3 and You're Out!
 

For the 3rd time that I've seen this season a MLB umpire calls a runner out when the fielder doesn't even have the ball! This time it was another play at the plate in the Toronto @ Detroit game.

But they are paid a lot of money right? I would think they could do very basic things that we are taught at a LL umpiring camp. It is time to overhaul that staff. I would love to see video but that is unacceptable if remotely true.

Peace

That is freshman ball stuff. You have got to be kidding me. :eek:

Peace

Good grief.

Yeah, it's getting pathetic but look at it this way. We are gaining a lot of video to show our rookies!

1. Even the big dogs make mistakes!
2. Sometimes you are in the wrong place!
3. Timing, timing, timing!
4. Don't rush the call!

Heresy. We don't work at their level, we cannot possibly understand.

The worse part is that it doesn't look like he was out if there was a tag !!! :confused::confused::confused:

Yes we all make mistakes but this is a pretty basic one. It is one thing to miss a call that is close, but to rule when you know the catch has to be made or completed is another. And it has happened more than once, which makes me think that the MLB does not review game tapes or situations like other sports. Heck once I would see this by a fellow umpire in the league, I would think this is something I would want to totally avoid. But maybe the MLB does not do this constant training and evaluation like the other sports. This is the third time something like this has happened this year, I guess I would think MLB would tell their umpires this is not acceptable.

Peace

If one of those MLB umps misses 432 more calls I'll legitimately be able to say "I'm as good as he is!". :rolleyes:

JJ

Which, so far, covers a span of nearly 2000 games. Do three screw-ups in 2000 games equal a trend or a fluke?

This is something that should not happen at all. Trend, fluke or anomaly, it should not happen. If I can go through hundreds of varsity and college games and it will not happen once with me or partners, then I think a MLB Umpire can avoid this mistake that is working 100 plus games a year. Look we all make mistakes, but some should not happen. This is one of them and certainly after you see someone on tape do this previously in the same year.

Peace

And Rut, again, shows he is king. If he doesn't make a mistake, that means no one can.

If I did that (or had that plate stance with that head height) in the minor leagues during a game in which I was being evaluated by PBUC staff, my career might be over (unless I was in rookie ball and just starting my career).

Why does suggesting that a mistake like this means someone criticizing a basic issue as meaning you are king? There are some mistakes like a judgment, even positioning and sometimes philosophy is one thing, but this is basic procedures we are discussing. I cannot believe that if you are the best in the world as many here claim that MLB umpires are that they cannot take the time to wait to see if the fielder caught the ball by showing them the ball. Sorry, but that is not just a mistake. That is either apathy or laziness to have this happen 3 times that we all know of. Again, in the NBA when officials make mistakes they have video they can review daily to their staff to let them know what has been done good or bad. The NFL (despite the replacements) goes over video and plays every week that were done good or bad. I wonder if MLB takes that same focus on continuing to train their staff. Because at all levels that I work we constantly go over stuff to not continue mistakes and many of the mistakes I see from MLB guys seems like they are often going through the motions and living off their past experiences. You cannot do that as an official no matter what your experience is at any level because you constantly have to work on your craft. Please do not tell me that MLB umpires like Bob Davidson is ten times better than many D1 or even HS umpires across the country because he is in the MLB ranks.

Peace

Happened again today in the Angels vs. Tigers game from the first base umpire.

I was about to post that
 

Tigers batter bunts to third...barehand pickup and throw...1B tries the pick and the BALL ROLLS TOWARD THE FIRST BASE UMPIRE and he punches him out.

He did call him safe without a conference, though.

I guess it is hard to take a second to take a second look.

Peace

Second look? He almost had to dodge the ball rolling at him whilst he was punching out the runner.

I would suggest this guy should consider a first look.

The term is a commonly officiating term (not so much in baseball and maybe why these things keep happening) to illustrate to take your time that is all.

I did not see this last play so I cannot see how bad it was. But I guess pointing this out makes me a better officials overall because I recognize how this should not happen. Then again this goes back to my point that multiple sports officials tend to be better as they have perspective of taking their time to make calls in other situations.

Peace

Anybody have a video link? It didn't make Baseball Tonight, probably because nobody got chunked.

MLB umpires are notorious for making quick calls and not exercising good timing. Most often, they get the call right and nothing is said. But on occasions such as these, they look totally inept.

So I wouldn't say this is indicative of a new trend. They've probably been doing this for years. We just have more opportunities to see these mistakes with all the replays we have access to nowadays.

I can't wait to see a PU coming up with a Strike call when the batter hits the pitch... :p

Yadier Molina says collision at plate was 'clean play' | MLB.com: News

This one is interesting.

Your point being??????????

Well, he is....

JJ

He is?

Peace

There are no HS-exclusive umpires that are as good as Bob Davidson, whether you love him or hate him.

Some of the D1 guys that are former pro umpires could step in at the MLB level and do fine.

I agree. Contrasts with the situation in the NFL, though the "replacement" refs are mostly not D1.

The Lingerie League aint D1? Who knew?

Some are D-36...er, 36-D.

