Running Lane - Whose Call?

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by Forest Ump

I would not call RLI on this. He has to be completly outside of the lane before I make that call.

Please bring this up at your next clinic. This is wrong on many levels.

[Forest Ump]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

Please bring this up at your next clinic. This is wrong on many levels.

No need to. I screwed the pooch on this one. I was clearly thinking wrong on this one. Glad it's cleared up now (unlike the rest of this thread).

[gordon30307]

Jeff, you're the only person in the world who believes a running lane violation can be called by U1. How many authoritative sources do you need? You're flat out wrong. Sure you could call it but it would be indefensible to any assigner worth his salt and you would be left twisting in the wind.

[Manny A]

Originally Posted by gordon30307

Jeff, you're the only person in the world who believes a running lane violation can be called by U1. How many authoritative sources do you need? You're flat out wrong. Sure you could call it but it would be indefensible to any assigner worth his salt and you would be left twisting in the wind.

Bases loaded, infield in, and the batter hits the ball to F6. F6 throws home just slightly too late to get R3, and the PU makes an emphatic Safe call. Then F2 throws to first to make the play on the BR. BR is a few steps from first base, with his left foot outside the lane. U1 clearly sees that F3 couldn't find the throw until it gets past the BR, and F3 reacts too late to make the catch.

U1 is supposed to be silent here?

[tcarilli]

Originally Posted by Manny A

Bases loaded, infield in, and the batter hits the ball to F6. F6 throws home just slightly too late to get R3, and the PU makes an emphatic Safe call. Then F2 throws to first to make the play on the BR. BR is a few steps from first base, with his left foot outside the lane. U1 clearly sees that F3 couldn't find the throw until it gets past the BR, and F3 reacts too late to make the catch.

U1 is supposed to be silent here?

So, why can't the PU also see the RLI in this circumstance?

[Manny A]

Originally Posted by tcarilli

So, why can't the PU also see the RLI in this circumstance?

There could be plenty of reasons why the PU misses it. Just look at the play that took place in the White Sox/Angels game, where the PU made the call at home from 3BLX. He wasn't in an ideal position to see it. Heck, this could be a college- or high school-level game with a four-man crew and he's watching for a FPSR violation as F2's throwing to first. Who knows?

Again, I'm just trying to understand why a RLI violation cannot be called by U1, as gordon30307 states.

[mbyron]

There are 2 plausible positions being defended here:

1. PU will ALWAYS take a RLI call.

2. PU has PRIMARY responsibility for a RLI call and will make it 99.9% of the time.

These positions are practically indistinguishable for nearly all umpires for nearly all of their umpiring careers. Chances are, if PU doesn't make this call, it doesn't (and shouldn't) get made.

Not much point arguing over the 0.1% of cases, IMO.

[gordon30307]

Originally Posted by Manny A

There could be plenty of reasons why the PU misses it. Just look at the play that took place in the White Sox/Angels game, where the PU made the call at home from 3BLX. He wasn't in an ideal position to see it. Heck, this could be a college- or high school-level game with a four-man crew and he's watching for a FPSR violation as F2's throwing to first. Who knows?

Again, I'm just trying to understand why a RLI violation cannot be called by U1, as gordon30307 states.

Manny,

If you're working a 3 or even 4 man game UIC has no reason to look or call FPSR since there will be an umpire at 2nd. I gather your new at this gig the way your question is posed. Suffice it say if you're U1 NEVER make that call because it's not yours to make.

[tcarilli]

Originally Posted by Manny A

There could be plenty of reasons why the PU misses it. Just look at the play that took place in the White Sox/Angels game, where the PU made the call at home from 3BLX. He wasn't in an ideal position to see it. Heck, this could be a college- or high school-level game with a four-man crew and he's watching for a FPSR violation as F2's throwing to first. Who knows?

Again, I'm just trying to understand why a RLI violation cannot be called by U1, as gordon30307 states.

