ASA Pitcher Delay

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by Stevetheump

Seth - I don't do that, either, but there are different ways to handle any situation:
1. Yeah, you can further *iss the pitcher off by calling "ball 4." That will probably result in his getting in your face and you ejecting him. Now, the situation has ESCALATED to a possible forfeit situation. Or,

To start, this is the rule, you are being paid to enforce the rule and if you start worrying about how a player is going to react by you doing your job, you will stop doing the job for which you are being paid.

2. (Again, quietly) say something to the catcher to have him go out and calm down the pitcher. The pitcher is going to be more "receptive" to the catcher than he would be to you. Now, I have DEFUSED the situation. The pitcher gets a chance to cool down. I get a chance to cool down and nobody has (yet) made a decision that they will later regret.

Not my problem. If the pitcher is going to be an ***, nothing the umpire does or doesn't do is going to make that change. For that matter, in many circumstances, if the player is trying to intimidate you (and that IS what the player is doing), you may have just raised the bar for him/her and THAT may escalate it that much more.

Getting in a *issing contest with players is NEVER a good thing. Being an umpire requires a good working knowledge of the rules, excellent mechanics, and knowing when to warn & when to eject.
Okay, off soapbox.

Why would an umpire get into a pissing contest with anyone? When was the last time you saw an umpire lose a debate/discussion/argument with a player or coach?

Yeah, as an umpire, you don't WANT to eject anyone. And you do want to defuse any possible volatile situation. However, there are TWO teams on the field and both are paying for the umpire to be there and enforce the rule by which THEY agreed to play. Your feelings are irrelevant to the issue. You are not the one who intentionally allowed the ball to pass into center field and delay the game.

And, yes, the game situation may determine how you handle the situation. But if you allow this pitcher to get away with this stunt, what are you going to let the other pitcher get away with? After all, you don't want to seem unfair, right? Where does it end?

In this case, the OP has already set the play and resolution. You are being asked to rule on the protest as the UIC. And I can tell you that personal feelings or preferences should not factor into your decision.

[Stevetheump]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

To start, this is the rule, you are being paid to enforce the rule and if you start worrying about how a player is going to react by you doing your job, you will stop doing the job for which you are being paid.

Not my problem. If the pitcher is going to be an ***, nothing the umpire does or doesn't do is going to make that change. For that matter, in many circumstances, if the player is trying to intimidate you (and that IS what the player is doing), you may have just raised the bar for him/her and THAT may escalate it that much more.

Why would an umpire get into a pissing contest with anyone? When was the last time you saw an umpire lose a debate/discussion/argument with a player or coach?

Yeah, as an umpire, you don't WANT to eject anyone. And you do want to defuse any possible volatile situation. However, there are TWO teams on the field and both are paying for the umpire to be there and enforce the rule by which THEY agreed to play. Your feelings are irrelevant to the issue. You are not the one who intentionally allowed the ball to pass into center field and delay the game.

And, yes, the game situation may determine how you handle the situation. But if you allow this pitcher to get away with this stunt, what are you going to let the other pitcher get away with? After all, you don't want to seem unfair, right? Where does it end?

In this case, the OP has already set the play and resolution. You are being asked to rule on the protest as the UIC. And I can tell you that personal feelings or preferences should not factor into your decision.

First of all Irish, I don't worry about how a player is going to react.
Second, I am NOT going to stop doing my job. I've been doing my job for over 30 years now and I've gotten pretty good at it.
Third, I am only making a suggestion here. Instead of getting in to a situation that I KNOW will quite probably result in a player getting ejected, I look for an ALTERNATE way to "do my job" and keep him in the game. An ejection is the LAST RESORT between a player and an umpire.

I'm not "letting the pitcher get away" with anything. What I'm saying is, I'm using the catcher to help resolve the situation. Don't be caught with "tunnel vision" and see a difficult situation in only one "light." Also, I realize that "personal feelings" play NO part in resolving a protest. I've been involved in MANY protests and in every one, personal feelings played NO part in resolving it. BTW - I've NEVER lost a protest. If I have to, I'll break out the rule book, find the appropriate rule and show the manager. Now, if he wants to argue with the rule book, oh well.....
If a player "baits" me in to how I respond, then I'm playing his game. That's not going to happen. You umpire leagues long enough, you get to know the players - the good ones, the bad ones and the "wannabes." I've been on the field long enough to know to see it (baiting) coming.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by Stevetheump

First of all Irish, I don't worry about how a player is going to react.

Yet you posted more than once in a manner which, at least to me, indicates you are. You suggested more than once that you would not make the call that may create a pissing contest with the pitcher.

Second, I am NOT going to stop doing my job. I've been doing my job for over 30 years now and I've gotten pretty good at it.

Congratulations. I'm in my 44th year as I started in 1966 at 14 yo.

