Two strikes, ball comes in check swing, catcher drops the ball. You call a ball, catcher asks you to go to partner, you do (praying they stick with the ball call) partner says she went giving the hammer. Now catcher easily tags BR still standing in batters box. Question: By the BU signaling a strike did it put the BR in jeopardy as they didn't have a chance to run after finding out it was a dropped 3rd strike? What would you do in this case, besides get ready for a nice calm discussion with the offensive coach??

If the batter swung, why was she just standing there?

The BU did not put the batter in jeopardy; her swing and miss / failure to run did.

NFHS rules

I WOULD not go to my partner. I feel that sometimes you have to live with your calls, good or bad. By going to my partner, I am putting the BR in jeopardy for not making a call for whatever reason I did not make. Not fair - probably. But what is the greater unfairness.

I have had the pleasure to work with some people who would call the pitch a strike and let the chips fall where they may, since that gives everyone an equal opportunity to complete the play. My feeling is - I called the pitch a ball because I thought it was a ball. I am not now going to put the BR in jeopardy to cover up a call I may have kicked. Sometimes, I have to be the fall guy.

To the defensive coach: Coach, I called it a ball and I am sticking with my call. In NFHS rules, I don't HAVE to go to my partner for help. Life happens.

MNBlue,

My 2006 and 2007 Federation Umpire's manual says on page 34 under Checked-Swing: "If the umpire calls the pitch a ball and the catcher request help, ask for it. If in doubt go to your partner before they ask you."

If F2 asks you to go for help on a check swing (ball call only) then you should go for help.

Like the FED Umpire's Manual says "If the umpire calls the pitch a ball and the catcher requests help, ask for it. It is not a weakness to go for help. If in doubt , go to your partner for help before they ask."

My high school baseball association (I work both SB/BB) has adopted the Voluntary Strike Mechanic (used at higher levels of baseball) for just this situation. Here it is:

In a situation where the batter is permitted, by rule, to advance to first base on a dropped third strike, the base umpire in a two man crew, or the appropriate umpire in a three or four man crew, may immediately and voluntarily, make a strike call IF the base umpire intended to reverse the plate umpire if the plate umpire has asked. This mechanic gives the batter an immediate opportunity to run.

Example: With first base unoccupied and a 3-2 count, the batter checks his swing and the ball eludes the catcher. If the first base umpire intended to call a strike on appeal from the plate umpire, the first base umpire may make the call immediately.

The mechanic is for the base umpire to raise his right arm above his head, fist closed, and loudly and emphatically announces “The batter went, the batter went.”

If the batter swung, why was she just standing there?

Because the PU said that she did not legally swing - he called it a BALL!

The BU did not put the batter in jeopardy; her swing and miss / failure to run did

The batter heard ball, she is standing there. Now the BU reverses the call to a strike. Why isn't that placing her in jeopardy?

This is one situation where I WILL NOT go to my partner. I will tell the catcher and/or coach that I made the call and will stick with it - for the obvious reason that the runner did not get a fair chance to advance to 1B.

WMB

To be honest, if I'm on bases and we're not using the Voluntary Strike mechanic, I wouldn't reverse my partners call in this situation.

In this situation it's easier to live with a checked swing that really was a strike then a delayed 3rd strike call from your partner on a ball that hit the ground or got away from F2.

UNLESS, it was the last out in the bottom of the 7th and I was tired, then it's a strike all the way.



Wait......Don't hurt me.....I'm only joking

Do us a favor and keep such absurdities in baseball. This is the exact type of stuff (automatic appeal, automatic base on OBS, etc.) from which Fed softball moved away and, IMO, made it a better game.

Wow!!! I'm not trying to change softball, I was merely sharing a mechanic that is used elsewhere. You don't have to subscribe to it. You don't have to like it but I should be able to comment on it without attack. I always listen to what others have to share and no matter how stupid I think their comments are I always respect their right to make them. But I was raised to respect the opinions of others.

I wasn't aware that I had broken a forum rule by my post. So, am I to understand that while on the softball side of the world I am not to make comments when my point of reference is baseball?

Just for the record, I do not use that mechanic in softball, but I would if I could.

If this player has any experience at all, she has seen several checked swing ball calls over turned after the PU goes for help. We require the catcher to know the game situation, so should the batter. The matter is not settled by the PU's call of "ball." If the checked swing was close, she should have been running.

I'm just answering the OP's question... did the PU put the batter in jeopardy by going for help? In my view, no, he did not.

Dakota,

I disagree. In the OP, the PU called the pitch a ball. The batter goes with the PU's call. By going to the BU, the PU put the BR in jeopardy. I think PU has to eat the call and take the heat.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by MNBlue

Quote:

I disagree. In the OP, the PU called the pitch a ball. The batter goes with the PU's call. By going to the BU, the PU put the BR in jeopardy. I think PU has to eat the call and take the heat.

