Eager Partner?
 

From a Fed game last week where I am PU. Partner is pretty good, no real problems with him (first time working together). First occasion, lead runner coming in to 3B (trailing BR still on bases), I am down the line getting in to position with a throw coming in. I see BU coming over so I verbalize "I got third" (loud enough to make the 3B coach turn towards me), but BU continues to move in. Luckily ball gets away so there's no call to make. Second occasion, we have a rundown between 2B and 3B. I am in position to take the lead, but BU is right smack dab in the middle, so I verbalize "I got this end" (again loud enough to make the 3B coach turn). There is a series of quick throws as the BU does his imitation of one of those target ducks that twirls back and forth before the tag is made as the runner is retreating to 2B and BU rings her up.

My questions is this: After letting the BU know that I am there to make my call and he is still right there to also make the call, what should I do? In both cases, I was thinking to myself that I was going to let him make the call (and the rundown did turn out to be his call) in order to save us from the possible double call, but what should I have done?

He was a 20-year veteran and after the game he was more concerned with fraternizing with the coaches than reviewing game so we didn't get to discuss the coverages. I know we pre-gamed, but I don't remember for sure if we went over these situations. More than likely we didn't.

Although the incorrect mechanic by the BU, IMO you would have done the correct thing. If a call is to be made, look up and see if the BU is going to make a call. If so, let the BU make the call.

Also, although there was no time for a post game meeting, I would have called the BU the next day to discuss.

I say dont call him.. For what purpose? If its like my area, you may not see this guy again for perhaps years.. who knows? He surely doesnt want to hear from you and wouldnt listen anyway.

In a game with a guy like that.. just wait and see if they will make the call. If he doesnt, make it.. if he does.. let him. No post game either.. just get in your car, go home, vent a little here, and forgidabodit.

Block him in Arbiter. Life is too short to deal with guys like that.

You did the right thing backing off and letting him have it if he is going to take it and then if he doesnt make a call then you now have to bang it bigger than you would have had you been able to be sure you had the call and not wondering if you did or didnt. The NCAA has a communication thing that I think is really cool, if in your pre game you can discuss it with your partner, What the NCAA manual has in it is when in a rundown or situation where your partner is calling you off but you cant look over to him/her to let them know you heard them then touch your ear closest to that umpire that is calling you off. This is a low profile signal that you and your partners can use for communication. That being said on my pregame "cheat sheet" I have rundowns and coverage on there those are always situations that can screw with even the best of people. As for the post game... if your partner doesnt want to then just get in the car and drive away listening to whatever calms you down and later vent ... let it go ... hopefully like someone else suggested you can block him on arbiter :D

Thats terrible. You dont need a secret signal.. Rundowns are not rocket surgery. If you are boxing the play and you just say "I got 3" or whatever, then your partner SHOULD know that if the play is in that direction, its yours, if its in his direction, say 2, its his. You dont need to touch your ears or do top secret stuff, just speak. A good partner hears and understands what it means and knows what to do. I got other things to do that to watch an umpire to see if he his touching his ear. If I scratch my @ss in response, that means, speak, so I know what the heck you are doing.

That last line says it all :) ...Funny stuff! Fun at the ole' ball park! ...Al

First of all its not secret if you pre-game... second of all you are communicatiing with your partner. I have worked wiht a guy who wears hearing aids and cant here all that well so when you scream Ive got third he mau\y not here you. Third of all that signal allows your partner to keep their eyes on the action and let you know that he/she knows youve came down to help. Also what if you cant here them respond. now you have no signal no verbal and you sir are Fd because you dont know what your partner is doing and you dont know what you should be doing because you have to react to your partner in that situation. Also you knowing what you should be doing is great and the key to setting up success but your partner not knowing or even if your partner knows and doesnt let you know you are still screwed. BTW that ear thing is in the NCAA manual not NFHS so I am not saying go and do it and that mechanic was put in the manual by Ed Crane and Emily Alexander along with the other people in the national umpire improvement program Who really know what is good and what is not good. The low profile thing is like the same with asking for outs and giving the response in NCAA its done on the pants as to keep your arms in and not be signaling to god and everybody that you have two outs. The ear thing is not the only communication that should be done but it is CERTAINLY a helper.

Or you can just acknowledge with a thumbs up or simple, "okay, I'm on this end" or something similar.

So, am I to understand that now you don't believe in umpire to umpire signals for communication? You know, things like holding your hand to your left chest to indicate IFR being in effect, or wiping it away with your right hand to your left forearm? All this is is another umpire to umpire signal. If you are too busy yourself to notice it, then that is okay. But at least you were replied back to. There are all kinds of umpire to umpire signals that are "approved" signals. I don't see a problem with using them.

That would work too. But, for the NCAA game, what kcg mentioned is indeed the approved signal.