Third, I am only making a suggestion here. Instead of getting in to a situation that I KNOW will quite probably result in a player getting ejected, I look for an ALTERNATE way to "do my job" and keep him in the game. An ejection is the LAST RESORT between a player and an umpire.

An ejection has nothing to do with the umpire. Either the player crosses a line or not. The umpire is not ejecting anyone without cause. It has often been stated that umpires don't throw out players, players throw themselves out. In most of the cases, that is a very accurate comment.

I'm not "letting the pitcher get away" with anything. What I'm saying is, I'm using the catcher to help resolve the situation. Don't be caught with "tunnel vision" and see a difficult situation in only one "light." Also, I realize that "personal feelings" play NO part in resolving a protest. I've been involved in MANY protests and in every one, personal feelings played NO part in resolving it. BTW - I've NEVER lost a protest. If I have to, I'll break out the rule book, find the appropriate rule and show the manager. Now, if he wants to argue with the rule book, oh well.....
If a player "baits" me in to how I respond, then I'm playing his game. That's not going to happen. You umpire leagues long enough, you get to know the players - the good ones, the bad ones and the "wannabes." I've been on the field long enough to know to see it (baiting) coming.

Yep, just as I teach it, but you're still talking about what you would or wouldn't do. This isn't about you, it is about the call and whether the umpire's ruling was within the parameters of the given rules.

So far, you have done everything, but answer the question asked.

BTW, since we are keeping score, I've only had one protest and my call was upheld.

[Stevetheump]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Yet you posted more than once in a manner which, at least to me, indicates you are. You suggested more than once that you would not make the call that may create a pissing contest with the pitcher.

It is quite evident, at least to me, that we have different umpiring "styles." So be it. If what you do works for you, fine. I'll do what works for me.

Congratulations. I'm in my 44th year as I started in 1966 at 14 yo.

Congratulations.

An ejection has nothing to do with the umpire. Either the player crosses a line or not. The umpire is not ejecting anyone without cause. It has often been stated that umpires don't throw out players, players throw themselves out. In most of the cases, that is a very accurate comment.

I believe the same as you do - "players/coaches eject themselves - I just let them know they did it."

Yep, just as I teach it, but you're still talking about what you would or wouldn't do. This isn't about you, it is about the call and whether the umpire's ruling was within the parameters of the given rules.

I would say the umpire's ruling WAS within the parameters of the given rules. Are you happy now?

So far, you have done everything, but answer the question asked.

I believe I did (above).

BTW, since we are keeping score, I've only had one protest and my call was upheld.

ONE protest in 44 years?

[Steve M]

Originally Posted by Stevetheump

ONE protest in 44 years?

That's not all that unusual. I've got over 40 years of umpiring and have never had a protest upheld.
Perhaps you should rethink the "you do what works for you & I'll do what works for me" approach and ponder a bit more on those who've been around, at all levels, and what they say.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by Stevetheump

ONE protest in 44 years?

Sure, and to me, the call was a no brainer. The tournament UIC (BH) at the time accepted the call, then called the RUIC (RS) who in turn checked with the Deputy UIC (HP).

All was good.

[Skahtboi]

Originally Posted by Steve M

That's not all that unusual. I've got over 40 years of umpiring and have never had a protest upheld.
Perhaps you should rethink the "you do what works for you & I'll do what works for me" approach and ponder a bit more on those who've been around, at all levels, and what they say.

I have never had a protest. Of course, I have a few less years on the job than you and Mike, so maybe someday.

[Stevetheump]

Originally Posted by Steve M

That's not all that unusual. I've got over 40 years of umpiring and have never had a protest upheld.
Perhaps you should rethink the "you do what works for you & I'll do what works for me" approach and ponder a bit more on those who've been around, at all levels, and what they say.

SteveM - I DO consider what other people say and if I think it will work for me, I'll use it. However, I KNOW what works for me and I have been successful at many levels. So, forgive me if I don't follow everyone's advice.

[NCASAUmp]

Originally Posted by Skahtboi

I have never had a protest. Of course, I have a few less years on the job than you and Mike, so maybe someday.

I've had only one. The UIC agreed with my ruling, and play continued.

[Stevetheump]

Originally Posted by NCASAUmp

I've had only one. The UIC agreed with my ruling, and play continued.

NC - Too many (mostly younger) umpires get flustered when a coach says that 7-letter word "protest." That's why it is important ALL umpires know what can - and cannot - be protested.
I had a coach a couple years ago try to protest a game (ASA SP)on a "foul tip." He thought the batter should have been called "out" (the ft was only her 2nd strike). I told him he could not protest a game on a judgment call. You could almost see the steam coming out of his ears. I ended up ejecting him for a personal attack directed at me. Come to find out, he was President of the league.
Good "role model," huh?

