Can you abandon your at bat?

[RadioBlue]

Originally Posted by CecilOne

Why did U1 allow this or did he/she find out after the fact, without watching B2 running or not running to 1st?

U1 assumed he must have had the count wrong and she bunted foul for the 3rd strike and that we had two outs at that point. Afterward, he had given me a "two out time play" signal at which time I returned an emphatic "1 out" signal. U1 was the only one who was aware that B2 went to the dugout. U3 was unaware the batter in the box wasn't the same one who had just batted since he had a runner coming to 3B during the foul bunt attempt. When U1 and I got together and talked about it after the half-inning, I told him I hadn't seen the batter head into the dugout. It wasn't until the OC came out an inning later while heading down to coach 3B that I realized what had occurred. He asked me "What if ....?" and I asked him exactly what had happened. When he told me, I was pretty much shocked.

Originally Posted by CecilOne

Wasn't R1 thinking 3 outs a clue that something was awry? She apparently knew B3 was B3, and B2 was gone.

The offense knew things had gone awry, they were worried they would be hurt more by the remedy/ruling than leaving well-enough alone.

This one was talked about in the umpire tent for quite a while.

[CecilOne]

Originally Posted by RadioBlue

U1 assumed he must have had the count wrong and she bunted foul for the 3rd strike and that we had two outs at that point. Afterward, he had given me a "two out time play" signal at which time I returned an emphatic "1 out" signal. U1 was the only one who was aware that B2 went to the dugout.

Do you (and all) think a talk was appropriate at this point? Is it acceptable for U1 to initiate it, or is that outside protocol?

[AtlUmpSteve]

Not exactly a tangent, but answering the topic question in a manner that doesn't address the play (which I believe has been answered correctly).

The only manner of "abandonment" that can be applied to a batter (so far as I am aware) is failing to take a position in the batter's box when directed by the umpire. With two strikes, the penalty of a called strike after 10 seconds would result in the out.

But, since some one stepped in, and you didn't ask for the correct batter to step in, it doesn't really apply here.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by RadioBlue

U1 assumed he must have had the count wrong and she bunted foul for the 3rd strike and that we had two outs at that point. Afterward, he had given me a "two out time play" signal at which time I returned an emphatic "1 out" signal.

Biting tongue, biting tongue, biting tongue...............

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Biting tongue, biting tongue, biting tongue...............

I figured that was coming!

[KJUmp]

I'll leave the correct ruling to everyone else.

My question to you is, in looking back on this, where do you feel you guys messed up as a crew? As the PU and the guy with the responsibility to manage the crew AND the game, where did you come up short?
As Wade said, "you guys got lucky"....verrry lucky. You guys were one pitch or bounce of the ball away from a major cluster f**k in an ASA National Tournament.
Not looking to slam you here, but you do need to learn from this. To me, long term relative to your umpiring career, it's more important than the correct ruling to the sitch in your OP.
And yes, as others, I'm curious as to the UIC's take on all this.

[BretMan]

Also along the lines of "game management"...

I was wondering if you ever gave the count during this sequence. I'm probably going to be signalling/announcing the count after the foul bunt, since we had a slight delay in play and since we now have two strikes. I'm probably going to be giving it again once we reach the third ball/full count.

If you did give the count, it seems like the batter would of had a funny reaction to being told she had two strikes, when you hadn't called a single strike on her! Or, it might have got some response from the defense or your partner for clarification.

Announcing that a batter has two strikes when you haven't called a strike on her tends to get somebody's attention!

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by BretMan

Also along the lines of "game management"...

I was wondering if you ever gave the count during this sequence. I'm probably going to be signalling/announcing the count after the foul bunt, since we had a slight delay in play and since we now have two strikes. I'm probably going to be giving it again once we reach the third ball/full count.

If you did give the count, it seems like the batter would of had a funny reaction to being told she had two strikes, when you hadn't called a single strike on her! Or, it might have got some response from the defense or your partner for clarification.

Announcing that a batter has two strikes when you haven't called a strike on her tends to get somebody's attention!

That is a good point and it probably would draw the attention of someone. However, it would mean the players would need time to react to such an announcement.

I am seeing a lot more umpires (in FP) who are giving the count as they are stepping up behind the catcher as the pitcher is ready. I like to give the count prior to anyone getting set so I can move on to prepare for the pitch instead of making is all one motion.

[RadioBlue]

I completely agree we had luck on our side. (I'll take it!)

Bret: I cannot recall if I gave the count after the foul bunt, or not. But as is my standard practice, I would have. I do remember giving the count on the 3-2 pitch. I never noticed the batter give any reaction. However, if I recall correctly, there might have been an offensive conference during. If so, that would have been a good time for the coach to tell the batter what's going on and not to say anything as the OC was expecting an abandonment out should discovery be made.