Of course, the also assumes the partner is watching for that signal instead of already picking up the play. :D

I agree. There are no guarantees it will be seen. In fact, I would venture that the majority of the time, it isn't. Of course, there have been many times when I have given the IFR signal, and not gotten a response back either. I still do it, though.

How did you leap from "Thats terrible. You dont need a secret signal" to "you don't believe in umpire to umpire signals for communication"?

When I read that, I understood him to mean that a secret signal is not required for a rundown. And I have to agree; in the middle of the action, a signal like touching your ear seems far too easy to miss. A simple verbal response would work better, imo.

But when there is no action, the standard umpire-to-umpire signals are certainly appropriate. That's completely different from what was being discussed.

I give it even during solo games. Same thing with the wipe-off

Talking with yourself, blue? ;)

Actually, I do that, too.

You should read my post, and quote the entire thing, instead of just the part that you deem necessary. If you had, you would notice I was asking a question, to make a point. Yes. As I have stated, many of these signals go unnoticed. However, we still continue to use them. I don't believe I have ever stated whether or not I agree with this particular signal at all. What I did state is, it is the recommended signal for NCAA, and being such, I will use it when I call their games.

In the NCAA they advise using this signal. Absolutely nothing secret about it. It is in print in the CCA Umpire's Manual. Same as the other umpire to umpire communication signals. So, this is exactly what is being discussed. Not, as you stated (and that can be seen by the fact that I quoted you completely above) something "completely different."

As do I.

I'm surprised I didn't catch this the first time.

What wipe-off, Mike? I can't find this anywhere in the book. ;)

Especially if I can see an umpire on an adjoining field to signal. :)

No, you should understand I dont believe in dumb signals when verbal communication works just fine or better. Ive worked with many of you college guys and you do this collar thing for good call and all this lame stuff. Its just dumb. IFR or "gimme the count" and some other stuff are fine.

What the hell is the "collar thing?" Apparently, not an approved signal, as I have never seen or heard of it. I still haven't weighed in with my opinion on the response signal for someone coming up to cover the other end of the play, just stated that it is in fact a legitimate, approved signal in the NCAA. Therefore, it is no different than any other approved umpire to umpire signal in any other code.

And playing devil's advocate here, why not just yell at your partner, "the infield fly rule is on," or "what do you have for a count," (which I believe is still the recommended ASA way) instead of using signals? Don't you think that when these signals came into being, some umpire, somewhere, was saying "I am not going to use these signals, they are just dumb?"

Obviously, though, enough umpires accepted the change and applied them, and they have now become the accepted norm.

Speaking ASA

Asking for the count if eye contact doesn't work, but the IFR is still a right hand to the chest.

However, I do not understand why you would need to compliment your partner on a "good call". What does it mean if you forget to execute the "collar thing"? Does that mean you disagree with the call? :rolleyes:

I think the only thing I could add is to tell your partner a couple more times that your there, we don't want to turn that into a conversation on the diamond during a rundown....but maybe esculate the verbal

1) I got 3 (as you said)
2) 3rd is my call
3) I'm at 3 take second

I dont' think I would go to a forth just do what you did after that, and I would have a conversation after the first incident to remind your partner that is your call and you were there, a nice reminder that he/she is working with an umpire that doesn't have a chain tied to home plate. That you are going to be where you should be per the manual. Also to see if he had a hard time hearing you call him off or what. A nice, brief conversation but still let him know you were there and you will be there baring any SNAFU's that might occur.

So just to go down the slippery slope here if some signals are dumb but others are fine... do you pick and choose which rules to apply based on what you think is dumb ... we enforce all the rules for a reason those signals are all used for a reason

That slope is so slippery, it doesn't exist.

Rules =/= signals..its apples and oranges. Many different umpires can legitimately differ/express preferences over signals, but ignoring rules is an entirely separate matter.

I also signal IFR when solo, but for 1 reason only. I want to be consistent every game and certain "routines" help me recall the sich during actual plays. The point is, if it helps me, then why not.....

True but how many times have you heard this, " I'm not gonna call that this is a (insert important game here)" Unfourtunately I have heard that WAY to much as of late. Just to add to that ... a majority of those umpire who wouldnt make a "tough call" or enforce a rule because of whatever game it is didn't signal or use the right signals or even have a pre-game to discuss what they would want to use

Well.. two diff animals, you guys have E. A.'s books with a billion signals in it. There actually are not very many signals for use in ASA.

I've heard it from unexpected sources of late.....

Use the signals in the NCAA Softball Umpire's Manual if you are doing a college game and the FED signals if it's a high school game. If it's rec ball, use the signals that the rule set is being played under. Many of the rec games use standard ASA mechanics for umpire to umpire signals.

If your umpire association UIC has specific signals s/he wants used then KTBDH. (Keep The Big Dog Happy)

If you pre-game something with your partner it for communication purposes I dont know any UIC that will ding you for that. And since rundowns are in my pregame it will be pregamed if some one has a problem with it we always work to a comprimse.