[NCASAUmp]

Originally Posted by Stevetheump

NC - Too many (mostly younger) umpires get flustered when a coach says that 7-letter word "protest." That's why it is important ALL umpires know what can - and cannot - be protested.
I had a coach a couple years ago try to protest a game (ASA SP)on a "foul tip." He thought the batter should have been called "out" (the ft was only her 2nd strike). I told him he could not protest a game on a judgment call. You could almost see the steam coming out of his ears. I ended up ejecting him for a personal attack directed at me. Come to find out, he was President of the league.
Good "role model," huh?

Oh, I don't mind protests. In fact, during one tourney, I casually asked the coach if he would like to have the rule interpretation protested (I posted the situation here, which led to quite the debate). In that instance, the coach declined, and we played ball. In the instance I mentioned earlier, the coach was so frazzled that all he knew was that he wanted "to... to... to talk to somebody!"

"Coach, what you're saying is you want to protest, right? "

"Yeah! That's what I mean!"

"Okay, no problem. Hey, UIC! "

I have no problem with protests. I'm confident in my ability to interpret and apply the rules correctly, and I don't take it personally.

[Stevetheump]

Originally Posted by NCASAUmp

Oh, I don't mind protests. In fact, during one tourney, I casually asked the coach if he would like to have the rule interpretation protested (I posted the situation here, which led to quite the debate). In that instance, the coach declined, and we played ball. In the instance I mentioned earlier, the coach was so frazzled that all he knew was that he wanted "to... to... to talk to somebody!"

"Coach, what you're saying is you want to protest, right? "

"Yeah! That's what I mean!"

"Okay, no problem. Hey, UIC! "

I have no problem with protests. I'm confident in my ability to interpret and apply the rules correctly, and I don't take it personally.

I don't have a problem with protests either. But, I emphasize to my fellow umpires that they must go on the field with a good "working knowledge" of the rules and if needed, go to the rulebook to get the correct interpretation. If they just "wing it," that ump could be back on the field to finish a game HE screwed up. I know that doesn't happen that often, but the possibility is there, nonetheless.

[NCASAUmp]

Originally Posted by Stevetheump

I don't have a problem with protests either. But, I emphasize to my fellow umpires that they must go on the field with a good "working knowledge" of the rules and if needed, go to the rulebook to get the correct interpretation. If they just "wing it," that ump could be back on the field to finish a game HE screwed up. I know that doesn't happen that often, but the possibility is there, nonetheless.

Different organizations have different opinions on whether an umpire should have the rulebook with him/her on the field. My understanding from blues on this board is that the NCAA requires it (please correct me if I'm wrong), while in ASA, it's frowned upon. Without going into a whole debate as to why one side is wrong or right, I'll just sum it up that both sides have merited arguments.

Then again, I do have the PDF version of the ASA rule book on my phone...

[Skahtboi]

Originally Posted by NCASAUmp

Different organizations have different opinions on whether an umpire should have the rulebook with him/her on the field. My understanding from blues on this board is that the NCAA requires it (please correct me if I'm wrong), while in ASA, it's frowned upon. Without going into a whole debate as to why one side is wrong or right, I'll just sum it up that both sides have merited arguments.

Then again, I do have the PDF version of the ASA rule book on my phone...

NCAA requires that the rulebook be accessible. I keep one in my car during games. Coaches usually have a rulebook in the dugout.

[okla21fan]

Originally Posted by NCASAUmp

Different organizations have different opinions on whether an umpire should have the rulebook with him/her on the field. My understanding from blues on this board is that the NCAA requires it (please correct me if I'm wrong), while in ASA, it's frowned upon. Without going into a whole debate as to why one side is wrong or right, I'll just sum it up that both sides have merited arguments.

Then again, I do have the PDF version of the ASA rule book on my phone...

I was watching two small D1 schools from Texas last spring and there was an over 20 minute 'delay' when one of the coaches broke out the rule book for a thrown ball out of play and the placement of runners. It was really humorous though as even with all that, the three blues on the field still didn't 'get it right'

here is the play in question:
zero outs.
R2 one 1st, R1 on 2nd, B3 hits a ground ball to F6. F6 fields the batted ball, and steps on 3rd base forcing R1 out for the 1st out by 4 to 5 steps. F6 then throws the ball to F3, however the throw is low/wide, tipping off F6's glove, then into dead ball territory.

after a conference of the 3 blues, they awarded R2 home (and then the fire works commenced)

It was very clear that R2 had not reached 2nd base at the point of release of the throw from F6, but non of the blues knew for sure. The real problem though was that it didn't appear the coach understood the rule in the first place and was 'arguing' that because the ball was tipped, the dead ball award should be different. In the end, rule books were broke out by both coaches, the blues on the field still awarded R2 home. which they latter admitted to another umpire buddy of mine was the wrong call.