Pulled foot mechanic and timing

[Warren Willson]

Originally posted by jicecone
Having said that, each of us have to decide what type official we want to be. The one that puts image first, or the one that truly understands what their there for.

The decision to change or not change a call, will be relatively easy after that.

Your opinion is worth as much as anyone else's with the same level of experience - and I don't know what that is so I'm not taking a shot by saying that.

That said, although both you and that other poster make a passionate case for getting it "right" regardless of how you would look, you need to re-examine the DUAL responsibilities of officials under 9.01(a).

No-one is advocating NEVER seeking help. The advice has been to do that BEFORE making a decision, wherever possible. Only get help on a judgement call AFTER making a decision if it was a call that may reasonably be corrected given the following game action, and PROVIDED you have not first been approached by a participant in breach of 9.02(a).

Game management is not just a matter of umpire dignity, but try managing a game without it! Despite protestations to the contrary, even that other poster's much beloved and now superceded General Instructions to Umpires urged officials NOT to get help excessively, but instead to GET YOUR OWN CALLS.

Just thought you'd like to know.

Cheers

[Edited by Warren Willson on Jul 22nd, 2003 at 05:07 PM]

[GarthB]

No-one is advocating NEVER seeking help.

Most everyone in their own way and style seems to agree that no one is advocating NEVER seeking help and also no one is advocating ALWAYS seeking help. The point of contention appears to be where the emphasis should be. It has to be somewhere.

For me. the emphasis is on training and performance. That is the hope we have to reduce the number of times that getting help is requested and more importantly, it will reduce the number of times that an umpire may feel that getting help is needed.

Some others appear, to me, by simple word count, repetition and other tactics, to be putting the emphasis on the justification of getting help. This, in my opinion, is similar to the modern public educational ploy of trying to get students to have "positive self-esteem" prior to having done anything that would create the opportunity of positive self-esteem. Sort of like, "Yes, Johnny, you only got 2 out of 20 correct, but the important part is you feel good about yourself. Think how much better Johnny would feel if he had learned well enough (or benn taught well enough) to get 20 out of 20 correct.

I have no argument that there may well be a time an umpire feels the need to get help. No need to spend bandwidth justifying that. I believe it would lead to better umpiring if we spent our energy and time on learning our craft so that those occasions are drastically reduced.

[refman]

Warren....why do you keep insisting that we're dealing with "judgement" on this 5-page post? I repeat an earlier post that the judgement part of this call is made by ruling out/safe. Judgement is the criteria in all out/safe calls. The pulled foot is simply a frequent occurance that often requires the help of the plate umpire to confirm or deny such an occurance. It's usually noticed by the first base coach and he's generally the one to request you ask for help. Why make this such a tough situation?

[insatty]

I can't quite grasp Garth's latest point, as he seems to want it both ways. But it seems plausible to reconcile the opposing viewpoints with the following maxim: Get help if you must, but work to improve your game so you won't ordinarily need to. And since this maxim describes my own philosophy on the help issue, I paraphrase Pharoh's declaration to Moses: So let it be written, So let it be done!

[GarthB]

I can't quite grasp Garth's latest point...

Sure you do.


Get help if you must, but work to improve your game so you won't ordinarily need to.


See? I knew you did.

[Warren Willson]

Originally posted by refman
Warren....why do you keep insisting that we're dealing with "judgement" on this 5-page post? I repeat an earlier post that the judgement part of this call is made by ruling out/safe. Judgement is the criteria in all out/safe calls. The pulled foot is simply a frequent occurance that often requires the help of the plate umpire to confirm or deny such an occurance. It's usually noticed by the first base coach and he's generally the one to request you ask for help. Why make this such a tough situation?

Hey, refman, I'm not trying to make it tough I'm trying to make it easy.

1. There is NO GOOD REASON to get help AFTER you've made your judgement decision when you could just as easily have gone for help BEFORE you'd made that decision. THAT was my point.

2. If you are FORCED, by circumstances of continuing game action, to make a judgement decision BEFORE you can get help then common sense will show that you CANNOT easily roll back the action that followed in every case.

3. There is a list of at least 5 occasions where you CAN roll back game action, and those are the only cases where I would recommend getting help AFTER making the call.

4. I would NEVER recommend getting help otherwise when approached by a participant to do so. That's BAD game management. It has nothing to do with salvaging personal dignity for its own sake.

