umpires conferring

[steveshane67]

are either of these situations proper. I forget the exact pre pitch runners but it was something like 1st and 3rd.

1)a play on a runner retreating towards 3rd (from home), PU immediately makes a call (which was obviously wrong) the team "getting screwed" yells and ultimately asked for the PU to appeal with the BU. BU and PU meet and BU makes the opposite (yet correct) call. (edited to emphasize that it was the BU that made the final call)

2)a play on a runner retreating towards 3rd (from home), PU immediately says he cant see and asks for help from the BU. BU makes a call bc he has a much better angle.

[Dholloway1962]

Originally Posted by steveshane67

are either of these situations proper. I forget the exact pre pitch runners but it was something like 1st and 3rd.

1)a play on a runner retreating towards 3rd (from home), PU immediately makes a call (which was obviously wrong) the team "getting screwed" yells and ultimately asked for the PU to appeal with the BU. BU and PU meet and make the opposite (yet correct) call.

2)a play on a runner retreating towards 3rd (from home), PU immediately says he cant see and asks for help from the BU. BU makes a call bc he has a much better angle.

Without a doubt they are proper. What would make you question it wasn't?

[steveshane67]

Originally Posted by dholloway1962

without a doubt they are proper. What would make you question it wasn't?

forgot to mention it was an ASA SP league

was playing in a game a while ago, runner on 3rd was tagging and left about 2 steps too early, PU said safe on the appeal, BU basically turns around and laughs, we ask BU for an appeal, BU said ASA umps cannot meet and overturn one another.

and

10-3-A

there will be no appeal on any decision involving accuracy of judgment. No decision rendered by any umpire will be reversed except when the umpire is convinced it is in violation of one of these rules.

[Dakota]

OK, you need to quit mining the rule book for ways you think your team got screwed. Instead, you need to begin to actually understand the rule book.

What happened in the first situation of your OP was not an appeal, even though players and coaches frequently call it that. What it was was asking the calling umpire to get help from his partner. If the calling umpire believes his partner may have seen something he did not, it is entirely proper for him to ask for help through a conference. When this happens, the umpire is not being reversed by his partner. He is getting additional information from his partner and based on that, reversing his own call. Sometimes this happens very publicly (e.g. a check swing "appeal" - that is also not an appeal, and the plate umpire is, by nature of his asking his partner, agreeing to go with the partner's call). Sometimes, it happens just between the umpires during the conference, with the decision being announced after the conference.

What happened in the second case of your OP is the plate umpire saw that he did not have a good view of the play, saw that his partner was in position with a good view, and gave the call up to him. Whether or not this is good practice is debatable, but it is allowed. It can work well between umpires who are very accustomed to working together.

In your final case, the BU should be ashamed of himself for how he acted, but his refusal to discuss the play was proper, since you asked the wrong umpire - you need to ask the umpire that made the call. He is correct that the umpires cannot meet and then "overturn one another" --- that is not what happens; see my explanation above.

As I said, learn the rule book instead of trying to proof text with it.

[Dholloway1962]

Originally Posted by dakota

ok, you need to quit mining the rule book for ways you think your team got screwed. Instead, you need to begin to actually understand the rule book.

What happened in the first situation of your op was not an appeal, even though players and coaches frequently call it that. What it was was asking the calling umpire to get help from his partner. If the calling umpire believes his partner may have seen something he did not, it is entirely proper for him to ask for help through a conference. When this happens, the umpire is not being reversed by his partner. He is getting additional information from his partner and based on that, reversing his own call. Sometimes this happens very publicly (e.g. A check swing "appeal" - that is also not an appeal, and the plate umpire is, by nature of his asking his partner, agreeing to go with the partner's call). Sometimes, it happens just between the umpires during the conference, with the decision being announced after the conference.

What happened in the second case of your op is the plate umpire saw that he did not have a good view of the play, saw that his partner was in position with a good view, and gave the call up to him. Whether or not this is good practice is debatable, but it is allowed. It can work well between umpires who are very accustomed to working together.

In your final case, the bu should be ashamed of himself for how he acted, but his refusal to discuss the play was proper, since you asked the wrong umpire - you need to ask the umpire that made the call. He is correct that the umpires cannot meet and then "overturn one another" --- that is not what happens; see my explanation above.

As i said, learn the rule book instead of trying to proof text with it.

amen

[steveshane67]

Originally Posted by Dakota

OK, you need to quit mining the rule book for ways you think your team got screwed. Instead, you need to begin to actually understand the rule book.

