We Kicked it! Bad mechanics?

[mick]

Last night, two-man, Senior LL, trailing team at bat with bases jammed and 2 out. Me at C. Favorite partner is PU.

BR shanked one that was on the 1B line about 20’ behind the bag. F4, F3 and F9 start after the ball.
I took a couple steps toward the play and then decided to stay at C assuming PU had the line and if I left the obvious play at 2B, or possibly 3B will be uncovered.

PU wanted to stay home to cover the plate, but moved up the line 15’ for a look.

F4 dived for the foul ball (by 6-8”) and made the catch? Did we call the batter out? Yes.

Fans on 1b side groan. Three outs. Rally is dead.

Trailing team’s Manager comes to us and started with, “I’m sorry, guys, … I know you had no chance of seeing that play, but the second baseman caught, dropped and reacquired the ball on the bounce.” He was totally polite and, having dealt with this man before, I had no reason to doubt that what he said was totally true.

We both saw the dive the catch and the ball in the glove. Neither of us saw the drop and bounce.

My question is, what could we have done, should have done, differently to get that right?

mick

[gobama84]

My question is, what could we have done, should have done, differently to get that right?

mick



Why would you do anything different?

[DownTownTonyBrown]

Mick, the catch and the fair or foul call was not yours to make. Your partner should have busted up the line (15 feet was probably not enough) to see the play - especially given the game situation. This was an important play and therefore an important call.

Given that there were two outs, tag-ups were not important. But if there were less outs you should have been lining up to help with tag-ups at all the bases - 2nd and 1st would be easy to see. 3rd would be a challenge but most likely the one to be protested.

This is a difficult one - several defensive players running to make the catch, a coach, a runner on first - there are loads of obstacles to see around. If F4 can move 50 to 60 feet to attempt a catch, I can move 30-40 feet up the line carrying all my gear. I would have to have been in the situation to pick the appropriate positioning but would also suggest getting about 10 feet into foul territory and creating an angle from outside all these players trying to make the catch. This might allow a better view.

A third umpire was needed. It was good that the coach was understanding - but even the nicest most considerate guys don't always see things the same way I do.

Sounds like an exciting game to have worked.

[Bfair]

Originally posted by mick

Trailing team’s Manager comes to us and started with, “I’m sorry, guys, … I know you had no chance of seeing that play, but the second baseman caught, dropped and reacquired the ball on the bounce.” He was totally polite and, having dealt with this man before, I had no reason to doubt that what he said was totally true.

Agree with him...............

"You are correct coach. We didn't see that."

Freix

[Warren Willson]

Originally posted by mick
Last night, two-man, Senior LL, trailing team at bat with bases jammed and 2 out. Me at C. Favorite partner is PU.

...[snip]...

We both saw the dive the catch and the ball in the glove. Neither of us saw the drop and bounce.

My question is, what could we have done, should have done, differently to get that right?

mick

What should you have done? You should have started that game with either 4 or 6 umpires! That way the catch/no catch on the base line would have been reasonably well covered. *BIG grin*

I disagree with DownTownTonyBrown that your PU partner could have done any more by "busting" further down the line. This was a bases loaded situation, so going up the line any more than the 15 feet your PU partner did would have made any following time play calls at home plate virtually impossible. In fact, in his place I wouldn't have gone up the line at all! Instead I would have dropped back to 1BLE and tried to keep it all in front of me! That wouldn't have made it any easier to call that catch/no catch, or the fair/foul for that matter, but that was never going to be easy using a 2-man system on that play!

BTW, some of my colleagues might have told that manager "Look in the book, Skip. We called what we saw. If you want better coverage, pay for more umpires." After all, if he truly KNEW that you couldn't possibly have seen that play, why bother to make you feel bad by telling you that you had got it wrong? I guess misery loves company. Personally I'm not that much of a red a$$, so I'd just nod my unspoken "Thank you" and say nothing.

Hope this helps

Cheers.

[Rich]

I don't believe in saying that more umpires are needed. Two umpires are standard in amateur baseball just about everywhere in the US. We aren't getting three so we shouldn't lean on that. Ever.

