Out of batter's box

[NCASAUmp]

Originally Posted by Ref Ump Welsch

It's a dead ball in USSSA, at least in the slow-pitch game. Called this so many times this year I feel like it's become a trademark for me.

After I made this call only one time in my last tourney, I got a 15-minute lecture from the AUIC on how to make this call.

[CecilOne]

Originally Posted by NCASAUmp

After I made this call only one time in my last tourney, I got a 15-minute lecture from the AUIC on how to make this call.

Are you going to explain or should we just assume you kicked the batter and yelled "no such rule in USFA"?

[NCASAUmp]

Originally Posted by CecilOne

Are you going to explain or should we just assume you kicked the batter and yelled "no such rule in USFA"?

Actually, I'll be honest. My initial (and also hidden) reaction was, "what the hell, man? It was a good call, and you're busting my nuts for it?"

However, he had some great points that made me take a step back to look at things from a different perspective. Yes, the batter's foot was clearly out of the box when he made contact. The AUIC (whom I will call "Fred," obviously not his real name) did not dispute that, and he said that from that aspect, I'm correct. However, his question to me was: why is that wrong?

We've all seen (and probably done) it: the umpire calls the batter out, coach comes to talk to the umpire, and the umpire points to the clear footprint left in the dirt. And yet, despite that, the coach continues to argue his player's case. What can an umpire do to avoid this?

"Fred" said to me, "it's not an issue of whether or not he was out of the box, but whether the batter gained an advantage by doing so." Does stepping out of the box necessarily give the batter an advantage? Not always, and Fred's message was that when it doesn't give the batter an advantage, maybe we shouldn't try to split hairs so much.

However, stepping out of the box often does give the batter certain advantages, such as pulling the ball harder down the line (by stepping back) or hitting an otherwise unhittable pitch (by stepping across). It's during these times, Fred contends, that the call should be made. Otherwise, you're simply splitting hairs, calling a call that really has minimal bearing on the game. And when you're picking boogers like that, we all know where that can land you.

Making these calls is something that every umpire must evaluate when setting foot on the field, and we do it every day. In our Tuesday night rec leagues, do we make everyone wear proper uniforms? Do we make them all turn their hats forward? In 10U, do we call every single illegal pitch when the pitcher gained no advantage? By the letter of the rule, shouldn't we be making these calls? Why aren't we?

Simple. No advantage gained, nothing lost, no call.

And now, how does this help us with a offensive coach whose batter just got called out? Simple. "Coach, the batter stepped out of the box and hit a pitch that would have been otherwise unhittable. In my judgment, he gained an unfair advantage by doing so, and we can't allow that to happen." You're telling the coach you're not out to pick nits, but rather to keep things on an even keel. Isn't that what we're supposed to be doing in the first place?

I hope that I've done justice to the 15-minute conversation that "Fred" and I had that day.

Dave, without copying and pasting your entire response, I wanted to respond to your lengthy, yet well-pointed discussion. Your AUIC makes a very good point with the advantage/disadvantage argument. That's something we use, not just in softball, but in other sports as well, football and basketball being my other sports. Of course, basketball is the big one on advantage/disadvantage. However, your AUIC probably is forgetting that sometimes you have to throw out that advantage/disadvantage thing when there's been a clear violation that cannot be ignored. An example would be the batter stepping out of the box so obviously the catcher saw it. If the catcher sees it, we really can't avoid calling it because then the defensive coach will be all over our case on it. That's why I don't call ALL of the stepping out of the box stuff. Earlier, it was noted in USSSA, the benefit of the doubt goes to the batter. I've used that to my advantage, and it works. It also depends on the level of play, travel team boys vs. the recreational beer league boys.

I'm not dissing advantage/disadvantage (used it big time in a freshmen football game the other morning, and pissed off an assistant coach so bad I had the head coach rein him in). There's a time and place where you have to throw out that advantage/disadvantage practice when obvious has happened, and going with that philosophy can burn you and create a cluster f**k later.

[NCASAUmp]

Originally Posted by Ref Ump Welsch

However, your AUIC probably is forgetting that sometimes you have to throw out that advantage/disadvantage thing when there's been a clear violation that cannot be ignored. An example would be the batter stepping out of the box so obviously the catcher saw it. If the catcher sees it, we really can't avoid calling it because then the defensive coach will be all over our case on it.

And that's why I felt that I wasn't doing the conversation justice. The dead-a$$ obvious calls SHOULD be called, or you'll end up looking more incompetent than they already think we are. Fred was advocating that if the batter's foot was smack-dab in the middle of the plate when contact was made, well, you've gotta call it. There are some rules that we just can not ignore.

But those calls where the batter steps across the plate and nearly into the other box? Call those, too! Why? Because again, the batter gained an advantage by stepping out of the box to hit an otherwise unhittable ball.

Otherwise, if his foot is an inch out of the box, no advantage is gained, and the catcher asks you about his foot, your answer is simple. "Catch, I'm concentrating on seeing if I can call a strike for your pitcher. Sorry, but I didn't see it."

That last section, for the record, was NOT something Fred said. That's me talking.

Originally Posted by NCASAUmp

And that's why I felt that I wasn't doing the conversation justice. The dead-a$$ obvious calls SHOULD be called, or you'll end up looking more incompetent than they already think we are. Fred was advocating that if the batter's foot was smack-dab in the middle of the plate when contact was made, well, you've gotta call it. There are some rules that we just can not ignore.