If this were 14U rec league ball, I might would agree with you. However, if this was any high level of ball, then I agree with Dakota's assessment. If there is a chance that a strike could be called, in other words, if there is a chance on appeal that the checked swing could be called a strike, then the batter should be aware of the situation and be running. If it the BU feels that the PU nailed the call, and stays with the ball call, it is a simple thing to call the batter back and reset for the next pitch.

Can't agree with you. Our primary function is to make the correct calls and enforce the rules so that the teams have an even playing field. In no other circumstance that I can think of is it legitimate to get help from a better perspective, but we should refuse to do that sometimes in fear that our call would be changed.

In other words, if you would check on potential strike one or strike two, you have no basis to not check on potential strike three. That is an old baseball mentality, and is unsupported in the softball world. Get the call right; if the batter swung, it should be called a swing.

Base umpire, it better be a full swing that your partner missed, black and white, not gray, but make the call. In that case, the batter and offensive coach has no arguement that you had to make the call, and the batter has to know it was a swing and should have run, no matter what PU called.

[Edited by AtlUmpSteve on Mar 16th, 2006 at 12:14 PM]

Get the call right; if the batter swung, it should be called a swing

Who says that one umpire's call is more right than another's? In every other situation where you may have a call compromised by a bad angle, different view, etc. the two umpires get together and discuss it. When the discussion is over, the calling umpire still makes the decision as to reverse or stay with his call.

But in a checked swing review, there is no discussion. The calling umpire is overruled by the BU. And everyone says," Oh good, we got the call right." An umpire 75' away who may also have been watching a runner somehow is deemed more right then the PU.

Not only is the BU further away, he has a different angle (not necessarily right, just different), and possibly has different judgment values as to what constitutes a swing. (Again, not more right, just different).

I don’t see it as a case of who is right or wrong. I feel that there are times when I do not want my call changed. If it is a discussion situation, I can disregard my partner’s input and stay with my original call. In a checked swing situation, I do not get that option – unless I refuse to go to partner. Which is my right!

WMB

I am surprised at the number of people trying to defend their position on this play that are taking what I consider to be an untenable position. That an umpire’s verbalization of his call, which is designed to let those players in the immediate area know the call and act accordingly without seeing a visual signal – is not to be believed. The player is required to act on their own information, under threat of penalty, regardless of what the umpire said.

So a batter that struck out and runs towards 1B should not stop when the umpires calls “batter is out.” If she thinks the catcher dropped the ball she should keep right on running because the umpire decision eventually might be reversed.

I had a runner stealing 2B pull up and not slide when she heard the PU call “FOUL” on a foul tip. She was an easy out because the catcher knew better and threw to 2B. Should I tell the runner, “Too bad, you should have known that a foul tip is live ball and kept running.”

On a bang-bang play the runner is called out and she gets up and walks away. The defender who knew that she dropped the ball tags her. Do we say to the runner that she should have known the ball was dropped? Thus was her responsibility to stay on the base pending a possible reversal of the call?

OK, maybe these scenarios are a little facetious, but players are trained to react to our calls. To suggest that they should ignore us because they should anticipate our call being overruled is ludicrous, IMO.

WMB

First of all, I do not have a problem with your statement that it is up to the PU whether to honor the request to go for help. If you know you nailed the call, stand by it. No problem.

I took the OP's question to be asking about whether ASA 10-6-C would apply to this situation. In general, no, it does not (IMO) for the reasons I have already stated.

Your example of the FOUL call that is not a FOUL is not apples and apples, since in the case of the BR, she has a pretty good idea whether or not she checked in time or if she got away with one WRT the PU's call. The runner in your situation has no earthly idea whether or not it was a foul ball. She only has the call from the umpire.

There is also a difference in your "batter is out" scenario in that the PU is emphatically re-emphasizing his call.

I both of those situations, I can see applying 10-6-C to rectify the reversed calls placing the runners in jeopardy.

Was watching a college SB game on ESPN2 lastnight, Michigan and UCLA (I think, it was late, I was tired) and with 2 strikes the batter check swings, catcher misses the ball, PU calls it a strike and they get BR out at 1st. Looking at the replay it was close, but looked to be checked short of what I would consider a swing (which my opinion doesn't matter) but made me wonder if he went ahead and called a strike to eliminate a situation where he had to ask for help (I think it is required in NCAA isn't it?) and it might have lead to the exact situation we are discussing here. Not implying anything, don't even remember the PU's name, but made me think of this thread!

This same philosopy. I understand the idea, I just don't agree with it. NCAA is a little different than NFHS, since they require the PU get help when requested, and NFHS gives the PU discretion.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by MNBlue

Quote:

This same philosopy. I understand the idea, I just don't agree with it. NCAA is a little different than NFHS, since they require the PU get help when requested, and NFHS gives the PU discretion.

From the NFHS Umpires Manual:

"If the umpire calls the pitch a ball and the catcher requests help, ask for it."

This seems pretty black and white to me.

