and in reality, but not in the viewer's perception. That was my point. Sure that perception is only in the eye of the beholder, but when that beholder is the umpire it's still important that he deals with that perception consistently and with the full support of the rules he administers.

Now are you seriously going to suggest that pointing out what the rules actually say is an exercise in "mental masturbation"? I thought proper interpretation and application of the rules was part of our job as officials? In order to make "decisions" you need to have sufficient information to separate the competing events. That's what an umpiring DECISION is, after all - the separation of competing events by selecting the pre-eminent event based on the rules of the game.

Cheers,

[thumpferee]

JMO here.

I have to agree with those who say there is no tie. It is your judgement as an umpire to make a decision. I never heard an umpire say "Tie" on a close play at first or any other base. Obviously there are ties, and IMO there are circumstances during the play that help me make the call.

Example: 1) Diving play in the hole by the SS, throws form knees, runner and ball arrive simultaneously, "OUT"!

2) Ball hit to F4 who bobbles ball, runner and ball arrive simultaneously, "SAFE"!

3) Base hit by B1 and tries to stretch into a double, tag at second is applied same time runner touches base, "OUT"!

I'll be waiting for your thoughts on this philosophy.

[Lonewolf986]

AGREED!

I believe as we are told to "sell the call!"

The fields and runners should do the same!...(Positioning, speed, keeping the ball in the glove, etc...)

[jicecone]

"Clearly none of the posters in this thread are paid active members of Officiating.com, or you would know that I posted a two-part series on this very subject entitled A Victory Sash."

Clearly, like so many other media guru's, you are caught up into to your own world of greatness and find it difficult to believe that some people don't care about what you have written or believe it, just because you have put it in print.

Clearly what we have here is a Correspondent that goes to print, WITHOUT checking there facts.

NOW, how are we to believe the validity of your other works?

[Lonewolf986]

burn!

[Warren Willson]

Originally posted by jicecone
"Clearly none of the posters in this thread are paid active members of Officiating.com, or you would know that I posted a two-part series on this very subject entitled A Victory Sash."

Clearly, like so many other media guru's, you are caught up into to your own world of greatness and find it difficult to believe that some people don't care about what you have written or believe it, just because you have put it in print.

Clearly what we have here is a Correspondent that goes to print, WITHOUT checking there facts.

NOW, how are we to believe the validity of your other works?

I don't consider myself a "media guru"; just another official with something to offer from experience. My experience of researching the rules showed that there are actually 4 occasions when a perceived tie is clearly decided by the rule wording, and I shared that finding in the subject article. Some people would have no doubt have found that helpful. Go figure.

My comment that has obviously lit your wick was a reflection that NONE of the posters in this thread were apparently aware that the article even existed, because they were referring to only 2 instances where the rules differed on who gets the benefit of any perceived tie. The fact was noted with some curiousity, but not contempt. A pity you cannot react in the same fashion.

If you don't care about what I have written, no problem. Your track record is even worse with me! I don't care whether you "believe the validity of (my) other works" or not. I still get paid anyway. At least I know the difference between "there" and "their" in the English language! Obviously you need to read a whole lot more to improve your skills in that area!

Cheers

[jicecone]

"I don't care whether you "believe the validity of (my) other works" or not. I still get paid anyway"

Spoken like a true professional.

[Warren Willson]

Originally posted by thumpferee
JMO here.

I have to agree with those who say there is no tie. It is your judgement as an umpire to make a decision. I never heard an umpire say "Tie" on a close play at first or any other base. Obviously there are ties, and IMO there are circumstances during the play that help me make the call.

Example: 1) Diving play in the hole by the SS, throws form knees, runner and ball arrive simultaneously, "OUT"!

2) Ball hit to F4 who bobbles ball, runner and ball arrive simultaneously, "SAFE"!

3) Base hit by B1 and tries to stretch into a double, tag at second is applied same time runner touches base, "OUT"!

I'll be waiting for your thoughts on this philosophy.

I have already agreed that there is no tie by rule, and that what is required is a decision. My point was that even where an official perceives that a tie may have occurred the decision CAN and SHOULD be based on what the rule says, and not on some arbitrary rule of thumb ("If in doubt, call 'em out!") or a personal judgement about whether the defense deserved to make the out or not on the basis of their good or bad play. That's NOT the umpire's job, at least according to the rules.

The rules clearly dictate what the outcome should be in any perceived tie situation. I believe umpires need to make a decision based on the rules, not on what they may personally think was good or bad play. That's my take on the question. If you choose to do otherwise then so be it. I won't criticise you for your choice but I personally prefer to administer the game according to the rules, wherever that is clearly and practically possible.

Cheers

[Warren Willson]

Originally posted by jicecone
"I don't care whether you "believe the validity of (my) other works" or not. I still get paid anyway"

Spoken like a true professional.

I didn't say that I didn't care whether ANYONE believed what I had to say or not, only that I didn't care whether YOU believed it or not. Obviously your comprehension skills are no better than your spelling or grammar!

If I didn't believe that any new or aspiring official with an open mind would benefit from me sharing my experience and research, then I honestly wouldn't bother to contribute despite the money. Take it or leave it!

Cheers

[whitecane12]

Wow! Little did I realize my measly little post about "ties" would generate so much great discussion. Thanks, gentlemen for sharing your wisdom (and in some cases, perhaps, lack of the same!). I'm proud to be a part of such a vast network of professionals (paid or not) who are helping to perpetuate the game I love. I'll umpire with any of you any time...even if your grammar and spelling skills aren't as good as your umpiring skills!

When I teach umpiring clinics I make it a point to tell the trainees that it is their responsibility to get the call right every time. "Impossible!" you say? Not at all. You may not always be correct but you can always be right.

The correct call is literally what happened. If you could see replays from every angle and determine for certain what happened on any given play that would be the correct call.

The right call is whatever you, as the umpire, BELIEVES to be the correct call. Make that call every time and you will always make the right call.

Thanks again.

[BigUmpJohn]

Anyone ever thought of just yelling "TIE!" and letting the players figure it out? I thought I would try that maybe one time, but anyway...

If the runner beats the throw, it belongs to the runner.
If the throw beats the runner, it belongs to the defense.
If they both get there at the same time, it belongs to me.

Make a decision and sell the call. It's a judgment. That's why we get paid the big bucks.