What happened in the first situation of your OP was not an appeal, even though players and coaches frequently call it that. What it was was asking the calling umpire to get help from his partner. If the calling umpire believes his partner may have seen something he did not, it is entirely proper for him to ask for help through a conference. When this happens, the umpire is not being reversed by his partner. He is getting additional information from his partner and based on that, reversing his own call. Sometimes this happens very publicly (e.g. a check swing "appeal" - that is also not an appeal, and the plate umpire is, by nature of his asking his partner, agreeing to go with the partner's call). Sometimes, it happens just between the umpires during the conference, with the decision being announced after the conference.

What happened in the second case of your OP is the plate umpire saw that he did not have a good view of the play, saw that his partner was in position with a good view, and gave the call up to him. Whether or not this is good practice is debatable, but it is allowed. It can work well between umpires who are very accustomed to working together.

In your final case, the BU should be ashamed of himself for how he acted, but his refusal to discuss the play was proper, since you asked the wrong umpire - you need to ask the umpire that made the call. He is correct that the umpires cannot meet and then "overturn one another" --- that is not what happens; see my explanation above.

As I said, learn the rule book instead of trying to proof text with it.

First off, I was on the offensive team, not the defensive team.

Secondly, I, as stated adamantly in an earlier thread, am of the mindset that the goal of umps/refs is to get the call right, not to worry about whos call it is or who has priority. And in that thread, I was basically bashed by everyone on this board for having that sentiment. All the umps kept saying "this is softball not (fill in a differnet sport) 1 ump cant overrule another once 1 ump makes a call..."

Thirdly, I was trying to impy in the OP that it was the BU who wound up making the final call, thus it was the PU initially making a call one way, one team (rightfully) complaining, and the PU asked the BU if he had something different, BU makes the opposite, of PU, call and that call stands. Note the bolded portion of your post, that is exactly what happen in the 1st sit in my OP.

Fourthly, I was just asking if either of the 2 situations in the OP were proper or if 1 ump was out of line by the letter of the ASA code, not trying to "mine the rulebook"

Fifthly, in regard to the underlined portion of your post, the ump already made his call. Why would he change it after someone said something like "are you sure?" Im not sure if you understood what I wrote, or if Im not understanding what you wrote, but as I comprehend it, you are asking me to appeal a call to the ump who made said call.

[BretMan]

Originally Posted by steveshane67

First off, I was on the offensive team, not the defensive team.

Duly noted- and irrelevent to the situation.

Originally Posted by steveshane67

Secondly, I, as stated adamantly in an earlier thread, am of the mindset that the goal of umps/refs is to get the call right, not to worry about whos call it is or who has priority. And in that thread, I was basically bashed by everyone on this board for having that sentiment. All the umps kept saying "this is softball not (fill in a differnet sport) 1 ump cant overrule another once 1 ump makes a call..."

The whole notion that one umpire cannot overrule another's call is something spelled out in "The Forgotten Chapter" of the rule book, otherwise known as "Rule 10- Umpires". This concept will be found in every single baseball or softball rule book for any association or sanctioning body.

Basically, one umpire cannot step in on his own and reverse the call of another. An umpire can make a call, then confer with his partner if he so chooses. His partner can offer any additional information he may have, but ONLY the umpire who made the original can change or reverse it. It's up to him. He doesn't have to or he can if he wants to, but he is the only one that can change it!

Try to imagine the fun we could have if this wasn't the case. Close play at the plate in a tight ball game. Plate umpire calls the out. Base umpire steps in and says, "Wait a minute- I think he was safe!". Plate umpire says, "No we wasn't!". Teams begin to argue either way. Neither umpire will budge. Chaos ensues...

Umpires can seek additional input from the other umpires, but there is a protocol and procedure to follow in doing that. If the other umpire isn't asked first, he really needs to keep his mouth shut and stay out of it!

Originally Posted by steveshane67

Thirdly, I was trying to impy in the OP that it was the BU who wound up making the final call, thus it was the PU initially making a call one way, one team (rightfully) complaining, and the PU asked the BU if he had something different, BU makes the opposite, of PU, call and that call stands. Note the bolded portion of your post, that is exactly what happen in the 1st sit in my OP.

This might be splitting hairs, but the base umpire isn't really making any ruling at all here. He should be telling his partner what he saw- IF ASKED- and then it's up to the plate umpire to change the call or not. It's still his call and he's the only one that should be changing it.

