How to "call" a ball not caught?

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by AtlUmpSteve

As I understand it, the purpose of the "safe" signal when seeing a play where they think you should be calling something is to acknowledge that 1) yes, I saw it, too, 2) I have made a judgment, it is a "no call", and 3) coming out to argue with me is challenging judgment, so you better come out asking about the rule, or else suggesting a different angle might have additional information to add.

To me, the biggest positive is that it stops the "he wasn't looking" griping; you can disagree with my judgment, but you know I saw it, and ruled on it. Personally, I think it is a good thing, when used appropriately (and not over-used).

Well, we will just disagree. Not only do I believe it is redundant since the lack of a signal means you did not believe it was a violation or you did not see it, which in every case of which I am aware, excludes the umpire from ruling otherwise.

On top of that, I believe it is an inappropriate signal as nothing occurred to suggest a player could be safe or out since if it did, there would have been another signal and/or call.

And while we are at it, this mechanic precludes absolutely no argument. It will be no different than any other play with or without a signal. It may actually be more inviting more trouble than what it is worth. It may be looked at as just another level of debate upon which a coach can hang their hat. "Blue, I knew you saw it! Obviously there was something there which made you think there could have been an infraction, but you decided not to call it."

And doesn't this pretty much fly in the face of the "no ball, no call" philosophy?

[luvthegame]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Well, we will just disagree. Not only do I believe it is redundant since the lack of a signal means you did not believe it was a violation or you did not see it, which in every case of which I am aware, excludes the umpire from ruling otherwise.

On top of that, I believe it is an inappropriate signal as nothing occurred to suggest a player could be safe or out since if it did, there would have been another signal and/or call.

And while we are at it, this mechanic precludes absolutely no argument. It will be no different than any other play with or without a signal. It may actually be more inviting more trouble than what it is worth. It may be looked at as just another level of debate upon which a coach can hang their hat. "Blue, I knew you saw it! Obviously there was something there which made you think there could have been an infraction, but you decided not to call it."

And doesn't this pretty much fly in the face of the "no ball, no call" philosophy?

No ball no call does not require a judgement to communicate...it is obvious.

This NCAA mechanic was discussed and implemented by a lot of great and experienced umpire minds.

It has been used at this level by alot of excellent umpires to acknowledge that the play was noticed and a judgement has been rendered.....

Alot of great umpires have used this mechanic and found it to be quite effective...and incorporated into their mechanics repertoire.

[Steve M]

Originally Posted by luvthegame

No ball no call does not require a judgement to communicate...it is obvious.

This NCAA mechanic was discussed and implemented by a lot of great and experienced umpire minds.

It has been used at this level by alot of excellent umpires to acknowledge that the play was noticed and a judgement has been rendered.....

Alot of great umpires have used this mechanic and found it to be quite effective...and incorporated into their mechanics repertoire.

First, I agree that it's a good signal to use - properly. And I understand that Mike is dealing is dealing with all all levels of ball and all levels of skill. AND - you may well owe be a beer r 2 for this, but - Mike would & has done well at just about any level he happened to be working.
Luvvy - you're indicating in your post that you agree with the mechanic for the college level - great, it's an expectation and pretty much a requirement that. Mike ain't agreeing with it for the various levels he's got.
There's not a problem there.
I suspect that if/when someone uses the mechanic in a game he's working, he'll know what just happened. Just as much, I suspect that in a game with Mike, if he doesn't make an interference/obstruction/no tag call in his area, I'll know he was where he should have been and saw what he should have seen.
I haven't worked a game with Mike, but we've hoisted a few and I've worked with at least 1 of his deputies - and that she's one of the best I've had the pleasure to work with - even if she does wear a non-black face mask.

[luvthegame]

Originally Posted by Steve M

First, I agree that it's a good signal to use - properly. And I understand that Mike is dealing is dealing with all all levels of ball and all levels of skill. AND - you may well owe be a beer r 2 for this, but - Mike would & has done well at just about any level he happened to be working.
Luvvy - you're indicating in your post that you agree with the mechanic for the college level - great, it's an expectation and pretty much a requirement that. Mike ain't agreeing with it for the various levels he's got.
There's not a problem there.
I suspect that if/when someone uses the mechanic in a game he's working, he'll know what just happened. Just as much, I suspect that in a game with Mike, if he doesn't make an interference/obstruction/no tag call in his area, I'll know he was where he should have been and saw what he should have seen.
I haven't worked a game with Mike, but we've hoisted a few and I've worked with at least 1 of his deputies - and that she's one of the best I've had the pleasure to work with - even if she does wear a non-black face mask.

What??



I did get the last part...and I would suspect DC uses this mechanic when appropriate.

I am just saying....there IS a reason, place and time...thats all!!

[ronald]

Originally Posted by luvthegame

This NCAA mechanic was discussed and implemented by a lot of great and experienced umpire minds.

Appeal to experts. Ok. Why have not the great and experienced umpire minds in baseball or ASA implemented it?

Originally Posted by luvthegame

It has been used at this level by alot of excellent umpires to acknowledge that the play was noticed and a judgement has been rendered.....

I can agree with that but the use of the safe signal is not something most fans can see and comprehend its meaning (I speculate that). Heck the fans may not even see it as it is done in super quick fashion. I wonder how many fans see the play and then immediately look at the ump to see if he made the safe call. For that matter, how many coaches look at the ump on this play?