The PU should've gotten this one -- he needs to stay with the ball until the catch/no catch determination is made. If he needs to move up a bit or even laterally to get some kind of an angle, he should do that. If he does his best, stays with the ball, and kicks it, well....stuff happens. There are balls that NOBODY can get, and this might just be one of them -- I can picture it, if the dive puts F4's body between the PU and the ball.

I'm most inclined to go with Friex here -- I would be happy to say, "If what you saw happened, coach, we missed it. We'll work harder." Doesn't mean we will, naturally, but I think it heads off any ugliness.

Rich

[Edited by Rich Fronheiser on Jul 10th, 2003 at 07:44 PM]

[Warren Willson]

Originally posted by Rich Fronheiser
I don't believe in saying that more umpires are needed. Two umpires are standard in amateur baseball just about everywhere in the US. We aren't getting three so we shouldn't lean on that. Ever.

...[snip]...

I'm most inclined to go with Friex here -- I would be happy to say, "If what you saw happened, coach, we missed it. We'll work harder." Doesn't mean we will, naturally, but I think it heads off any ugliness.

Rich

[Edited by Rich Fronheiser on Jul 10th, 2003 at 07:44 PM]

Like I said, Rich, "some of my colleagues" might have suggested they "pay for more umpires". I agree that's a reda$$ response, but I understand where it's coming from. The colleague(s) in question work a league where the standard taunt is "You're not worth the $25.00!". Just for the record, that's all.

BTW, I like your response WAY better than that other ill-informed admission, because yours clearly acknowledges the difference of opinion and position with an "IF". I would NEVER admit to a coach that I specifically did NOT see a play exactly as I called it, because that's the same as saying I have misapplied the rule. If you didn't see the catch at all, then you shouldn't have called it. Mick and his partner both believed they SAW a catch, and that's what they called, so your response is certainly much more appropriate.

Cheers

[mick]

Thanks for your insight, men.
When I work with this partner, it surprises me when we blow one.

[Bfair]

Originally posted by Warren Willson

BTW, I like your response WAY better than that other ill-informed admission, because yours clearly acknowledges the difference of opinion and position with an "IF". I would NEVER admit to a coach that I specifically did NOT see a play exactly as I called it, because that's the same as saying I have misapplied the rule. If you didn't see the catch at all, then you shouldn't have called it. Mick and his partner both believed they SAW a catch, and that's what they called, so your response is certainly much more appropriate.

So, Warren, who made an admission that they didn't see a play exactly as it was called? I don't see where any such admission was made.

My post merely agreed with the coach who stated we didn't see the ball come loose. If I called it a catch, I'd agree with that statement. That "admission" doesn't agree that the ball came loose. It, in fact, means that the call was made as it seen by the officials----A CATCH.

There are many things coaches see that I don't see, Warren.
Many coaches see there players safe when I see them out---and vice versa. Many coaches see balls when I see strikes---and vice versa. Many coaches may see obstruction and interference when I don't---and vice versa. It's true, Warren, we don't always agree on what we've seen, and I agree with any coach who tells me that. It doesn't mean I'm right or wrong about the call, and it doesn't mean I've called something I didn't see. It means we didn't see it the same way.

Please read a little closer, Warren, and try to understand what is written before throwing your darts.


Just my opinion,

Freix

[Warren Willson]

Originally posted by Bfair

So, Warren, who made an admission that they didn't see a play exactly as it was called? I don't see where any such admission was made.

My post merely agreed with the coach who stated we didn't see the ball come loose. If I called it a catch, I'd agree with that statement. That "admission" doesn't agree that the ball came loose. It, in fact, means that the call was made as it seen by the officials----A CATCH.

There are many things coaches see that I don't see, Warren.
Many coaches see there players safe when I see them out---and vice versa. Many coaches see balls when I see strikes---and vice versa. Many coaches may see obstruction and interference when I don't---and vice versa. It's true, Warren, we don't always agree on what we've seen, and I agree with any coach who tells me that. It doesn't mean I'm right or wrong about the call, and it doesn't mean I've called something I didn't see. It means we didn't see it the same way.

Please read a little closer, Warren, and try to understand what is written before throwing your darts.


Just my opinion,

Freix