Referee Mag Article-BU Inside Infield w/ Runner on 3rd Only

[mcrowder]

Originally Posted by jwwashburn

First of all, you assume that I AM using this way. I have used it a few times in JV ball, not varsity. You assume that I am sure it is the best. I am not sure it is best.

Now who is assuming? I assumed nothing of the sort - but simply was offering my advice from the point of view of actually trying out this mechanic.

Originally Posted by jwwashburn

It seems that a lot of umpires refuse to even consider anything different or new. Generations of baseball umpires got very close to calls at first and usually in foul territory. Just because it has been done one way for a very long time does not make it the best way.

True, but generally, in a profession with over 100 years of experience behind it, just about everything has been tried. There are things that change over time, and usually with a reason, and based on actual usage and experience. This mechanic has been used and discarded for the reasons stated above.

Originally Posted by jwwashburn

Why can't we have a discussion without people getting surly and insulting?

Who got surly or insulting? I see nothing surly or insulting. If you find that you cannot digest disagreement with your POV, you will find EVERYONE to be surly and insulting... and then we will actually become surly and insulting.

Originally Posted by jwwashburn

Trying to call good,

Try to call WELL. The only one that should be calling 'good' is the backjudge under the fieldgoal, and Marv Albert.

[CecilOne]

I think we're getting a little testy around here and need to get back to more gentility.

[jwwashburn]

Have any of the people jumping to the conclusion that I am a moron ever considered this mechanic before this thread or, TRIED it out?

Did anyone else see the article?

Again, as I have said, I am not certain it is a better mechanic.

I am certain that I read about it in referee Magazine and I find it worth consideration and discussion.

I am certain that, in person, most umpires I have asked about this also seem to dismiss it without consideration. I am talking about respectful questions with completely dismissive answers-often with less than a hearbeat to respond.

If you look up above, only one poster found any possible positives with this mechanic.

If anything I posted offended anyone, it was not intentional. I was trying to have an actual discussion about this idea. I have about 6 years experience in FP Softball...a LOT less than a lot of the posters here. I learn a lot from a lot of more experienced guys that I have worked with. I am sorry if I gave off an impression that I am not willing to LEARN...Good Grief---If I didn't want to learn, why would I subscribe to Referee and come here?

I am trying to call GOOD because that is what Papa C said in one of his videos.

Joe In Michigan

[mcrowder]

Originally Posted by jwwashburn

Have any of the people jumping to the conclusion that I am a moron...

Up until this post, I think we were giving you the benefit of the doubt, and just considering that perhaps you were inexperienced, and not a moron. But dude, if the shoe fits...

ever considered this mechanic before this thread or, TRIED it out?

Um... did you bother to read the posts? Or did you just notice that they disagreed with you, and stop reading. I see at least THREE posts disagreeing with this mechanic that specifically mention actually USING this mechanic, and finding it to be faulty and problematic (and even describing ACTUAL problems encountered when it was tried.).

Again, as I have said, I am not certain it is a better mechanic.

So... three people have tried it, and tell you it's not better... Three people tell you WHY it's not better, and after you denigrate those reasons, supply supporting descriptions as to why those reasons are valid. And then you, who is not certain it's better, decide that the people that have actually TRIED this are the problem?!?!?!

I am certain that I read about it in referee Magazine and I find it worth consideration and discussion.

That's what we were doing. Discussing our experiences with it after we considered it and tried it. What more do you want?

I am certain that, in person, most umpires I have asked about this also seem to dismiss it without consideration.

Without consideration? Can you read?

I am talking about respectful questions with completely dismissive answers-often with less than a hearbeat to respond.

The answers were dismissive because we've tried this. We responded quickly because it really didn't take much thought, after giving it a go. You would agree if you were speaking from ANY sort of experience with this at all... but lacking that experience with this mechanic, why do you stubbornly insist that everyone else is wrong. Why bother posting if you aren't going to listen to the input given you. We all posted in good faith, trying to help you understand why this mechanic poses problems (Heck, I even specified a small case where the mechanic DOES work, in my opinion). Yet you, again - with NO basis for disagreement - have such a huge problem taking the input, and ascribe attitudes toward those who tried to help you. Well... there's a last time for everything.

