2009 advanced FP camp

[Dakota]

No comment on wade's notion that BU should rotate home in 2 man?

[NCASAUmp]

Originally Posted by Dakota

No comment on wade's notion that BU should rotate home in 2 man?

Interesting concept he proposes.

Wade, would you like to clarify that mechanic? I'm open to hearing what you have to say about it...

[wadeintothem]

Originally Posted by NCASAUmp

Interesting concept he proposes.

Wade, would you like to clarify that mechanic? I'm open to hearing what you have to say about it...

Any time BU's job is to pick his nose while PU's job is at 3, BU should be home and actually have a job besides relaxing spectator.


Another example than above is hit and run or bunt (R1@ 1B) where the out is to 1B and PU takes the banger at 3B. BU should be home.
What else does he have to do?

Why should PU be forced to follow R1 home if the play goes that way?

BU should be gainfully employed covering home.

Its common sense.

[IRISHMAFIA]

No comment on wade's notion that BU should rotate home in 2 man?

Originally Posted by NCASAUmp

Interesting concept he proposes.

Wade, would you like to clarify that mechanic? I'm open to hearing what you have to say about it...

That's so easy, it is almost embarassing. One simple sentence, "Who is covering 2B?"

[wadeintothem]

For the hit and run, if there was potential of a play at 2B - (Ie the BR is safe or there is a run down)

BU would never rotate home.

BU would only rotate home with communication to his partner when he is no longer employed.

This same concept applies when he is "out and should stay out" - such as an outside foul line call at 1B.

Well at least cover home. BU doesnt need to spectate or cheerlead the PU, they can be employed at home.

IF BR is safe on the hit and run - BU should never rotate home.

I dont think that would be too difficult to teach to a national level umpire.

Even texas baseball umpires understand it

[CecilOne]

What were the questions/contexts behind these two?

9. On force plays at first base (no such thing), follow the DVD. It is the gospel.

10. On swipe tag at first base, one of the instructors told us what he has done. Instead of going towards the line which does nothing for your angle, he moves to his right to get a better view of a tag or no tag.

[ronald]

Originally Posted by CecilOne

What were the questions/contexts behind these two?

9. On force plays at first base (no such thing), follow the DVD. It is the gospel..

I do not remember a context for this one but it was emphasized a couple of times so I thought to mention it.

Originally Posted by CecilOne

10. On swipe tag at first base, one of the instructors told us what he has done. Instead of going towards the line which does nothing for your angle, he moves to his right to get a better view of a tag or no tag.

When we went to practicing drills, the instructor took it upon himself to add this.

[ronald]

Originally Posted by ronald

When we went to practicing drills, the instructor took it upon himself to add this.

Cecil, let me try to expand on this and give some context.

We were at the stations for plays at first base and the instructor brought up the swipe tag sit. He explained everything that others have about how moving to line offers no good angle and that pu does not have a good angle either and what they DVD said. But just like we have to move on swipe tags at other bases, he explained what he has done. Of course, we do this cause we have read the throw, can see it is off and the 1b is going to have to move or jump and so we move to the right to get a better view.

Now can we do that with all UIC's and not get a negative. I don't know but the NUS does want the ump to do more than get to the starting position. They want us to read and react appropriately to get the best unobstructed view. Julie did mention once to the umps: "Guys, we don't want you to be thinking where do they (instructors) want me but where do I need to get to get the best view." The four instructors at the school support that. Will all UIC think like that? We hope they will cause they are getting this philosophy from their superiors.
So, I think a play like that would be good to bring up in the ump's meeting before working with an unknown UIC.


Ron

[NCASAUmp]

Originally Posted by CecilOne

10. On swipe tag at first base, one of the instructors told us what he has done. Instead of going towards the line which does nothing for your angle, he moves to his right to get a better view of a tag or no tag.

Don't know about #9, but #10 was discussed ad-nauseam here.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

No comment on wade's notion that BU should rotate home in 2 man?



That's so easy, it is almost embarassing. One simple sentence, "Who is covering 2B?"

Dave,

Still waiting on an answer

[NCASAUmp]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Dave,

Still waiting on an answer

Wasn't my suggestion, so hell if I know.

Though I do agree with the concept in general. BU should be allowed to rotate home IF (and ONLY if) there are no other responsibilities at 1B or 2B (ie., batter hits a triple and could head home).

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by NCASAUmp

Wasn't my suggestion, so hell if I know.

Though I do agree with the concept in general. BU should be allowed to rotate home IF (and ONLY if) there are no other responsibilities at 1B or 2B (ie., batter hits a triple and could head home).

As long as there is a runner between 2B & 3B, how can there NOT be a potential play at 2B?

If a player hits a triple, it isn't the PUs call anyway.

[wadeintothem]

I'd say i think it can be read when there is potential of a run down, and that mean that I dont believe the BU has reached the "unemployed spectator" status.

That status happens when the play at 3B is obvious and PU is then forced to trail the runner home on the broken play at 3B.

Lets say BU did go home early or read it incorrectly, PU would probably have to pick up the slack by taking 2B temporarily while BU readjusted.

Certianly, whatever reasoning would make someone think PU couldnt cover 2B on that, should preclude you from believe you could cover home and 3B on that. Both bases are 50-55 feet from you.

[Big Slick]

Originally Posted by Rachel

I think that discussion of an umpire working outside the infield should be called working outside. Just sayin'. Rimming is an inappropriate term.

I agree about the nomenclature.

The NCAA does not have a strict adherence to the "inside-outside" theory. "Working the rim" is one specific case (base hit to LF with no runners on). Working "outside" has two underlying aspects: 1) there are two calling positions for every play (one inside and one outside); 2) the umpire can read the play and work inside or outside, which ever is beneficial to the play.

As for the first aspect, on runners on, and the BR tries to stretch a single (to LF) to a double. I can stay outside, work parallel with the runner, and be in a calling position at second that is outside. I've made a few out calls like this (2 umpire system), which I 1) never lost my priorities (obs at first, BR touching first, obs at second), 2) did not cross the path of the runner or 3) turned my back on the ball.

As for the second aspect, well, this is the key. Some umpires stay outside just for the sake of staying outside (i.e. laziness). If the BR hits a triple, or what looks to be a triple, then you can't stay outside. Staying outside does have it's place, but as Andy stated, it is an advanced technique, and should not be taught at the basic or LCD levels.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by Rachel

I think that discussion of an umpire working outside the infield should be called working outside. Just sayin'. Rimming is an inappropriate term.

Pardon my ignorance, but why is it inappropriate?