Originally Posted by luvthegame

Alot of great umpires have used this mechanic and found it to be quite effective...and incorporated into their mechanics repertoire.

What is the basis for stating that is effective? Can we say that of 100 calls using this mechanic, only 2 coaches discussed versus of a 100 calls where not used, 72 coaches decided to discuss the play.

I assert that on almost any contact between a runner and f6 where a safe signal is given that one of the coaches is going to come out and ask the ump something. I can even imagine if it is with only a runner on 2nd base, the coach asking U3 to get U1's input.

So for you college guys, what is your experience when using the safe signal? What percentage of the time has it stopped a discussion?

[Steve M]

"Appeal to experts. Ok. Why have not the great and experienced umpire minds in baseball or ASA implemented it?"

You're asking the wrong group of folks here. Ask the great minds.

"I can agree with that but the use of the safe signal is not something most fans can see and comprehend its meaning (I speculate that). Heck the fans may not even see it as it is done in super quick fashion. I wonder how many fans see the play and then immediately look at the ump to see if he made the safe call. For that matter, how many coaches look at the ump on this play?"

Don't know or care what the fans understand & think. As for the coaches, with the umpire in the right position, most will see the signal.

"I assert that on almost any contact between a runner and f6 where a safe signal is given that one of the coaches is going to come out and ask the ump something. I can even imagine if it is with only a runner on 2nd base, the coach asking U3 to get U1's input."

Coach, I was in the proper position and saw the play. What piece of information on this play did you see that I did not see?


"So for you college guys, what is your experience when using the safe signal? What percentage of the time has it stopped a discussion?"

When using this signal, I have not had a single coach come to discuss that specific play - I believe that they understand it is arguing judgement.

[ronald]

thanks steve.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by Ronald

"So for you college guys, what is your experience when using the safe signal? What percentage of the time has it stopped a discussion?"

Actually, there is no valid answer to Ronald's question since you do not know if the coach would have come out to discuss a non-call if you did not offer the safe sign.

Originally Posted by luvthegame

No ball no call does not require a judgement to communicate...it is obvious.

Yes, just as is a DDB or Deadball signal, or lack of one.

I am not a fan of extraneous signals by umpires. Have I given an unnecessary signal? Sure, but usually beat myself up when I do it.

Just because you have a group of softball gods come up with something new doesn't mean everyone has to like it, accept it and sit back with a smile and pretend everything is peachy keen.

[luvthegame]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Actually, there is no valid answer to Ronald's question since you do not know if the coach would have come out to discuss a non-call if you did not offer the safe sign.



Yes, just as is a DDB or Deadball signal, or lack of one.

I am not a fan of extraneous signals by umpires. Have I given an unnecessary signal? Sure, but usually beat myself up when I do it.

Just because you have a group of softball gods come up with something new doesn't mean everyone has to like it, accept it and sit back with a smile and pretend everything is peachy keen.

But if a group of softball (or base****) gods come up with something new and someone does like it and accept it...they have the right to sit back with a smile and implement it into their game. Even "Little Johnny" would agree with that?

I do agree with the chance for a valid answer being hard to determine

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by luvthegame

But if a group of softball (or base****) gods come up with something new and someone does like it and accept it...they have the right to sit back with a smile and implement it into their game. Even "Little Johnny" would agree with that?

And many of these people at one time thought that prior to the start of an inning the base umpire should clean the PP while the plate umpire cleaned HP and they should break in unison and hustle back to their position.

These same people at one time suggested that when there were multiple base umpires, both were to go to a set position simultaneously.

Umpires once used to hold that arm out for OBS and run around the field like a one-winged chicken.

And the mirroring of the plate umpire when calling time! For chrissakes, will someone PLEASE kill this UNAUTHORIZED (at least, in ASA) mechanic. Haven't used it in more than a decade unless there was a defender or runner still active in my area of the field. However, there are still some old school folks including a failure to do this in an umpire's ratings from a national. How can you gig an umpire for not performing a mechanic that is not in the manual? A game using a 3 or 4 umpire system.....oh, wait, we cannot use a 4-umpire system because it isn't in the manual ...okay, a 3-umpire system and all at one time every umpire throws their arms into the air as if Jesse James just appeared with a gun.

We, also, used to return to a set position after a play was over only to look like an idiot staring at an empty base as all the players are already moving back into position.

Then there is the Elbeco shirt which, if you wanted a good rating, better have a military press. And let us not forget the patent leather belts and shoes of which the umpires were so proud. Umpires at one time, also, wore ties and jackets. Yeah, love to have to have been in that uniform in August in OKC!

So, after all these years of trying to minimalize the umpire's visability on the field, these "gods" have determined it is best to begin using what can only be described as preemptive signals to communicate what one did not see? Yeah, it would be easier to sell me on a timing play indicator than this.

[BretMan]

Originally Posted by ronald

Appeal to experts. Ok. Why have not the great and experienced umpire minds in baseball or ASA implemented it?

I know some guys get riled up when you mention the "B" word on the softball board, but...

This mechanic is accepted and taught at the pro baseball schools. So, those great minds have implemented it!

[luvthegame]

Originally Posted by BretMan

I know some guys get riled up when you mention the "B" word on the softball board, but...

This mechanic is accepted and taught at the pro baseball schools. So, those great minds have implemented it!

Tru dat!!

And I have seen it used by umpires in many Major League games.