Whatever happened to the good ol' days when a pregame was:

U1: Partner, everything by the book.
U2: You got it!

That's still what I do, mostly. Other than reminders of various things, we (partner and I) only get off into other stuff if he brings it up.

OK, here's the question you 'posed' (both of them):

That seems like a pair of rhetorical questions designed to hyperbolize the other poster's statement. In other words, it was a strawman, and that is what I was focusing on. That you phrased it as a question is irrelvant. And if I misread it, then I apologize. But after rereading it, I still take it the same way.


No, you didn't come right out and definitively state your position on whether or not you agree with this particular signal. But you did jump all over those who deigned to say that they didn't like it.


No, the other umpire-to-umpire signals that you used for your hyperbolic comparison were the ones for the IFR. Those are used when there is a lull in the action; thus they can reasonably be expected to be seen and understood. The signal in question here is touching one's ear during the play. These are completely different situations, and the IFR signals really are NOT exactly what is being discussed.

One can agree with the IFR signals and not agree with the ear touching and still be consistent. Because they're, you know, different. Completely.

Note, however, that I do not criticize someone who uses that ear signal. As you say, it's an approved mechanic (at least for NCAA). I just don't happen to see value in it, especially when one's eyes are better used to follow the play rather than your partner.

Or how about:

U1: Partner, everything by the book.
U2: (touches ear)

Thats also mine.. pregames take about 15-30 seconds...

Some one in our assoc laminated this hugh list for pregame official/pregame coach and handed them out.

Funny.... thank god I've never had any partner pull that dang thing out.

Apparently you are still missing the intent of my posts. Yet, I can think of nothing else to make you understand. You are obviously committed to the belief that I was jumping "all over those who deigned to say they didn't like it." I have "jumped all over" no one, and that statement on your part is the only hyperbole I see in this discussion. I was merely supporting, originally, the stance of kcg NC2Ablu who made mention that the signal, which for the record I am not a fan of, is a legitimate signal as far as NCAA mechanics go. Wade had said he didn't need any secret signals, so I was informing him, in my way, that this is in fact not a "secret signal," but an approved mechanic so far as the NCAA goes. This is "proper" umpire to umpire communication.

Now insofar as your statement, "Note, however, that I do not criticize someone who uses that ear signal. As you say, it's an approved mechanic (at least for NCAA)," the following would seem to be contradictory:

I actually have. Last year, a guy I was working playoffs with pulled out a wipe off board and a list and starting going through everything item by item. Guess what? It was all by the book. He could have saved us all 15 minutes.

Apparently, Glen didn't trust you........oops, did I say/type that out loud:rolleyes:


:D

And you are sooooooooooooo right. :cool:

Unfortunately, as Mike said, there are a lot of umpires trained not to go by the book. I was surprised to hear our organization tell us that the BU should let PU handle ALL runners at 3B in SP, even the BR. Sometimes, you just have to account for that.

The crazy (or sad) part is that I had the same name in my head.

So...safe to assume this isn't an isolated incident?

Actually, you just did it (see below).

My apologies for both missing your point and making you explain it (and also my thanks that you did explain it).

That was levity. Nothing more.

The best umpires (IMHO) at the Florida Junior College tournament used the laminated 8.5"x11" pre-game form. They were all D-I umpires (SEC, ACC, CUSA and other conferences). It might have been a bit of overkill, but we sure had a thorough pre-game.

Now, if you're working 2-man with partners you've known for a long time, you don't need it ... but it was helpful in this case.

Bad thing is you shouldn't need that much pregame conversation....like several have said "I umpire by the book mechanics" "great, lets go". BUT how many times have you had this conversation and then have a BU that wants to call the lead runner into 3rd? Or rule on a tag up at 3rd? Or worse working 3 person.....and everyone is good with it prior to the game, then both field umpires go out on a ball hit to center :eek: or a U3 is working their way to 3rd on a base hit to the outfield with no one on and PU is standing there for the play.....thinking by the book this is mine surely he/she will stop at 2nd, surely they are releasing the runner to me....

I've been doing something similar (not as huge) this year when I work with partners I haven't worked with before. I want to know that their interpretation of 'by the book' is.

So are we done with this now?? Whew! :D

My pregame sheet is quick easy and paiinless. I ask if whoever Im working with has a question about something that I run through if they do we talk about it. Having a white board isnt a bad tool if your going over something with a new umpire or someone who hasnt worked three man before but if you ask if everyone(or just your partner) and they say yes ... no need to go through all that. Also saying everything is "by book" is hard if the people you work with dont have the book let alone know how to read it.

By the book is fine, but there apparently are different books. :rolleyes:

I usually mention the items I find inconsistent among umps I work with; like 3rd base coverage (list of 5 in another topic), going out or not in 2-ump, echoing counts, anything they have had questions about in other games.