How as U1 can you know that, ex ante? So after the play it is possible for the U1 to offer information to PU about the play. I think there are times when U1 can see RLI, I just don't think we want him to be the primary judge of this infraction, nor do I think we want him even looking for it. Once the throw goes to first base the PU has nothing to do but watch the position of the runner, BU has other things he needs to attend to, that are more important than the position of the BR as it concerns the runner's lane.

Mechanics are a set of as we call them in the fire service, SOPs, or standard operation procedures. That doesn't mean that they are carved in stone and we can never ever stray from them. Instead what it means is that we will always begin with the SOPs in mind. Now after the fact, it might be possible to get help and it might come from U1. Mechanics that are based on the possibility of someone not following the mechanics are not mechanics...its called freelancing.

The PU did not make an adjustment after the play, that is correct, what we should learn from the video is that just because your primary play or responsibility is over, that does not mean you may not have further responsibilities.

I think this is about SOPs not about rare exceptions to the rule. There is a difference. Hell, I've seen PU's make calls on BR at 2nd base because both U1 and U3 went out in 3-man. That doesn't mean that that should be the mechanic, what it means is something F'ed up happened and it was covered by an "emergency" violation of SOPs.

As for force play slide rule at the plate why can't that be observed at 1BLX or the point of the plate and adjust to 1BLX in anticipation of the return throw the 1B?

[gordon30307]

Two person game my lips are sealed. Three person game I'll answer it like this. I've had hundreds of plays involving bunts, swinging bunts and the play you described. I'm too busy watching the ball, the feet, the catch etc. the last thing I'm going to make note of is where BR feet are in relation to the running lane. Besides in the play you described BR MUST leave the running lane to attain first base since first base is in fair territory. No violation. No ****ing way I will ever make that call as U1. If you choose to make that call do so at your own peril.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by gordon30307

Two person game my lips are sealed. Three person game I'll answer it like this. I've had hundreds of plays involving bunts, swinging bunts and the play you described. I'm too busy watching the ball, the feet, the catch etc. the last thing I'm going to make note of is where BR feet are in relation to the running lane. Besides in the play you described BR MUST leave the running lane to attain first base since first base is in fair territory. No violation. No ****ing way I will ever make that call as U1. If you choose to make that call do so at your own peril.

Who said BR LEFT the lane to attain first base - who said he was ever in the lane in the first place?

Make this sitch clearer - BR is CLEARLY inside the line, was never in the lane, and the ball hits him in the back. And PU is not looking as he's dealing with something at home plate (for example, R3 hurt, F2 arguing with ump, play was close so he decided to point at home plate several times like in the other thread, etc.)

To say U1 can NEVER make this call is mistaken. Rare? Yeah, probably. But NEVER??? No way.

[gordon30307]

Have you ever called it or seen it called in a 3 person game?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by gordon30307

Jeff, you're the only person in the world who believes a running lane violation can be called by U1. How many authoritative sources do you need? You're flat out wrong. Sure you could call it but it would be indefensible to any assigner worth his salt and you would be left twisting in the wind.

Gordon with all due respect, people on this site are not in an authoritative position in my officiating world. They are just some people on the site that talks about what they think or why we all should do something. I do not work for any of them and never will. Considering that I have watched the post season games and seen a lot of things done that were not "taught" by the state or organizations, somehow those individuals still keep working.

