Timing play signal in MLB
 

Are MLB umpires taught to give the timing play signal to each other with 2 outs and RISP. In the Was/LAD game LAD had a runners on 2nd and 3rd with a ground ball to F5 who knocked it down and tagged the approaching runner when the lead runner was 2 steps from home. PU didn't even realize a time play was happening and allowed Mattingly to talk him into allowing the run. It wasn't a blown call as much as PU was not even aware of his responsibility on the play. Even a decent HS crew would never make such a stupid mistake.

Don't know what is taught, but I have seen the PU tap his wrist to indicate a potential time play.

Kemp was still 15' from the plate when the 3rd out was made.

Cost Washington the game!!!

Stupid replacement refs...

:)

I believe they still signal with a tap of the wrist however, this is like crrying an indicator in your hand or just not using one. In either case, there is no guarantee you are not going to screw something up.

As long as we have humans officiating and playing sports, there will be screw ups and therefore a topic for discussion on this forum, in are off time.

Yes, they are taught to give a signal but like the infield fly signal, it doesn't always happen.

Yes, it does appear from the replay that the run was counted in error.

Yes, it did impact the final score although I would not go so far as to say it cost Washington the game (but then I still don't think Don Dinkingers call cost the Cardinals game 6 in '85 either).

Wrong, I have seen even a "decent HS crew" kick this call as well. Never one of my games though:).

Then Washington didn't get enough runs! That's not the umpire's fault!
But the timing play was blown, big time!

Wanna bet? I see it all the time when I am evaluating members. I had at least seven of them this past season. And they all gave the old "fingers on the watch" signal. But if the PU doesn't line up the plate with the play, the time play will always be blown. That is what I find to be the biggest problem - lining up the plate and the play.

This clip ends in "no run." Was it later changed? Major argument by Washington?

Here's the anatomy of the call. As soon as the play happened, the radio guys (I heard the radio replay this morning, though I was watching on TV) noted that Alan Porter, PU, did not make a call on whether or not the run scored and the TV guys were saying that he was just standing at the plate like the usual between innings routine. That suggests that he checked out on the play and didn't realize that he had a call to make on the time play. So no call is made and Mattingly comes out to talk to Porter, by this time TV replays are showing that Kemp didn't come close to the plate at the time of the tag, and I'm expecting to see Porter telling Mattingly "no run," but then the crew goes into conference, and I knew (yes I'm a Nats fan) that this could mean trouble. He wouldn't be talking to the crew if he saw the play because it wasn't even close. Now from what Davey Johnson said in his postgame, he was told that none of the BUs said they could help; which is fair because there were 2 other runners on the loose to occupy the BUs. At this point Porter is out on a limb and he has a decision to make, allow the run or not. Here is where I think that professionalism would dictate don't allow the run if you can't be certain that it scored in time. Here is where the crew chief could have helped Porter. Porter has 2+ years of MLB experience, so the crew chief should have been telling him, "If you didn't see Kemp score in time, no run." What we get from Porter after the crew met is him pointing home saying score the run. Then Davey comes out and he tells Davey that he allowed the run because he saw him score in time. Well, then why didn't you signal right away and why did you conference. Answer, because you weren't paying attention and now you are compounding the blown coverage and poor professional judgement with poor integrity saying you saw something that didn't happen. So I think the play broke down on 4 levels, first, Porter didn't realize he had a time play, second, he never should have allowed a run he wasn't sure had scored, third, the crew chief could have helped him and didn't, and fourth he shot his integrity by essentially making up what he said to Johnson. I wonder how MLB will handle this kind of thing. I think its a lot more serious than a simple blown call on a bang bang play.

While I did read all that, paragraphing that would make your post more readable for all.

U1 and U2 did not have anything to do here so if any could help they could have. But it was PU's responsibility to know he has a call to make and make it.

They wouldn't have signaled Time play here because there was only 1 out. These guys work together all year and often time many years in a row. I've watched for this at games I attend and some crews do it and some don't. Nobody I know signals "time play" with one out even though it is a possibility.

They got it wrong. I think the PU spaced out and didn't realize what it was until it was too late.

There were 2 outs.

I stand corrected. Thank you.

So basically the 2 minor league umps Fagan and Porter got their plays right. (Fagan on the call at 3rd and Porter by sleeping at the plate and making no call) and the the two ML umpires Winters and Wegner(ML??????????????XX) got it wrong.

Ok I will cut Winters some alack, he knew Porter was in trouble and immediately came into the plate to consult with Porter but on that play Winters has to wait back at 1b for a possible play there and probably has no angle ont that. So its Wegner at 2B who has no play to call, who has to help the helpless Porter on that one and obviously he was asleep also.

Whats sad here is that Porter is a solid umpire who should be promoted and probably will have ot wait a couple of years for that.

Yes I train them and they are trained to properly handle the Time Play. But unfortunately not all heed the training.

Both of you, knock it off.

Not that I'm looking for something to excuse the PU here, but ya gotta admit that the play was so unusual, it's quite possible that it caught him totally by surprise, and that's why he missed calling the Time Play at home.

Sometimes, the philosophy "Expect the Unexpected" that we preach to young umpires at the lowest levels is forgotten by seasoned veterans. I know I've been caught moving one way in anticipation of a play, or relaxing when I think a play isn't going to happen, and then something out of the ordinary catches me unprepared. This PU probably thought Zimm was going to field the ball cleanly and throw to first, and then when Zimm muffed it, he assumed there would be no play.

Stuff happens even in the pros. Being ready for that stuff is easier said than done.

Actually, U2 has to be ready for a run down on this. He has to watch the play at 3B to see if R2 comes back or not. There is no help on this. PU is all alone and blew it.

I know that's right, and probably don't even know what a time play is. Comes without saying. Just an inexperience thing that comes with the territory.

A possible explanation that would make sense
 

Nats F2, Jesus Flores, had an interesting comment on the play in the W. Post. He said that he thought PU thought that the bases were loaded in which case in PU's mind, there would be no timing play on the first runner because the play at 3rd would be a force. That could explain why PU didn't even indicate whether or not the run scored after the 3rd out. Only when Mattingly came out to ask about the run did PU then realize that the out at 3rd was not a force.

The W. Post article didn't state whether Flores said that PU told him this or not, but this explanation is easier to conceive of than PU knowing that the runner on 3rd could be involved in a timing play but then forgetting to watch for the tag/touch. The T play signal would have been given, but PU would not be thinking that it applied to the lead runner.
Edit/Delete Message