LLWS - Championship

[kylejt]

I'm not sure what game you fellas are watching. He wasn't consistent on balls and strikes the whole game.

The announcers were on him the whole game, and West coach belittled him on the field. It was awful.

[JJ]

Hmm...I thought his mechanics were solid, and I thought his positioning was good, and his timing was better than most of the LL umpires I saw in this tournament. Balls and strikes? Coaches and players PO'd? Heck, those folks are upset most of the time during a game, depending on how they're doing.
So much for trying to compliment a hard working umpire. I won't make that mistake here again.

JJ

[EsqUmp]

I thought that he did a pretty dreadful job. He missed at least three dozen pitches that could have been called strikes. Thought there is room for some deviation, how is it that with him behind the plate the number of pitches per inning more than doubled per pitcher? Not 3 or 4 pitches, but an increase from around 13 to around 27? That's absolutely ridiculous. There were at least a dozen pitches that were strikes in ANY umpire's zone, which were called balls.

He seemed more focused on pleasing the spectators by doing things like showing the count every single pitch (which didn't help him when he gave the batter 1st base on ball three). He also had an egregious "swinging" third strike where the West player's bat barely came off of his shoulder (bases loaded - inning over!).

It was also great how he would say, "ball, no swing" all the time, only to go for help on the checked swing. Was he trying to convince the base umpires that he was right?

With regard to game management, he didn't appear to have much there either. Players and coaches (at least the one I could understand) were on him all game and he didn't address it once. The players antics and demonstration of displeasure with his zone is understandable, but not acceptable and he never seemed to address it.

Unfortunately, I didn't anticipate a 3 hour game so my DVR cut off going into the 6th inning

[briancurtin]

Originally Posted by EsqUmp

It was also great how he would say, "ball, no swing" all the time, only to go for help on the checked swing. Was he trying to convince the base umpires that he was right?

I thought that was a fairly standard thing, although myself and most others I know would say "ball, no he didn't"

[Rich]

Originally Posted by briancurtin

I thought that was a fairly standard thing, although myself and most others I know would say "ball, no he didn't"

"Ball. No, he didn't go."

I say this every time I have a check swing where I judge the batter didn't offer. Means nothing other than I thought he didn't go. Isn't meant to give a message to anyone other than that.

[Manny A]

Originally Posted by Rich

"Ball. No, he didn't go."

I say this every time I have a check swing where I judge the batter didn't offer. Means nothing other than I thought he didn't go. Isn't meant to give a message to anyone other than that.

I was recently taught to not say anything but "Ball." If you say something afterward like, "He didn't go," or "No he didn't," then you're definitively stating that you saw no swing, and you shouldn't subsequently go for help when asked.

[briancurtin]

Originally Posted by Manny A

I was recently taught to not say anything but "Ball." If you say something afterward like, "He didn't go," or "No he didn't," then you're definitively stating that you saw no swing, and you shouldn't subsequently go for help when asked.

Correct, I am definitively stating that I saw no swing, because I didn't. You first need to judge the pitch as it pertains to the zone (you have a ball), and then you need to determine if he swung (he didn't). Why hide the fact that you think he didn't go? If U1/U3 turn it over and say he did, no big deal.

Anyways, NCAA 3.6.f says get help when they ask, so I'm asking if they're asking. "ball, no he didn't" - "can you check?" - "Bob, did he go?" - "yes he did" - "ok we have a 2-2 count here" -- simple.

If I didn't definitively know, I'd check with a base umpire right away.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Manny A

I was recently taught to not say anything but "Ball." If you say something afterward like, "He didn't go," or "No he didn't," then you're definitively stating that you saw no swing, and you shouldn't subsequently go for help when asked.

This is not the professional teaching, unless it changed recently.

And besides, in OBR/NCAA you *must* go for help when asked, regardless of what you say on the check swing.

[EsqUmp]

Originally Posted by Rich

"Ball. No, he didn't go."

I say this every time I have a check swing where I judge the batter didn't offer. Means nothing other than I thought he didn't go. Isn't meant to give a message to anyone other than that.

Doesn't saying "ball" cover it? That would, after all, be the definition of "ball."

We don't say, "out, fielder had possession of the ball while in contact with the base prior to the forced runner contacting the base."

[briancurtin]

Originally Posted by EsqUmp

Doesn't saying "ball" cover it? That would, after all, be the definition of "ball."

It covers it in the same way as just calling a runner "safe" at first base even though the ball beat him by two steps and the first baseman pulled his foot. In both cases, you have a call and an extra piece of information that saves or at least redirects the followup.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by EsqUmp

Doesn't saying "ball" cover it? That would, after all, be the definition of "ball."

We don't say, "out, fielder had possession of the ball while in contact with the base prior to the forced runner contacting the base."

It communicates that I saw the bat move and that I judged it wasn't enough to consider it an offer.

I'm amazed at how many people act as if this isn't mainstream. This is the passage directly from the PBUC manual:

"All decisions on checked swings shall be called loudly and clearly by the plate umpire. If the pitch is a ball and the batter does not swing at the pitch, the mechanic to be used by the plate umpire is: "Ball; No he didn't go." If the pitch is a ball but the batter commits on the check swing, the mechanic to be used is: "Yes, he went," while pointing directly at the batter and then coming up with the strike motion."

[PeteBooth]

The one "thing" we do not know is how these umpires are instructed.

I cannot remember anyone getting tossed in the LL Regionals or LLWS and there were some actions that warrented it.

If you remember the Danny Almonte era, there was a player on the Bronx team who hit an HR and taunted the other team all the way around the bases. Even his own coach said he probably should have been EJ'd.

There was a coach many years back who made a mockrey by not allowing one of his players to get the minimum one at bat requirement and took a forfeit. I think it was a coach from Indiana if memory serves and nothing happened.

I could go on and on which leads me to believe that these umpires are SPECIFICALLY instructed not to toss anyone.

As far as the strike zone goes these "guys / gals" can't win. It's either too liberal or too tight.

Pete Booth

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by PeteBooth

As far as the strike zone goes these "guys / gals" can't win. It's either too liberal or too tight.

A) This is something all umpires live with... But that said -
B) There is a HUGE amount of space between the finals guy's "too small" and the semi-finals guy's "too large" Neither of these two zones were acceptable in anyone's book.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

A) This is something all umpires live with... But that said -
B) There is a HUGE amount of space between the finals guy's "too small" and the semi-finals guy's "too large" Neither of these two zones were acceptable in anyone's book.

The only umpire I know personally was the guy that worked the International Final -- I have no clue whatsoever how he didn't get the championship plate, but that happens all the time in these tourneys. Umpiring ability isn't always the number one reason assignments are made as they are. I know from personal experience.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by Rich

isn't always

You misspelled "is never"