I will put it this way, when I worked the state finals a few years ago I had a play there it was my call all the way but I got screened. This was a shot fly ball in short center and the SS made a great play to dive at the ball. I had no idea if the SS caught the ball or not and immediately looked to my partner at first base (3 person game) and he gave me a signal of "out" without me using my voice or asking any other way but giving him a look of "help." My partner knew what I wanted instinctively and we made the call and it took probably a second to complete. When we got into the locker room, the UIC praised us for getting this play right. This was not a stated mechanic; this was not what we talked about the day before the tournament started or the meeting that is required or in any situation. When you get to that point where every play is being evaluated (and you may get there relatively soon), then talk to me then about these authoritative people and what they think then? I know where my bread is buttered and it is not with some guy that has a name I have no idea who they are. I cannot go to Craig or Brad and tell them, "We had this discussion on an officiating board and this is what they told me to do." They would start laughing before I finished that sentence. And that does not even include what happen with me in the State Finals in football this past year which at least a very well-known play. Of course there were people that disagreed, but the powers that be did not say a word or complain. We all have to choose why we do this and who we do this for. I am secure in the fact that what I believe is right for me. It might not be right for you. Do what works for you and let the chips fall where they may.

Peace

[tcarilli]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

This was a shot fly ball in short center and the SS made a great play to dive at the ball. I had no idea if the SS caught the ball or not and immediately looked to my partner at first base (3 person game) and he gave me a signal of "out" without me using my voice or asking any other way but giving him a look of "help." My partner knew what I wanted instinctively and we made the call and it took probably a second to complete.

That's exactly how it is supposed to work, it was your responsibility, you got blocked you looked to him he helped! He helped you, you made the call. That is awesome when it works. Hurray! That is infinitely better than getting together after the fact especially on a catch/no catch. This is what good umpires do! Note, however, that this is not the same as U1 making the call that belongs to you, while you at the same time keep responsibility for a call.

Originally Posted by JRutledge

people on this site are...just some people on the site that talks about what they think... I do not work for any of them and never will.

Why, then, engage any of us? I wrote earlier about the principal of charity. I am assuming you don't want us to read your thoughts on certain things and conclude: I don't work or will never work for him, so what he writes has no merit. Yet, I submit that is exactly what you are doing to those of us who differ in opinion from you, even slightly.

I have learned some things from this thread in terms of the way I think about that play in particular and mechanics in general. Writing them out and considering them has had the effect of softening some of my positions and hardening others. That is why, I participate in this forum and in the principle of charity is why I assume others do the same. Any day, I can learn something new or reconsider something I have learned before is a good day.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by tcarilli

Why, then, engage any of us? I wrote earlier about the principal of charity. I am assuming you don't want us to read your thoughts on certain things and conclude: I don't work or will never work for him, so what he writes has no merit. Yet, I submit that is exactly what you are doing to those of us who differ in opinion from you, even slightly.

I am giving an opinion, but I backed my opinion with facts as well. There is nothing in the mechanics books (or my state mechanics which does not use NF) that says it is always someone's call or not someone's call. When I called people on it they changed the standard or tried to suggest that I had no idea what I was talking about. And I understand completely you can dismiss my opinion totally. I am not your supervisor or someone you will have to work with in any game. Gordon is the only person I have worked an actual game with that is on this site. And even Gordon is not in a position to tell me what I should do nor can I tell him what to do. Not all umpires agree on every single mechanic or philosophy. I work with too many people that have totally different philosophies and somehow we get through the games. I have been on this forum for so long I have perspective on what these discussions ultimately mean. I had people say all kinds of person things about me like I would never work this and I would never work that and what do you think happen? I do not have to prove anything to anyone and everything I wanted to accomplish in baseball I have. I could retire today and be totally fine with my baseball umpiring career. I am close to accomplishing something in officiating that only 3 others have in my part of the state. I am good with my positions on these things. I am not sure many people can say that. And I did not get their by listening to people here exculsively and making career decisions for those opinions. I share my knowledge, take it or leave it. I do not lose a single cent here if you hate my position unlike some people.

Originally Posted by tcarilli

I have learned some things from this thread in terms of the way I think about that play in particular and mechanics in general. Writing them out and considering them has had the effect of softening some of my positions and hardening others. That is why, I participate in this forum and in the principle of charity is why I assume others do the same. Any day, I can learn something new or reconsider something I have learned before is a good day.

Good. You seem to have some perspective on what this place is to you. Just do not be upset that others might not take it that way.

Peace