protocol during pitching change

[John Robertson]

I just spoke to a zone umpire-in-chief in Ontario today about this situation. He says the new philosophy is not to go out and "babysit" the pitcher--just give the count and the outs to everyone once the new pitcher's warm-ups have been completed. It used to be common practice to give the pitcher a personal update, but now it's considered coaching. Thanks for all the input, people. It is appreciated.

[Blu_IN]

Originally posted by mcrowder
Throw me in for the first vote in the "Don't do that - it's coaching" category. I clinic my guys not to do this. I do, however, tell them that after any long delay, PU should hold up the number of outs just before making the ball live, and say it loud enough for batter and catcher. If there is a count after a delay like this, I would signal it as well.

To me - the practice of having BU walking out to the mound, out of position, to do this is annoying and delaying. And if you feel it's important information to impart after a delay, why don't you walk around the bases mentioning it to the runners as well? I think this looks VERY unprofessional. When I see someone I'm working with for the first time do this, I know he's going to be one of those guys who has to come visit with me between every half inning - something else that looks very unprofessional.

Exactly.

Though I'm not the out giving kind of guy. Only person I ever signal the outs to is my BU and when asked by a participant. If the pitcher assumed a count, as a PU I'll give her the count and that is it.

[U_of_I_Blue]

As I stated earlier, as PU I will give the outs and count after a long delay (minute or more). However, I saw a blue last night that took it to the extreme. Every time a new batter came up it was "ok ladies, (x number) outs, no count". I was a spectator and was getting really annoyed by it as often as it was done. It's starting to make me rethink my position. I may only give the count from now on, outs if asked only.

-Josh

[mcrowder]

A friend of mine, quite the smart@$$, once had a slowpitch umpire tell him as he approached the batters box, "1 out, no count." He stopped, looked at the umpire, and said, "Really? No count? Are you sure?" As I cringed anticipating the ejection (wouldn't have been his first ... and I realized I probably would have tossed him had I been PU), instead I saw the umpire just look embarrassed. PU didn't do it again the rest of the game.

PS - regarding the out announcements - I do it every time there's a long delay (pitcher change, offensive conference, or injury), and every time the number of outs changes.

[Dakota]

Originally posted by mcrowder
I do it every time there's a long delay (pitcher change, offensive conference, or injury), and every time the number of outs changes.

If you have one of those innings and you look at your indicator and say to yourself "Is THAT all the outs there are?"... you'd better be announcing the outs a couple of times between outs, too!

I see nothing wrong with announcing the outs fairly regularly. OTOH, the "no count" with a new batter is silly. The umpire should have been embarassed.

[noobie]

Originally posted by U_of_I_Blue
... I saw a blue last night that took it to the extreme. Every time a new batter came up it was "ok ladies, (x number) outs, no count". I was a spectator and was getting really annoyed by it as often as it was done.

That was my recent-ex-style, which I've pretty much abandoned over the last few days. You're right ... it's pretty bush league. I do like the sotto voce-to-catcher tactic suggested by ASA/NYSSOBLUE earlier -- will use it again tonight (if we don't get rained out!!).

Now, to get to work on the rest of my game Thanks, folks!

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally posted by Dakota
OTOH, the "no count" with a new batter is silly. The umpire should have been embarassed.

Wait until next year.

[Dakota]

Originally posted by IRISHMAFIA

Wait until next year.

You're not saying there is a move to make this the recommended mechanic!

I stand by "silly."

[orioles35]

Originally posted by mcrowder
If you have one of those innings and you look at your indicator and say to yourself "Is THAT all the outs there are?"... you'd better be announcing the outs a couple of times between outs, too!

...usually followed by "how much time is left in this game?"

[tzme415]

Originally posted by orioles35

...usually followed by "how much time is left in this game?"

This actually becomes relevant if the games have time limits---which in some cases can be a good thing

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally posted by Dakota

You're not saying there is a move to make this the recommended mechanic!

I stand by "silly."

No, but in the SP game, it is very possible that there will be a count when a new batter comes to the plate next year.

[azbigdawg]

Hopefully what mike mentioned wont happen....but in local leagues the count can start at 1 and 1.. so the first week of the season, I may give the first couple of batters the starting count...after that they are on their own.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally posted by azbigdawg
Hopefully what mike mentioned wont happen....but in local leagues the count can start at 1 and 1.. so the first week of the season, I may give the first couple of batters the starting count...after that they are on their own.

If last year was an indicator, it will happen this year.

For SP it is not a bad thing. Even at the national level players were stepping in the box EXPECTING a one-one count. The only difference is that ASA will probably include a courtesy foul.

[azbigdawg]

there is not point to it...even LESS of a point of you are going to include the courtesy foul....

[tzme415]

I understand the 1 and 1 count in local leagues where time limits of 60 minutes are in use, but I can't imagine why they would want to change this in tournament and championship play. If I were still playing SP, I would be really upset if I heard this rule change was coming.