Why Softball Rules Are Smarter

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by socalumps

I think that is part of the quandry....the person responsible was in a better position than any of the replay angles and did see a tag....which is how he deducted an out. In your preferred position there is no way he could have seen for sure as it was a swipe tag coming from the 1b foul side and would have placed the runners body and right leg between the ball/glove and tag.

I don't think so. "My" preferred position would have started and adjusted (but not much on this play) off the back outside corner of the RH box. And that would not have placed the any body part in front of the other as is seen from the shot above and behind the 3B dugout.

But go ahead and think the rest of us are blind and are out of position third base line extended

No, just out of position.

...we (and McClelland/and many other MLB professionals) are wrong...you are right!! You've convinced us!!

And yes, I do believe the MLB professionals are incorrect for the majority of baseball/softball. It may work for their level of ball with a 4-man crew, but not everything with bases and a stick.

The assumption of the position is that the runner is always going to be wide and the catcher will sweep. The mechanic is unreliable for anything coming straight down the line. Only because the "major leaguer" at 1B failed to give the catcher a decent throw did McClelland see any of that play. If the throw was to the glove side and Molina moved to block the plate, that would have put Molina's body between the umpire and the play. It wasn't as if McClelland was reacting to the bad throw as he was moving to his right the moment he saw F3 looking home.

Yeah, on a softball board, I believe you and MLB umpires use a less than favorable mechanic on 3BL extended.

[socalumps]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

I don't think so. "My" preferred position would have started and adjusted (but not much on this play) off the back outside corner of the RH box. And that would not have placed the any body part in front of the other as is seen from the shot above and behind the 3B dugout.



No, just out of position. But you admit that he was in position? And yes you did indicate the use of a red tipped cane and seeing eye dog.


And yes, I do believe the MLB professionals are incorrect for the majority of baseball/softball. It may work for their level of ball with a 4-man crew, but not everything with bases and a stick. Why does 4-man crew matter? as long as the umpirre is responsible for only the play at the plate?

The assumption of the position is that the runner is always going to be wide and the catcher will sweep. The mechanic is unreliable for anything coming straight down the line. I agree, and as stated earlier, a top level softball player would have use an avoidance slide in this situation.Only because the "major leaguer" at 1B failed to give the catcher a decent throw did McClelland see any of that play. If the throw was to the glove side and Molina moved to block the plate, that would have put Molina's body between the umpire and the play. It wasn't as if McClelland was reacting to the bad throw as he was moving to his right the moment he saw F3 looking home. But you admit now that he did see the play?

Yeah, on a softball board, I believe you and MLB umpires use a less than favorable mechanic on 3BL extended.

I have seen this mechanic used very favorably many times in both baseball and softball.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Yes, McClelland saw the play. So did thousands of other people, but I did not say that I believe he saw the play at the proper angle. He had a two dimensional view. You talk about a 4th dimension, this umpire didn't have a 3rd.

He was in the MLB prescribed position, IMO, not the best.

A four umpire crew would matter under a softball scenario as we are trained to watch whatever play we can and do not get hung up on territory if input is needed. Don't know how many times I've heard baseball umpires talk about his play or my play and going for help is out of the question. Granted, old school, but it is still there.

On this play, the four umpire crew would not have made a difference. However, on other plays facing the infield, a PU on 3BL could get help from the base umpires, if necessary and the umpire is willing to use it. Again, in softball, we do not have the luxury of an umpire for each base and responsibilities are different.

Maybe you have seen this mechanic work. I have seen the mechanic not work and it was a Phillies game, again. Runner sliding at the plate. Catcher tagged the runner on a raised, bent knee and the umpire ruled the runner safe. What the umpire did not see was that the extended leg was not near the plate at the time of the tag. Maybe it was that baseball philosophy that a high tag equals safe or maybe the 3BL was a bad angle. The announcers and everyone else who saw the replay not only thinks, but knows the umpire blew a call made from a knee on the 3BL at the rim of the dirt.

I believe the ASA prescribed positioning gives the umpire a set-up which gives the umpire the best view for the multitude of possibilities and flexibility to move with the play.

IMO, there are too many umpires being pushed at the higher levels to be at point A and that's the end of the story. In the recent NCAA, there were umpires so intent on getting to point A, they almost lost the play. One umpire was so intent on getting to the 90 for the call at 1B, the umpire literally stepped into the middle of a possible play. Another so busy working the rim on a call at 3B, the possibility of a play seemed to be overlooked as the umpire placed themselves behind the play and would have missed any tag.

People talk about ASA umpires being too robotic. I would rather have an umpire be willing to get to a position to make sure of the best view and give a standard signal than have an umpire get to his/her prescribed point and make a call on a play not completely seen.

JMHO

[wadeintothem]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

IMO, there are too many umpires being pushed at the higher levels to be at point A and that's the end of the story. In the recent NCAA, there were umpires so intent on getting to point A, they almost lost the play. One umpire was so intent on getting to the 90 for the call at 1B, the umpire literally stepped into the middle of a possible play. Another so busy working the rim on a call at 3B, the possibility of a play seemed to be overlooked as the umpire placed themselves behind the play and would have missed any tag.

People talk about ASA umpires being too robotic. I would rather have an umpire be willing to get to a position to make sure of the best view and give a standard signal than have an umpire get to his/her prescribed point and make a call on a play not completely seen.

JMHO

Now that we can agree on. But you are the rare exception. No evaluator (unfortunately) in my area is going to say "wow that was not 'point A as prescribed' but you had a great view."

You are going to get dinged because the book says with Runners on 1 and 2 in a 2 man system on a ball hit here and a play there, you be in Z position.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by wadeintothem

Now that we can agree on. But you are the rare exception. No evaluator (unfortunately) in my area is going to say "wow that was not 'point A as prescribed' but you had a great view."

You are going to get dinged because the book says with Runners on 1 and 2 in a 2 man system on a ball hit here and a play there, you be in Z position.

And if that is the case, the NCAA needs to do a better job with those they allow to make such evaluations whether at the local association or higher levels of authority.

As we all know, the idea is to get it right and the mentality you describe here seems to be placing appearance above the game. IMO, that is unhealthy for the game and the umpires, in general.

[MNBlue]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

Except maybe post 12, which is what I was referring to.

I know there aren't, but there should be. They're playing baseball, not football or hockey.