But those calls where the batter steps across the plate and nearly into the other box? Call those, too! Why? Because again, the batter gained an advantage by stepping out of the box to hit an otherwise unhittable ball.

Otherwise, if his foot is an inch out of the box, no advantage is gained, and the catcher asks you about his foot, your answer is simple. "Catch, I'm concentrating on seeing if I can call a strike for your pitcher. Sorry, but I didn't see it."

That last section, for the record, was NOT something Fred said. That's me talking.

Agreed 100%. I've had to tell catchers the same thing, especially with the very subtle out of the box steps. I've even used the line "if there was a line there, he'd stepped ON it." Works just as well.

[NCASAUmp]

Originally Posted by Ref Ump Welsch

Agreed 100%. I've had to tell catchers the same thing, especially with the very subtle out of the box steps. I've even used the line "if there was a line there, he'd stepped ON it." Works just as well.

Well, only problem was that the line was CLEARLY there when I had called it during that game. It was top of the 2nd inning, and the lines were almost as sharp as they were from the start of the game.

My initial reaction was, "oh cluck, I'm gonna HAVE to call this one...."

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by NCASAUmp

"Fred" said to me, "it's not an issue of whether or not he was out of the box, but whether the batter gained an advantage by doing so." Does stepping out of the box necessarily give the batter an advantage? Not always, and Fred's message was that when it doesn't give the batter an advantage, maybe we shouldn't try to split hairs so much.

However, stepping out of the box often does give the batter certain advantages, such as pulling the ball harder down the line (by stepping back) or hitting an otherwise unhittable pitch (by stepping across). It's during these times, Fred contends, that the call should be made. Otherwise, you're simply splitting hairs, calling a call that really has minimal bearing on the game. And when you're picking boogers like that, we all know where that can land you.

Making these calls is something that every umpire must evaluate when setting foot on the field, and we do it every day. In our Tuesday night rec leagues, do we make everyone wear proper uniforms? Do we make them all turn their hats forward? In 10U, do we call every single illegal pitch when the pitcher gained no advantage? By the letter of the rule, shouldn't we be making these calls? Why aren't we?

Simple. No advantage gained, nothing lost, no call.

And now, how does this help us with a offensive coach whose batter just got called out? Simple. "Coach, the batter stepped out of the box and hit a pitch that would have been otherwise unhittable. In my judgment, he gained an unfair advantage by doing so, and we can't allow that to happen." You're telling the coach you're not out to pick nits, but rather to keep things on an even keel. Isn't that what we're supposed to be doing in the first place?

I hope that I've done justice to the 15-minute conversation that "Fred" and I had that day.

And what do you tell the catcher that saw the player contact the ball with the foot on the ground completely outside of the BB?

You now have to either lie to the catcher (which I just will not do to anyone) or tell the player, "You're correct, but IMJ the batter did not gain an advantage by violating the rule, so I'm not calling it." Now you just set yourself up for a protest as you just admitted to misinterpreting a rule, unless FRED is the UIC.

Actually, I'm not completely opposed to what FRED is trying to sell, just that I realize there are two teams on the field that voluntarily agreed to play by a certain set of rules. I also am of the belief you don't nit pick, but can someone tell me where the line between nit picking and doing you job is drawn? You ever have someone tell you that if you have to go look for it, you probably shouldn't call it?

But let's talk the theory of advantage/disadvantage. If a batter hits a ball he normally would not have been able to hit, that means the pitch would have been called a ball. Where is the advantage? Many OBS are relatively routine and really didn't give anyone an edge, but we call it anyway, don't we?

Where is the advantage or disadvantage to the LBR? Why not allow a runner to stand in foul territory off 3B for safety reasons as long as they are not closer to the plate? After all, there is no advantage, is there?
For that matter, what advantage does a runner gain by stepping over 1B instead of touching it? Yet, on appeal, we will rule that runner out.

There are instances in the ASA (and other) rules which acknowledge advantage/disadvantage as in stopping a ball with detached equipment, umpire inteference with a catcher, etc. along with the common sense of not calling a player out for removing a helmet if there is no ball in the area or a catcher hitting the bat when throwing the ball back to the pitcher.

And yes, there are things like IPs at the 10U or JV level, but does the umpire not make them aware of the issue and then call it if not corrected? To me, that type of judicious action is more along the lines of survival than TOAD.

There are hundreds of different issues that could be addressed under this heading, but there would be no resolution. Like I said, where do you draw that line?

I am not advocating ignoring common sense, but you need to remember there are two teams on the field and they deserve equal attention. For example, in the given play, what do you do when that catcher you blew off steps in the middle of the plate and fouls one off? Do you "make up" for the previous call even though the world just saw what happened?

BTW, I really don't care about "handling" the OC and I don't need to "make excuses" to sell my call. You reiterate the call, what occurred that drew the call and the results. Let him have his say, calmly answer any reasonable questions "once" and move on. If the coach gets too animated or gives cause that s/he needs to go, send'em.

I guess Fred and I will just have to disagree. Then again, I also disagree with the clinician who told the group that if a BR interferes with the defenses ability to catch a pop-up over fair territory that comes down and rolls foul as a "foul ball" because that is easier to sell. And s/he is a member of the softball officiating hierarchy

[okla21fan]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

I guess Fred and I will just have to disagree. Then again, I also disagree with the clinician who told the group that if a BR interferes with the defenses ability to catch a pop-up over fair territory that comes down and rolls foul as a "foul ball" because that is easier to sell. And s/he is a member of the softball officiating hierarchy

That's 'easier' to sell? wow