I totally disagree with that point of view. For one the level you work in baseball especially is not a reflection on your talent level in any way. There are HS only umpires that would be better than D1 guys if given the chance, but will not likely ever work that level because of availability. It is hard for many to get to a game at 1:00 in the afternoon on a week day if you have a job or family for that matter. That alone is a hindrance for many to work small college ball let alone higher level D1 ball. Secondly to be a pro umpire you have to be young enough or willing to sacrifice your life on many levels just to get that chance. I umpire that is working on their craft at other level might be just as capable to work any level if they had the time or energy to make it there. And I think there are many D1 guys that have no pro experience that could step in tomorrow and do well. I am also saying this that there would be an adjustment period to move to any level, but I do not think it would take long for many across the country to take Davidson's job and be a long time answer. What we do at the lower levels of baseball is not that drastically different than what they do at the pro level, you are just dealing with different personalities and different attitudes. But do not tell me with the attitude and the way Davidson carries himself on the field that someone could not do what he does and be perceived better.

Peace

I don't think it is a hard and fast rule about working at the level of your talent, but in this area at least, I don't know of many (Or any) HS-only umpires who wouldn't get eaten alive in even a D2 game.

I'm not talking about whether or not someone at the high school level or college level could work their way to MLB if they had the time/money/inclination. I agree with you that they could. There are guys working various levels of baseball that could be as good as MLB umpires if they had the time/money/etc. to do it.

I am talking about running a high school umpire out there this weekend in an MLB game compared to Bob Davidson or any other MLB umpire. It would be far worse than these guys working the NFL preseason games right now.

I did not say that you could run anyone out there and they would be better. Of course this would be dependent on the person you bring out there. I even think it is easier to make that transition because baseball rules are not that different. Baseball does not have the complicated rules that football has with the college level and NFL level. There are not on a regular basis the kind of situations NFL guys have to face with very complicated and once in a season situations. Even the basic situations are complicated in football. What does a baseball umpire have to do the most? Call balls and strikes; get an occasional tough call at a base? Even the speed of the overall game outside of the pitchers is not going to be that drastic, if you have good timing and good concept of what your strike zone is. Again, I am talking about Davidson specifically more than anything. I do not think he is at the top of his profession at that level. I think he is at the lower end or a guy many would not miss. Again my opinion and certainly you have the right to disagree with me (be my guest), but I have seen talented guys that could replace him now and I am sure there are guys at the AAA level that certainly would do just fine in his spot.

Peace

This is pretty simple...if the player is tagged out...I say show me the ball...then I either bang them out or call them safe if he cant show me the ball...not that tough.

Of course there are AAA guys that would do fine in his spot. Most of the callups are very competent and some would be in the top half of MLB umpires if they were full time.

I disagree that the overall speed of the game at that level is not drastic. The difference between lower level college games and D1 is drastic, and then there is a difference between D1 and the higher levels of MiLB. There is a HUGE difference in the speed of the game from HS to MLB.

Another part that would tough for most HS umpires is going from 2-man to 4-man mechanics without a good amount of training/instruction. (Or even 3-man)

I would recommend finding the ball without asking the fielder.

What speed? Until recently we were using metal bats where the ball was coming off of the bats at a higher rate of speed than MLB in many cases could produce with wood. And that is only about the ball, not the players for the most part. Actually older players tend to make many plays routine that younger players make much more difficult.

This is not a sport where you have to move faster because the players are faster and we have to keep up with them. The speed of the game in other sports where the ball is not factor is harder to officiate. In baseball we are mostly in a fixed position and only move when the ball is hit. I do not see that as a hard transition for anyone with decent and good training.

And I have seen an umpire get hurt in the MLB and was forced to 3 man to cover the game and those umpires looked lost on how to cover basic plays, which is understandable considering that is not a regular thing for them. But do not tell me a guy that now does not have to move that much is at a huge disadvantage. We will just have to disagree on this one. Considering that all of this conversation is because MLB umpires did something that is basic more than once and would make an HS umpire look very bad, that is not a good reflection on their ability to do their job. Yes we all make mistakes, but not those kinds of mistakes if you have been to any training. I do not think I have ever done this personally and I cannot think of 3 times where a partner did this at the HS level. I have never seen this at the college level. It does not make me perfect, it just means that I know that I have to wait and so do my partners before we make a call. It is a vital part of our job especially at a close play at home where collisions and the ball comes out frequently. Either it is ability or apathy.

Peace

I think this is dependant on the level of play. In a HS game or above, I agree that we don't need to ask a fielder to show us the ball. At lower levels of ball it's not a bad thing to do. I've seen many times when a fielder has applied what looked to be a tag with possesion of the ball end up with the ball under the runner or even the fielder. They both just look up at you while laying in a pile with a deer in the headlights look waiting for you to make a call. A simple "show me the ball" gives them the hint they're looking for.

YMMV

Tim.

There are HS or college players that do not know to do that on certain plays. I have no problem with someone asking if they have not shown them some evidence that they caught the ball. Usually a player that has caught the ball is very willing to show the ball to prove they made the play. I do not see this as a big deal as it is better to make the call based on them having the ball then making a call and assuming.