I was trying to have an actual discussion about this idea.

So were we.

If I didn't want to learn, why would I subscribe to Referee and come here?

That, sir, is an EXCELLENT question. One I'm wondering about myself. If one truly wants to learn, one should not simply disregard any contrary opinions as balderdash, especially when one lacks any true basis for such opinions through their own experience. Mike told you specifically what can be wrong with this mechanic, and your immediate response implied that he must not be paying attention if he had that problem with the mechanic... yet you've never actually tried it.

This reminds me of numerous discussions with my 6 year old daughter. "That's yucky." No it's not, you should try it. "No, I just know it's yucky." How can you know it's yucky if you won't try it. "I just know." ad infinitum.

[jwwashburn]

Mcrowder,

I went back and read all of the posts. I can't see anyone other than you that has used this mechanic.

As I said, I HAVE used the mechanic. I went back and read my notes. I used the mechanic in 6 JV Double Headers and two Varsity games(I had forgotten, about the Varsity games) and in a handful of U14, U16 and U18 games.

To further address Mr. Mafia's points, from my personal experience:

1) I never got "turned around" on a ball up the middle. Maybe I am not understanding what he meant by this, but I cannot remember any circumstances where this happened. Maybe it could be explained more clearly and I might better understand this one.

2) Ending up in the middle of a play. I can see how this could happen but, it may not have to be a problem. If the infield is in, you could stay behind them, if they are back, you could be closer to second base than the circle. I am not certain that this would solve the problem. I think it could work. I did not find myself in the middle of any plays.

3) How often have any of us been hit by a batted ball in baseball? It has not ever happened to me in 12+ years-I have ahd a few close calls. On a regular baseball diamond, the BU is usually approx 70 ft away? If you employed this mechanic, you could be about the same distance away-if not even farther. Do I remember Geometry Class? the diaganol of a square is the Square Root of 2 x one side...Almost 85 feet from home plate to second base. Why would this be a problem?

4) His last point: "not being in a position to go out on a possible catch/no catch scenario" Is there a mechanic that sends you "out" with a runner on base? Am I missing something here? I think your position for seeing catch/no catch would be at least as good, if not better.

Joe In Michigan

PS I talked to Referee Magazine today, the guy said he thought he could get the article to me. Also, he said that they are finally working on putting archives on their web page!

[mcrowder]

Do what you want then. If you had to look up in your notes when you tried this, you probably don't really remember it that well... and kudos on your amazing note-keeping. I don't think I list exactly where I stood on the field in my notes. I do remember this mechanic being a problem on the balls mentioned, and fail to see how you could react on a ball hit at you that is fieldable by F6 - how do you see the catch/no-catch and move toward first base at the same time, without tripping over yourself or getting turned around (and if you're not moving toward 1st base from that position... then you've eliminated the advantage of starting there, as any umpire can get to that spot from C on a normal ground ball when the play is going to be at first base)

My only real question to this last response is... WHEN is a baseball umpire 70 feet from home plate? A and D positions are about 100-110 feet away. B and C are much farther (I'd have to get out the old trig, but quick math comes to about 150 feet). And "inside" is about 115 feet.

[Dakota]

Just to help with the math (rounded to nearest inch)...

Softball diamond (60' base lines):

Distance from home to 2B: 84' 10"
Distance from PP to 2B: 44' 10"
Area of the square with 2B and PP at opposite corners: ~1005 sq ft

Baseball diamond (90' base lines):

Distance from home to 2B: 127' 3"
Distance from PP to 2B: 66' 9"
Area of the square with 2B and PP at opposite corners: ~2230 sq ft

Note that the area behind the pitcher's plate and second base on a baseball diamond is more than twice the size of the same area on a softball diamond.