KJ: I'm not exactly sure how we should have handled this differently and I'm certainly open to suggestions. To me, if U1 saw something funny he should have shut things down and came to me so we could get it straigtened out. His lack of confidence in the situation (outs, count, etc.), kept our crew from keeping the situation under control.

I think the only person who knew exactly what was going on while it was occurring was the OC. And he was fearful to correct the situation because of what he thought might be negative consequences. Even the DC must not have known the sitch because when the improper B3 grounded out, R1 moved up from 2nd to 3rd. It's the the DC's advantage to appeal at that point since they would get to back the runner up 60 feet.

As far as the UIC goes, when I gave him the situation, he asked me what I thought. I told him my initial reaction was abandonment. He said, "Usually your first reaction is the correct one." I told him I didn't think that was correct in this case. I asked him, "What is she abandoning? She is not a runner or even a batter-runner. She does not 'occupy' home. I think it's BOO." At that point he got called away to other duties and those of us in the umpire tent at the time discussed the play. We were, probably, 70/30 split in favor of BOO.

[KJUmp]

Originally Posted by RadioBlue

I completely agree we had luck on our side. (I'll take it!)

Bret: I cannot recall if I gave the count after the foul bunt, or not. But as is my standard practice, I would have. I do remember giving the count on the 3-2 pitch. I never noticed the batter give any reaction. However, if I recall correctly, there might have been an offensive conference during. If so, that would have been a good time for the coach to tell the batter what's going on and not to say anything as the OC was expecting an abandonment out should discovery be made.

KJ: I'm not exactly sure how we should have handled this differently and I'm certainly open to suggestions. To me, if U1 saw something funny he should have shut things down and came to me so we could get it straigtened out. His lack of confidence in the situation (outs, count, etc.), kept our crew from keeping the situation under control.

I think the only person who knew exactly what was going on while it was occurring was the OC. And he was fearful to correct the situation because of what he thought might be negative consequences. Even the DC must not have known the sitch because when the improper B3 grounded out, R1 moved up from 2nd to 3rd. It's the the DC's advantage to appeal at that point since they would get to back the runner up 60 feet.

As far as the UIC goes, when I gave him the situation, he asked me what I thought. I told him my initial reaction was abandonment. He said, "Usually your first reaction is the correct one." I told him I didn't think that was correct in this case. I asked him, "What is she abandoning? She is not a runner or even a batter-runner. She does not 'occupy' home. I think it's BOO." At that point he got called away to other duties and those of us in the umpire tent at the time discussed the play. We were, probably, 70/30 split in favor of BOO.

OK, here's my .02 for whatever it's worth:

"I cannot recall if I gave the count after the foul bunt"
Brett and Irish already hit on the importance of this. Should be SOP.

...."there might have been an offensive conference during"
??? How can you not know if there was one? You're the PU. Do you not record charged conferences on your lineup card? Or do you rely on memory? Or were these being reported by you to an official scorer in the press box?
If there was a charged OC....refer back to Brett & Irish's comments on counts.

..."if BU saw something funny, he should have shut things down and come to me"
I don't know if you guys covered in your pre-game how to handle a sitch where a BU has information that needs to be conveyed to you during the game. Your reply to my post seems to indicate that it was not discussed in your post game. BTW...did you guys have a proper post game? I mean just the three of you, not just a rehash of the play in the umpires tent with the rest of the umps.

"His lack of confidence in the situation (outs, count, etc.) kept our crew...."
Were "outs, counts. etc." covered in your pre-game? I asked what you felt the crew, as in 3 umpires working as a team, could have done better,and you're tossing B1 under the bus. Maybe his lack of confidence was due to nerves and inexperience at this level of umpiring. Was he new to Nationals? If he was it was either the job of the most experienced "Nationals guy" on the crew, or you as the PU, to sense this and during pre-game spend some extra time with him. I do hope that if you did not have a formal post game, you at least sat down with him to review the sitch and offer some solid confidence building advice.

"....from keeping the situation under control."
That's your job. You're the plate ump. You're the de facto crew chief. This is what running and managing a game is all about.....at any level, but even more so at a National. When **** starts to hit the fan, when the ship starts to drift off course, you're guy that has to take a leadership role to get things back under control, be it with the players, the coaches, or your crew.

At that point he got called away
I would have tracked him down later during the tournament to finish the discussion on the correct ruling....and to review/discuss with him how your crew handled the sitch.

Radio, it was a screwy situation to be sure...again, not looking to slam you. You guys handled it the way you handled it when it happened in the heat of a National tournament. I just think there are some things to learned here.

I hope that your national went well, and that it was an overall good umpiring experience for you.