Peace

Kids do the darndest things.
 

What do you do if one of them throws the ball at you after asking to see it?

Just saying.

I'm with you, Jeff. The reason I don't think we need to do it in HS and above is because the players at that level know they need to show us the ball on these type of plays. Perhaps it's because both youth associations I belong to instruct our umpires to ask to see the ball, and the HS players that came through those programs are accustomed to it.

Tim.

I do not disagree with that position at all. I just do not see a major problem if someone does either way. But I would not call someone out if it is unclear if they caught the ball. Sometimes it is obvious.

Peace

True, but at least 4 times this year, a MLB umpire called a player out when the fielder did not, in fact, have the ball.

The potential problem is when the fielder raises his glove/mitt to show you the ball (after you've directed him to do so), and the ball pops out. Now you have a no-tag, and it's all your fault.

It is the umpire's job to find the ball, unassisted.

You lost me here. What do you mean the ball pops out? If you have the tag with the ball, why would it fall out afterwards and be your fault?

Peace

If the fielder raises his glove to show you the ball and the ball pops out, he just demonstrated he did not control the ball (which is what you need to determine before banging the runner out on the tag). If he is showing you the ball because you told him to do so, it is going to be perceived as being your fault.

Find the ball. It's not that hard. It takes a couple/three seconds under the worst of circumstances. Everyone knows what you are (properly) looking for.

Never heard that explanation before, but I guess if you feel it is your fault, then you have the right to feel anyway you wish. I think if they cannot demonstrate they controlled the ball, that is on them. And it is not when they come up with the ball I am concerned with, it is the fact they do not have the ball at all I am mostly concerned with. Never had this as an issue and never considered it my fault if a fielder did not have the ball. Then again there are umpires that worry about things I clearly do not worry about.

Once again I did not say it was hard to do or that it is required to ask every single time. Do not project everything based off of one situation we are discussing here. I just know that will not make a call without some demonstration that the fielder has the ball. They might be trying to make the next play and it is obvious they had the ball the entire time. Either way I am not calling out and the ball is 10 feet somewhere else. I am not going to feel responsibility because a player does not have the ball secured. Never felt that way ever in all my years of doing this umpiring thing.

Peace

Never mind.

I agree, some people worry about things that others could give a damn about. ;)

Peace

Please tell me you're not one of those "Voluntary release can last for 30 seconds" guys. Had a partner try to tell me (and enforce!) that if an outfielder catches a ball, then jogs in toward his dugout and the ball falls out near the mound, it wasn't a voluntary release, therefore not a catch.

The player makes a catch or tag, then loses the ball on subsequent action, it's still a catch/tag. "Voluntary release" is a guide on a banger, it doesn't last forever.

No, I'm not in that crowd (I doubt it's a crowd). Here's another example for your partner:

R2 stealing, line drive "caught" by F5. F5 takes 6 steps chasing the now retreating R2, dives for him and the ball pops out when he hits the ground (involuntary release). Is the batter out?

But yet you're concerned that you can't sell an out if the ball falls out of a glove when it's opened to show you the ball several seconds after a tag?

I have no problem selling whatever it is. But control of the ball must be demonstrated before, during and after the tag. How much after is judgement. I want to see secure possession of the ball after the tag. If he raises up his glove and the ball pops out, the possession was clearly not secure.

I think you're way overthinking this, Dash. I have no real clue how you wouldn't rule the fielder lifting the glove to show you the ball after a tag as a separate movement that would satisfy voluntary release.

Tim.

I think just the opposite.

Nobody said anything about voluntary release. Try not to be so clueless next time.

Scroll back up and read post #50 in this thread. Maybe this time you'll get it. And while you're at it, give a quick peek at the J/R and JEA and you'll see where the concept of voluntary release is appropo here.


I hear Sweet Baby Rays really helps with the taste of crow........


Tim.

Don't quote the trolls.

Yes. The ball popped out on the tag attempt, not on the catch attempt.

Or are you suggesting that there was no voluntary release after the catch?

Yes post #50 was an excellent example of what dash was stating. NOT!

Both. The batter is out, and there was no voluntary release after the catch.

Then, by rule, you would HAVE to call the batter Safe on the uncaught ball. You cannot consider this as "no voluntary release after the catch" because that would make it a no-catch.

That was the point of my response. The ball came out of the glove when the fielder attempted to tag the runner, not when he attempted to make the catch. The catch essentially ended as soon as the fielder turned to begin his chase of the runner. Even if the ball had popped out of his glove as he was running after the runner and before he lunged to make the tag attempt, the catch would still be legal.

Incorrect.

Then please explain to me what I'm missing when I read this in OBR 2.00's Definition of Catch:

In establishing the validity of the catch, the fielder shall hold the ball long enough to prove that he has complete control of the ball and that his release of the ball is voluntary and intentional.

Complete control of the ball is necessary for a catch. Although a voluntary release is always proof of complete control, sometimes a catch is established before there is any release of the ball.