5. Any umpiring decision that involves judgement is a JUDGEMENT DECISION.

Now I'm pretty darn sure that I've spelled out these points before, one way or another. I don't propose to spell them out again. For the record, handling such calls the way I suggest has the following benefits:

1. You won't NEED the First Base Coach's advice to "get help on that call, Blue". You'll have already done it!

2. You won't NEED to overturn your judgement decision. You won't have made one yet!

3. You won't NEED to respond to half the number of coach's questioning your judgement decisions that you would otherwise. They KNOW you would have asked if you were straight lined!

4. You will earn more respect and improve your game management skills.

The pulled foot call (horrible description) is NOT a case of a rule misapplication. On the information available to the umpire whenever he makes the call, it is a JUDGEMENT DECISION. That is why I "keep referring to judgement". If you cannot grasp that then I guess we'll have to agree to disagree (A2D).

Cheers

[Edited by Warren Willson on Jul 23rd, 2003 at 12:26 AM]

[refman]

Has nothing to do with what I "grasp", but rather than continue trying to explain my point.....it's time to agree to disagree.

[jicecone]

"Your opinion is worth as much as anyone else's with the same level of experience - and I don't know what that is so I'm not taking a shot by saying that."

Your absolutely right. As is yours. Opinions are like ????,
well you know what I mean. As others have already pointed out, this discussion is applicable at ALL levels.

The image portrayed by changing a call after a judgement and decision has been made is in you words, " That's BAD game management".

Well it might be for you. However, I am confident enough at whatever level I work at to handle ANY further questions or situations that may arise as a result of changing my call. I am not afraid to say that, "I made a mistake." Even if,
in your opinion, the rule book says that I can't.

And when you think of it , that is what it comes down to. Doing, what each of us has to do, to get through are game.

Have a good day.

[His High Holiness]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Warren Willson

I guess this thread is headed for a record 5th page!

Cheers

Warren

I recall that last year I started a 7 page topic that had 100 replies. Garth stated that this was a record. I believe that I only had one post after the original one.

The thread was a huge $hithouse by this forum's standards. However, no one ever mentioned anything about what people down under do with all those sheep

Peter

[Rich]

Originally posted by refman
Warren....why do you keep insisting that we're dealing with "judgement" on this 5-page post? I repeat an earlier post that the judgement part of this call is made by ruling out/safe. Judgement is the criteria in all out/safe calls. The pulled foot is simply a frequent occurance that often requires the help of the plate umpire to confirm or deny such an occurance. It's usually noticed by the first base coach and he's generally the one to request you ask for help. Why make this such a tough situation?

A frequent occurrence that often requires the help of the plate umpire?

I've asked for help on a play at first base once in the last ten seasons. It was at the MSBL World Series in Phoenix and Dave Hensley was my partner. The play was a 3-1 play where the second baseman ran right in front of me as a tag attempt was made. It was such an unusual play I remember it well.

That's it. I've been ASKED to "get help" more than that, but when I've gotten a good angle and make a call I don't understand WHY I should get help. It's my job to make that call and I make it.

The thing I don't understand in this whole discussion is that umpires seem to be making calls and THEN getting help from their partners. For me to make an out call, shouldn't I be in a position to see F3's foot on the base and then determine that the throw beat the runner? If I'm clearly screened or think that I might be missing something, wouldn't I go to my partner FIRST?

I've gotten grief for "not getting help." One time I had a manager come all the way to right field to "discuss" a play at first base after an inning ending double play where he thought (from the 3rd base coaching box, of course) that F3 pulled his foot. I refused to get help. I explained to the coach that I was doing my job and I saw the foot on the base.

In the next few innings I had more pulled feet, swipe tag plays, and other squirrels happen than I've ever had in a game before or since. I made every call with confidence and not once did a manager come out of the dugout or even question the calls. I was a new umpire in the area, I made it clear that I was going to get my own calls, and that was that. Had I gone to my partner on the first play to appease the coach and keep him from following me to right field I firmly believe that they would've been asking me to get help the rest of the game.

Mr. Freix calls that "fear." I call that game management. Letting the teams know that judgement decisions are final and that they can't look around for an sympathetic ear (umpire) every time there is a disagreement is a good thing, in my opinion.