Originally Posted by steveshane67

Fourthly, I was just asking if either of the 2 situations in the OP were proper or if 1 ump was out of line by the letter of the ASA code, not trying to "mine the rulebook"

It was proper IF the umpires followed the guidelines noted above.

Originally Posted by steveshane67

Fifthly, in regard to the underlined portion of your post, the ump already made his call. Why would he change it after someone said something like "are you sure?" Im not sure if you understood what I wrote, or if Im not understanding what you wrote, but as I comprehend it, you are asking me to appeal a call to the ump who made said call.

Well, you can always ask- and the umpire can always say no!

If the umpire clearly saw what he needed to see to make the call, and is sure of what he saw, then he should NOT go to his partner for help. If he had it, then he had it. Stick with it!

But if he was blocked out on the play, knows he might have missed something, wasn't looking where he should have been looking, was horribly out of position, had a really poor angle or anything else that might lead to some doubts, he should gladly go to his partner if asked.

There's a procedure for that, too. If the coach has a legitimate question, like something regarding one of the above examples, he needs to: Request time; Wait until it is granted; GO TO THE UMPIRE THAT MADE THE CALL; Make it clear why you feel that the umpire may have missed something or why his partner might have additional information.

If it was just a close play and you didn't like the call, that is no reason for the umpire to go for help. That is just fishing for a second opinion because you didn't like the first one! If that is the case, the umpire should not entertain your request. You need to have some concrete reason for asking, something beyond, "I wish the call had gone the other way".

If you go to the umpire that didn't make the call first, he should refrain from commenting on the play and send you right to the umpire that did make the call.

A good umpire will usually know if he might have missed something. If he thinks he did, he should have no problem with checking. If he is sure that he didn't, he can tell you to forget it!

[steveshane67]

Originally Posted by BretMan

Duly noted- and irrelevent to the situation.

I was talking to dakota, he, among others on the board, like to not read what is written, make assumptions, and start going off on tangents.

Originally Posted by BretMan

Basically, one umpire cannot step in on his own and reverse the call of another. An umpire can make a call, then confer with his partner if he so chooses. His partner can offer any additional information he may have, but ONLY the umpire who made the original can change or reverse it. It's up to him. He doesn't have to or he can if he wants to, but he is the only one that can change it!

that was the answer I was looking for, I dont know why its so hard for some to just give an answer without going into diatribes.

thank you.

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by steveshane67

I was talking to dakota, he, among others on the board, like to not read what is written, make assumptions, and start going off on tangents.

Speaking of not reading what was written, I told you the same thing about the ruling. In previous postings, you've claimed to umpire games, yet your lack of knowledge on some of the basics is astonishing.

[wadeintothem]

I actually had this debate recently whereby a coach was saying (fairly vigourously) by rule that me and my partner could not confer because a judgement call is not "appealable". He also said that the other coach could not even ask about it because the call wasnt protestable.

Obviously the layman's usage of the terms"appeal" does cause them confusion as they misread rules.

If an umpire thinks that he is missing a part of the puzzle to make a call that his partner may well be able to provide, it is entirely appropriate in many instances for an umpire to go to his partner.

Because of the nature of some calls and/or the positioning of partners at certain times, it would be inappropriate to go to them because they do not have a credible vantage. In those instances, you are actually throwing your partner under the bus if you cannot stand firm on your call.

I think UMPIRE training and experience will let you know when your partner can provide credible (i.e. "saleable") input.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by wadeintothem

I actually had this debate recently whereby a coach was saying (fairly vigourously) by rule that me and my partner could not confer because a judgement call is not "appealable". He also said that the other coach could not even ask about it because the call wasnt protestable.

And what rule was that?

[crazygolf]

What happened in the second case of your OP is the plate umpire saw that he did not have a good view of the play, saw that his partner was in position with a good view, and gave the call up to him. Whether or not this is good practice is debatable, but it is allowed. It can work well between umpires who are very accustomed to working together.

[lingering]

Learn the rule book is always ranks first.

[umpirebob71]

Originally Posted by lingering

Learn the rule book is always ranks first.

Huh?

[Skahtboi]

Originally Posted by Dakota

Speaking of not reading what was written, I told you the same thing about the ruling. In previous postings, you've claimed to umpire games, yet your lack of knowledge on some of the basics is astonishing.

Is today "understatement day?"