"Over the batter's head"?!

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by Andy

I'm with Steve on this one...I just don't see the value of the "foul tip" signal. It's treated the same as a swinging strike and, usually, everybody knows that the batter swung.

I think this is leaking over from baseball but I tend to agree with not having a signal for a foul tip and just using the hammer to indicate a strike.

But, it's such a cool signal!

[topper]

Originally Posted by Andy

I'm with Steve on this one...I just don't see the value of the "foul tip" signal. It's treated the same as a swinging strike and, usually, everybody knows that the batter swung.

I think this is leaking over from baseball but I tend to agree with not having a signal for a foul tip and just using the hammer to indicate a strike.

If "everybody knows that the batter swung", using your and others' logic, why give a hammer?

I'd be willing to bet that many college umpires who argue against the foul tip signal now would have argued for it back when it was part of the collegate manual. Funny how these things go.

[topper]

Originally Posted by Steve M

I'm looking at that as having minimal value. Should there be CO, I've got a call to make and they'll know by the call what I have.

Do you give a safe signal when a runner nearly contacts a fielder or the ball? If so, why?

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by topper

Do you give a safe signal when a runner nearly contacts a fielder or the ball? If so, why?

And I was soooo trying to avoid heading back in this direction...

[Steve M]

Originally Posted by topper

Do you give a safe signal when a runner nearly contacts a fielder or the ball? If so, why?

Yes, I do. And that's the right thing to do. It's very much like the "play on" verbal in a different game.

[topper]

Originally Posted by Steve M

Yes, I do. And that's the right thing to do. It's very much like the "play on" verbal in a different game.

Originally Posted by Steve M

Should there be CO, I've got a call to make and they'll know by the call what I have.

Substitute "INT" for "CO" and I could see the consistency in your 2 points.

BTW, I include both signals in my game because they communicate the fact that, yes, I did see what you saw, and this is what it was. I prefer it to others thinking I'm not seeing what I'm paid to see. Like most of what we do, however, it's not 100% foolproof.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by topper

BTW, I include both signals in my game because they communicate the fact that, yes, I did see what you saw, and this is what it was. I prefer it to others thinking I'm not seeing what I'm paid to see.

What a load of crap

[topper]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

What a load of crap

You'll have to expand on this glorious comment, oh Great One.

If you're saying that a coach who thinks that he/she has seen or heard something that may be an advantage to his/her team is just as likely to come out and make an issue of it when these mechanics are used as not, then your years of experience are not the be all / end all that some would conclude.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by topper

You'll have to expand on this glorious comment, oh Great One.

If you're saying that a coach who thinks that he/she has seen or heard something that may be a advantage to his/her team is just as likely to come out and make an issue of it when these mechanics are used as not, then your years of experience are not the be all / end all that some would conclude.

(not referring to the foul tip mechanic)

I'm saying the umpire does their job and the coach is going to come out anyway if they disagree with your assessment of the situation no matter how many signals are made.

Or are you suggesting that coaches who think their team has been slighted by the lack of a call are not going to do their job just because an umpire makes a signal? IMO, that is one weak coach.

AFAIC, umpires have more important things to do than stop to make a non-call.

We have all had managers/coaches approach us prior to a the game warning us of the opponent's dastardly deeds on the field or during a game pointing out what they believe is a violation. Standard response, at least from me, is, "Thank you, coach, I will certainly call any violation when I see it".

I prefer it to others thinking I'm not seeing what I'm paid to see.

You are paid to see runners touch a base, but you do not make a signal every time a runner safely touches a base, do you?

[topper]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Or are you suggesting that coaches who think their team has been slighted by the lack of a call are not going to do their job just because an umpire makes a signal? IMO, that is one weak coach.

I'm suggesting that communicating to a coach that I have seen the same "something" that they saw and judged it to be nothing at least helps remove their perception that I missed seeing it. If they have a problem with what I've judged, that's ok. But I believe it lessens the likelyhood of a "you need to pay attention" discussion. IMO, the weak coaches are the ones who would disregard the fact that I made the signal and argue that I wasn't paying attention anyway.

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

You are paid to see runners touch a base, but you do not make a signal every time a runner safely touches a base, do you?

If there is any question about their being safe I do.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by topper

I'm suggesting that communicating to a coach that I have seen the same "something" that they saw and judged it to be nothing at least helps remove their perception that I missed seeing it. If they have a problem with what I've judged, that's ok. But I believe it lessens the likelyhood of a "you need to pay attention" discussion. IMO, the weak coaches are the ones who would disregard the fact that I made the signal and argue that I wasn't paying attention anyway.

Redundant. If you see a violation, you are going to make the appropriate signal/call, correct? If you don't see a violation, what is there to call? What happens when you make a safe signal and the coach is wondering "what the hell is he doing?"

If there is any question about their being safe I do.

And that would insinuate there was a play made. Even then, it isn't a matter of touching the base, but the runner being retired by the defense.

OTOH, it may also mean that you are making a call on a possible appeal prior to the request for an appeal.

[bestviewofall]

Oh, Mike. Don't stop now. This is hilarious. I love you taking the devil's advocate position on mechanics. Keep going. Please. This is great stuff.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by bestviewofall

Oh, Mike. Don't stop now. This is hilarious. I love you taking the devil's advocate position on mechanics. Keep going. Please. This is great stuff.

Sorry to disappoint, Smoke. There are some signals which I think are completely useless.

Sort of curious how we have survived 3/4 a century without such a signal.

Just a point, however. Nowhere along the way have I suggested an umpire not use the recommended signal of the org. for which they are working. Doesn't mean I have to like it.

[bniu]

Originally Posted by aceholleran

Glad to see a softball board here.

Maybe some of youze slo-pitch people can help here. The only softball I do is LL (all levels), whose rules are essentially those of fastpitch, I believe.

Sitch: I've got the dish. Less than two strikes. B1 attempts bunt. The rock strikes her bat and arcs about a foot into the air, then settles pleasantly in F2's (she's in foul territory, as if it matters) mitt. I wait my beat and call B1 out.

Manager of offense gets his shorts in a knot and relates his disapproval to me. He then starts with [and here's where I need your help] this, "It's gotta go over her head" horsesh&t. Now, this rule exists nowhere in LL, trust me.

I explain to him it's either a foul tip or a fly out, and I chose the latter. QED. I tried to keep him in the game, just because he was so earnest, even when he gave me old "Show it to me in the rulebook," to which I replied with my standard, "Nope. You show me." No EJ resulted.

After the game (of course, the complainer won), he approached me again, in kindly fashion. I said, "Found the rule yet?" He laughed. I at least showed him how the play could NOT be considered a foul tip.

Now, is this over-the-head palaver an existing or archaic rule in slo-pitch? This is, obviously, only for my own edification.

Ace Holleran

The foul tip mechanic, I've had several LL coaches mis-interpret it as calling the batter out. I would simply brush my hands several times, indicating the tip and give the hammer, indicating the strike. And then, the offensive coach comes up to me asking why I'm calling his batter out, and I have to explain that the hammer is used to indicate both strikes and outs. Makes me wonder, in LL, wouldn't it be easier if I just used the baseball method and point to indicate the strike?

[NCASAUmp]

Originally Posted by lala0453

Very nice post. This will help possible client to get a quality person.

Don't make him angry.