"Over the batter's head"?!

[Steve M]

Originally Posted by topper

One value would be to let anyone who may have heard the contact know that you heard/saw it and it was a foul tip and not catcher's obstruction.

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.

[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?