Don't get yourself straight-lined!
 

It's not the best screen capture, but the positions weren't any different half a second before this.

http://i.imgur.com/cDMeI.jpg

Here's the video: All Top Plays | LAD@COL: Hairston incorrectly called out at first - Video | MLB.com: Multimedia

Went 90 to throw; probably didn't read throw and no adjustment. 2SF would have worked here. Pick your poison.

I agree. While it's easy to get to 90 and looks like you're really hustling, it more often than not puts F3 between you and the play at the base, especially on the longer or off-balance throws from F5. Two to three steps fair is plenty.

Horrible. No excuse. Pure laziness.

If it's really a 90, it will not put F3 between you and the base. Most often, as in the case, he went beyond the 90. He was set up for a throw from third base or even then the mound and it came from the SS position. The bad throw and his failure to adjust made it worse.

Yeah, looking at it again, he was more like 45 degrees from where the throw originated.

Worst call ever?
 

Is there another?:confused:

When you figure how many games these guys work and how everything is being videoed, it is surprising there aren't more calls like this made. I might work 60 games a year. I wonder how many calls would show up on You Tube if every call I made was taped?

The MLB guys are great. I wish I were as good as the worst one. But the law of averages will catch up to them too.

I think we can all live with mistakes of judgement - it happens. But among this group, bad positioning that leads to a wrong call is going to get no sympathy. I agree that for the most part, MOST of the MLB umpires are as good as it gets. However, I believe we should be able to expect these guys to have stellar mechanics - and when they don't, it's not accepted here. There's no excuse for his positioning on this play.

Too damned far -- well beyond 90 degrees. And no read step on the bad throw -- he focused on the play before reading a bad throw. Happens to all of us. Horrible time for it to happen to him considering it ended up all over the web.

No such thing. The explanation is that they're human, and that's ok too. :)

I do not think it has anything to do with laziness, but an old mechanic that umpires that are older love to hold onto. Actually he had to hustle to get to that spot, but it is just a bad spot.

Peace

Agreed. Used it myself for many years. Fellow ump showed my 2-3 steps a few years back. using it since.

It's a bad spot in our games. In MLB, where the throw is accurate 99% of the time, that is a far better position than 2SF to judge whether the runner beats the throw. When things go awry, the shortcoming of the position is magnified, but that doesn't detract from how good a spot it is at that level.

"90 to the line of the throw" is a meaningless standard. You're always at 90. The length and direction of the perpendicular varies with the throw, but you're always at 90.

I disagree that plays at that level are that accurate. They have their share of bad throws just like we do at our levels. The difference is they have that look almost all the time, where we have to move inside the diamond and still have to make those calls.

Peace

That spot was never position to take that call in any mechanic system.

You are so intent to fault the 90 degree positioning that you are using that argument when the umpire wasn't close to 90 degrees.

He was lazy in that he never adjusted to the throw.

Nonsense. That is, if you really understand 90 degrees.

I am not intent on anything, just stating that that was once taught and this appears to be the way this umpire was taught. This was the standard when I first started and I still see MLB umpires doing this or old timers. And I disagreed with the lazy comment because it was not about being lazy, it was using a flawed system. I do not care if you disagree, but that is my take on the play.

Peace

I understand 'at a 90 degree angle' means 'perpendicular to.' Superimpose the line from the throw's origin to the bag on the picture, and I guarantee you I can draw a perpendicular between that line and Welke. And if the line of the throw is moved and/or Welke's position is moved, I still can.

If trainers would use the 45/15 vernacular (on a line through, when looking from the plate, the top left and bottom right corners of the bag--a 45 degree angle to the foul line--about 15 feet from the bag), new umpires would understand it a lot better.

Had Welke been there--roughly at the spot on the field hidden by where the screen is attached to the guy-wire--he'd have easily seen this play, and had an easy 1-2 step adjustment in any direction.