During HS ball, I routinely work with the same partner. We have it worked out that whoever is PU will always go to their partner when requested. One difference though, if as PU we know we nailed it correctly, we will take off our mask and ask our partner. If on the other hand we aren't for sure and really do want help we will do the same but put their name on the question first. As BU if we hear our name called on this we will give them an honest call, what we saw. If no name is heard we just mirror our partner's call. Even if you don't work with the same partner very often you could go over this with them before the game. Dave

If you are the BU, you should call what you saw, not what your partner wants. Anything else, like this special code you mention, IMO, is just plain wrong.

Kind of odd to work out this code so that you can fool observers into thinking you are going by the book, instead of actually going by the suggestions of the rulesmakers, isn't it?

If PU is not going to truly ask, don't ask. Don't make up this nonsense just for show.

Why is it that evertime I make a suggestion on ways I do things many have to act like everything they do is just fine but my ways are absurd? I don't agree with everything you say but I am sure not going to slam you. Someone noted previously that by the BU overruling the PU, sometimes you can put the batter-runner in jeopardy. I was just stating how we avoid some mistakes. I guess I better keep my thoughts to myself. Dave

Dave, no one is "slamming" you, from what I see. What we are saying is that we, as arbiters of the game, should go by the book and call em like we see em. We should never "mirror" our partner's call just to help him save face, or for any other reason. If we are not honest, and make the call honestly as we see it, then we are doing a disservice to the game and an injustice to its players, fans and coaches.

Actually, Dave, this "secret code" regarding the check swing "appeal" is fairly commonly used, and so is the reation to it from those who dislike it (so don't take it so personally).

When I have the bases with an unfamiliar partner, I tell them that if they ask, I'll respond with what I saw; if they want to stick with their call, don't ask.

Guess I'm going to get 'slamned' too.

When I'm working a HS softball game and I see the ball hit the ground or get past F2 on a check swing (when there are 2 strikes) I do not change the call from a ball to a strike when asked. Sometimes changing the call causes more problems than it solves. My partner doesn't have to use a secret code, I just don't change the ball call.

You don't change the ball call, even if you clearly see the batter offer at the pitch??? Do you ever worry what that might do to your integrity when the coaches figure out that you don't want to make the tough call?

I don't understand why this is so difficult. If you feel the batter went for the pitch, why not call it? Especially in the higher levels of ball, such as HS and college, where the players and coaches know the risks.

Didn't mean to slam anyone. I just think that if you're going to not really ask for BR's opinion, you are being more honest if you simply don't ask than if you make up a system so that you look like you ask, but aren't really asking. JMHO.

The way we handle it (and it could be perceived as wrong by some as well) is on iffy calls where immediate input is necessary, we (PU's) will ask immediately without waiting for F2 to ask us to get help. We cover this in pregame as well so that BU is ready for it. PU will call it as they see it, but immediately point to BU, who will immediately answer. This clears up any chance of us A) getting the wrong call, or B) jeopardizing either runner or defense.

It was Willie Newman. had the honor of working a couple games last summer with Willie. Had a sitch much like this in one of our games, he handled the same way.

IMHO, if you call it a ball and you are asked to get help, then go ahead and ask - even if the result does put the B/R in jeopardy. It's NOT our fault the b/r is now in jeopardy. In NFHS you have no choice, as the book says to do it. If the b/r is now an easy out, not our fault. Besides, it has been my experience that you'll hear far more chirping about not asking for help than the trouble caused by asking for help, having your partner ring 'er up, and the resultant out.

I guess I'm lucky (and honored) to work with some very experienced umpires both in softball & baseball (a lot of them work both). I have not seen, at least not in many years, one of them miss an obvious checked strike. But to be honest, if they did miss one, and everyone in the house saw it but my partner, then yes, I'd have to change the call if asked. But hopefully, the batter would know it too and be running hard for 1B. But if it's marginal I don't change the call in a 2 strike situation when the ball is on the ground, even if I would have with no/one strike.

Did s/he go? It's a judgment call for the BU right? If the defensive even thinks it's close what are they going to say when you don't change the call? Nice call Blue? Of course not. In this situation they never think you make the tough calls. But just go over and ask the offensive coach :-).

That's why I really like the baseball mechanic that gets me into trouble on this board when I mention it. It eliminates this problem.

IMHO this is the second best mechanic in this situation, just behind that unmentionable baseball mechanic. I think I’ll use it.

I want to ask you one question before I do, do if you ever get any ‘crap’ when you use this mechanic because you just called the pitch and then you immediately go to your partner for help?

It’s pretty obvious that any defensive coach is going to ask you to go for help in this situation (with 2 strikes on the batter). I know that I always did back in the days when I coached some.

I've never once even had it mentioned when I ask for help before the defense asks me to. Honest - not a single time.

Dakota, that's what I like to do also but it seems like if I am sure of my call but the catcher wants me to ask my partner and I am hoping that my partner doesn't change my ruling, that if I don't go to my partner it looks like I am trying to be bigger than the game. That is the only reason I did that "secret code" thing. Dave