Check Swing Appeal...Unrequested?

[Ump20]

Originally posted by David B
there surely is different schools of thought from the past how many years, but as we know from MLB "times are quickly changing."

I have seen MLB umpires this year appeal to whoever, not always necessarily the ump opposite as NAPBL suggests.

And this is with the 4 man crews or 3 man crews etc.,

The bottomline IMO is that if the BU sees a swing call it a swing. If in doubt as Steve suggested call it a ball.

I'm as PU not going to give information such as I didn't see it or I got blocked.

I may change that rarely used method and simply ask but I will talk about it in the pre-game. Here on Long Island I have often had coaches say to players about the BU "He's not going to see anything from THERE".

If I'm in doubt, I'll ask.

Under OBR I'll always ASK unless for some reason the coach is making a mockery of the game by "asking" too often albeit we haven't discussed that aspect.

If a coach or F2 wants help then usually I'll ask, and my partner can call it as he sees.

I know that there are a lot more strikes out there than are usually called by most umpires, especially in the younger age groups.

thanks
David

That is a valid point about newer umpires not calling as many strikes as the veterans. It doesn't mean that as BU I'll automatically agree with Smitty but if it is a newer official he may just have missed a STRIKE. Let's correct that. Jim/NYC

[His High Holiness]

Originally posted by Warren Willson

I trust the good readers here can now gauge the depth of your emotion and, using your very own "right-on" premise, will be moved to call into question your ability to maintain control in the College D1 baseball you claim to officiate.

Have a nice day!

My, my, Warren, who was it that dropped off the boards for a year or more to lick his wounds? Who was it that wrote that he would NEVER participate again in certain forums because of unfair attacks?

And who was it that broke his pledges with regards to no more participation?

Sounds like someone with an emotional response to me? Or perhaps it is prevarication ?

Peter

[Bfair]

Originally posted by Ump20

Here on Long Island I have often had coaches say to players about the BU "He's not going to see anything from THERE".

Jim, we have those same coaches here in Texas.
They only believe that while on offense, though.
When they're on defense they are in total agreement that the strike can be seen and called from the infield.

And I've also seen those same coaches from 100 ft. away argue tag plays where the official is right on top of the call and in perfect position to make the call. It comes down to whatever excuse they want to seek to argue a call that they don't like or that they want to go there way. I've also had many coaches later admit they argued calls knowing the official got it right, but they either wanted to merely stand up for their player or attempt to intimidate the official in hopes it would pay off for them later. When you start listening to coaches during a game, your game will generally not benefit from it.

Bottom line, while being in the inner infield is not the best position possible, it's still a position where the judgment can be easily made and called. While a 4 man crew would assure a better angle on this call, it would assure a better angle on most calls. But we don't get many 4 man crews in amateur baseball.

IMO, any umpire that feels he can't call a check swing appeal from the inner infield needs to be an umpire in football, not baseball.


Freix

[GarthB]

I know Peter. Despite our sparring and emotional outburst of four years ago, or so, I believe we have both arrived at a point of some level of mutual respect. It was a rocky road we traveled and most doubted we would ever see eye to eye on anything.

I know Warren. Our relationship has also had its ups and downs but overall our path to today has been quite a bit smoother. There are some that believe we are in lockstop with one another, however that is far from the truth. We have and continue to disagree vehemently on certain items. Most of the time we do so in private emails, however one disagreement in particular was conducted here at official.com a couple of months back.

Sensing the beginning of a conflagaration in this thread, I posted an attempt to provide both of my friends with enough cover to stay out of a protracted word war. While my post had a motive, I never-the-less believed in what I said.

Unfortunately, neither Warren nor Peter have such regard for each other as I have for them and both chose to ignore the opporutnity to remain silent.

I have in the past been just as guilty. There is one person on the internet whose behavior can move my blood pressure upwards at at least 60 points. In the past, I responded to that indidvidual.

However, for the past year, or about a year less a week or two, I have completely ignored that individual and my life has never been better. My blood pressure is back to 130/65 and I no longer scream at my monitor. I have found that remaining out of the fray, no matter the bait offered, is far better, at least for me, than to attempt to defend myself to someone who really doesn't care.

But this is not about me. Back to Peter and Warren. It would be easy for me to defend either of these gentlemen. Peter is perhaps the most entertaining umpire on the internet and Warren is perhaps the most sincere. Peter is intelligent and knows how to umpire in his environment as well as anyone. Warren is intelligent and knows how to umpire as well as anyone in his environment Unfortunately those environments are worlds apart as are their opinions on certain aspects of the rules and the game.

One of the differences between these fine two is that Peter actually enjoys the battle and looks for ways to to initiat it; while Warren doesn't really enjoy it, but engages in it anyway out of a feeling of obligation and honor. These characteristics have nothing to do with whether either of them are correct in their positions.

Another way of looking at it, perhaps is that Peter is the Sadist and Warren is the Masochist. In reality they may need each other. Otherwise Peter would have to be content with pulling the wings off captured flies and Warren would have to settle for slamming a car door on his tongue.

I believe they both know how I feel about them and will forgive my babbling analysis. Both of them in the past, and in their typical unique fashions have come to my aid and I am indebted to them. I hope they will understand that I am trying to do the same for each of them at the same time.