This "attitude" has served me well for the past 15 years and Steve's has served him well or he wouldn't be arguing his side so fervently. It's time to A2D, move on, and argue something else.

Rich

[GarthB]

Garth stated that this was a record


Peter:

Before the ususal cast starts demanding proof, citations and other best evidence, allow me to interject that my statement was anecdotal. I believe it to be true since I had been here from almost the start-up of the site. And, who else is more deserving of the honor of instigating, I mean initiating what would become the longest thread than our revered HHH?

[Rich]

105 messages versus 102. I looked. It was close and both reached seven pages.

Getting hit in the wallet was a fun story - even more so cause it was true and I have a witness!

I had a BU partner get hit this season -- his was in a college game where the ball found him. He didn't help matters by trying to run out of the way of the ball. Instead he looked like a cartoon character whose "wheels" spin before he gets moving. He took it in the back of the heel.

Oh, wait, I'm getting off topic. Wouldn't want that to be an excuse when we add 30 more replies and have the longest thread.

Rich

[His High Holiness]

Originally posted by Jim Porter
Well, this just proves a fact many of us have known for years now - that Peter Osborne and Garth Benham love themselves.

Jim;

The Bible says "Love thy neighbor as thyself." The underlying assumption in this Bible wisdom is that most people love themselves.

A sign of mental stability is that one loves himself. Ah, there's the problem. Love of oneself would seem abnormal to the mentally unbalanced mind.

Peter

[Warren Willson]

Originally posted by jicecone
"Your opinion is worth as much as anyone else's with the same level of experience - and I don't know what that is so I'm not taking a shot by saying that."

Your absolutely right. As is yours. Opinions are like ????,
well you know what I mean. As others have already pointed out, this discussion is applicable at ALL levels.

I think you may have misunderstood what I was trying to say. I was reacting to your own suggestion that your opinion might not be valued. In my own upside-down fashion I was trying to say that your opinion IS valued at least as much as it should be given your level of experience. I'm sorry if my regretably poor effort to encourage your input was perceived otherwise.

Originally posted by jicecone
The image portrayed by changing a call after a judgement and decision has been made is in you words, " That's BAD game management".

Well it might be for you. However, I am confident enough at whatever level I work at to handle ANY further questions or situations that may arise as a result of changing my call. I am not afraid to say that, "I made a mistake." Even if,
in your opinion, the rule book says that I can't.

Neither am I "afraid to say that, 'I made a mistake.'" My point was that if you do it my way, the way the pro's say to do it, YOU WON'T OFTEN HAVE TO! Why? Because you'll have checked first! It has nothing to do with confidence and everything to do with doing your job properly. You are NOT entitled to make a judgement call if you DIDN'T see the factors you are supposed to be judging UNLESS the continuing game action demands that you call something! That's seldom the case on swipe tag and pulled foot calls.

That's my point - CHECK FIRST when required! That's Rich's point. That's also Garth's point. If he thinks about it, that may even be BFair's point. Only you want to defy the advice of the pro's and make a call when you're clearly blocked out THEN correct it later, as though that was some kind of honorable approach!

Originally posted by jicecone
And when you think of it , that is what it comes down to. Doing, what each of us has to do, to get through are game.

Have a good day.

I guess that's an "I'll do it my way, you do it yours" sign off. Ok. A2D. I just don't understand why you would want to ignore the advice of the best umpires the game has to offer simply because I'm the one who brought it to you. Adds a whole new dimension to killing the messenger, wouldn't you say? Sheesh!

Have a nice day.

[Warren Willson]

Originally posted by His High Holiness
I recall that last year I started a 7 page topic that had 100 replies. Garth stated that this was a record. I believe that I only had one post after the original one.

The thread was a huge $hithouse by this forum's standards. However, no one ever mentioned anything about what people down under do with all those sheep

Yeah, well my remark was only intended as an off-handed comment, not a reporting of recorded fact. I was merely reacting to the amount of heat generated from such a simple beginning. For the record I'll take the word of Jim Porter that he holds it by a small margin.

As for what we do with sheep, we shear 'em, skin 'em, cook 'em and eat 'em! Want a demonstration? There's a few "sheep" around this board that I'd like to show that process to "first hand".

BTW, please stop baiting Jim Porter with cracks about mental instability. With the notable exception of BFair, there has been very little personal abuse on this board since I returned. Most of us are perfectly happy to keep it that way.

Cheers