Allow me to apologize for this interuption and may the best man remain standng.

[Warren Willson]

Originally posted by His High Holiness

My, my, Warren, who was it that dropped off the boards for a year or more ...

True. That was me.

Originally posted by His High Holiness

...to lick his wounds?

False. That is an assumption on your part.

Originally posted by His High Holiness

Who was it that wrote that he would NEVER participate again in certain forums because of unfair attacks?

Typical Osborne half-truth. I actually said I would NEVER participate in this forum again WHILE conditions remained unchanged. Note the message at the first thread in this forum. I took the chance to come back because it APPEARED that things had changed. Naturally, you and Bfair have made it your miserable business to prove otherwise.

Originally posted by His High Holiness
And who was it that broke his pledges with regards to no more participation?

Asked and answered. My pledge was honored in its entirety.

Originally posted by His High Holiness
Sounds like someone with an emotional response to me? Or perhaps it is prevarication ?

And NOW we get to the crux of the matter. YOU continue to mislead people with half-truths and plausible deceptions. In my dictionary that's called PREVARICATION. I called you a prevaricator a long time ago. You have done everything to live up to that label. That's not ME you're looking at now, Peter. It's a MIRROR.

Have a nice day.

[David B]

I thought I had recognized part of this conversation and it was the last time I had it out with a coach before his ejection.

Me - "that's what I saw and that's the way it will be tonight"

Him - "but you were out of position. How could you make a call from there."

Me - "coach its really kind of easy etc, etc, etc,

I've followed Peter and Warren for the three years I've been on the boards, and I agree with Garth.

They both have their own style and they are both as persistent as a bulldog.

Peter is entertaining (although I don't agree at all with his style of politics and umpiring) while Warren does know what he's talking about when its baseball. (he probably studies the fine points of the rules as well as anyone)

As Garth stated, may the best one win ????

Thanks
David

[Warren Willson]

Originally posted by David B
As Garth stated, may the best one win ????

I don't know about Osborne, but I don't see it as a "contest" to be won or lost. If it were, I would have won on points a long time ago.

Osborne delights in provoking arguments for his own and others entertainment. I don't like it when he uses his fellow officials for such trivial ends. I like it even less when it is me that he decides to use.

How quickly you and Garth forget. It wasn't all that long ago that Osborne was EXPELLED from the UmpireTalk listserv for exactly that sort of behaviour - provoking arguments with his fellow members purely for the entertainment value. It wasn't that long ago that His Holiness was also barred from this forum for similar behaviour.

This most recent altercation really all started when I asked Osborne to stop baiting Jim Porter. I knew then that I had metaphorically tweaked the tiger's tail. Regardless of how I feel personally about Jim Porter, and we are NOT on friendly terms, I don't find Osborne's penchant for umpire-baiting in the least bit entertaining. I'm truly disappointed that both you and Garth evidently do.

Your declarations of neutrality are NOT accepted. Where I come from fence sitters invariably end up with splinters or barbed wire in their backsides. Osborne must be enjoying the unexpected support, in much the same way as the Nazi's enjoyed Swiss chocolate and alpine retreats.

Have a nice day.

[Ump20]

Originally posted by GarthB
I know Peter. Despite our sparring and emotional outburst of four years ago, or so, I believe we have both arrived at a point of some level of mutual respect...

I know Warren. Our relationship has also had its ups and downs but overall our path to today has been quite a bit smoother. There are some that believe we are in lockstop with one another, however that is far from the truth...

Unfortunately, neither Warren nor Peter have such regard for each other as I have for them and both chose to ignore the opporutnity to remain silent...

I have in the past been just as guilty. There is one person on the internet whose behavior can move my blood pressure upwards at at least 60 points. In the past, I responded to that indidvidual.

:

---

However, for the past year, or about a year less a week or two, I have completely ignored that individual and my life has never been better. My blood pressure is back to 130/65 and I no longer scream at my monitor...

Wow I've been taking three pills a day for my blood pressure for several years. Fortunately it is down to 130/80. I'm no doctor but that diastolic of "65" could result in you just falling asleep at your monitor. Are you saying that to control BP all we need to do is ignore the posts of Peter and Warren when they deteriorate to the level they have on this thread? -- You know kind of like most of us try to do with FANS.Jim/NYC

[Jim Porter]

Originally posted by JimNYC
I'm no doctor but that diastolic of "65" could result in you just falling asleep at your monitor.

Reading Garth's, Warren's, and Peter's posts in this thread have me falling asleep at my monitor.

[Snive]

that because you said "Ball, no he didn't go", you have declared two things:

a) You saw that he attempted to check the swing
b) That he successfully checked it and therefore did not go.

Declaring "Ball, no he didn't go" is telling everyone in the park those two things. 90% of GOOD coaches/catchers won't even ask you to check if you declare that. However, if they do, you are bound to check. Since you declared it, I would strongly suggest that you do NOT go to your partner without someone asking you to go. It looks like you're second guessing yourself. JMHO

[His High Holiness]

Originally posted by Jim Porter
Reading Garth's, Warren's, and Peter's posts in this thread have me falling asleep at my monitor.

Jim;

I'm glad we could be of service in calming you down. Perhaps you should save this thread as a substitute for all that Prozac/Zoloft/Ritalin etc. that you have to take to calm down.

Peter