I would get rid of trailing the running on an obvious base hit and add more "outside" work. I would adopt the NCAA mechanics. I know, its one of those "b-b-b-but we gotta teach 35K umpires and many are really dumb" things...

Okay, now I'm going to take you to task on that statement:eek:

Name one positive point of working the rim that give the umpire an advantage that is not available in the I/O method.

Mind you, the biggest argument Henry via Bernie received (and is wasn't from me!) when moving the SP BU to the B was, 'since when does ASA base mechanics on making the umpire's life easier and saving his legs?' And as simple as that change was, or should have been, there are still umpires today who cannot grasp starting near F4.

ASA SP. R1 on 1B only with a pop fly to shallow left field. Whiplash sucks when checking the runner on a tag-up, because you KNOW F4 is playing halfway to the fence.

Are you saying that keeping more of the field/play in front of you is not advantageous?

I agree with Mike. Can you be more specific as to what kind of play you think the Rim gives you more of the field in front of you than I/O?

I just gave one...

You did, he didn't... and I'm still trying to find out what F4 is doing in Left Field and why I can't see it from I/O... but that's another question. Isn't our job the runner on this play - PU has the catch - and a good PU knows you need his verbal for timing's sake. I'm not convinced outside is a very good spot to see both anyway - you still need PU's help on that.

(OTOH - how often does R1 on first tag on a play to "shallow left" anyway? Shouldn't he be halfway?)

Single runner at 2nd, base hit to OF, play at plate. Where would you rather be for the catcher's throw to back to 2nd?

There are others, but you only asked for 1.

F4 isn't in left field, F4's playing their usual spot: practically (often literally) in the grass. If I'm in B, I have to cover about 40 feet to get inside, buttonhook, then hope to hell I've got enough time to find where the ball's going. Once I see the fielder first touch the ball, I now have to turn >180º in order to pick up R1.

Staying back closer to B, you still have a wide angle between the ball and R1, but you don't have one or the other completely out of your field of vision like you do when you buttonhook. R1 is at least in your peripheral vision, and you get a better feel for the timing.

98% of the time, the throw is coming to 2B, and the play ends there. If the throw is that far off target, you can still come inside to pick up the play at 3B should that arise.

And "shallow" left field would be a 200 foot hit. That's shallow for SP. I get plenty of runners tagging up and going on the first touch, especially if it looks like the fielder might have to dive or make the catch in an off balance manner.

And when the throw is off target and goes to the outfield? How do you cover 3B?

In your sitch, I'm inside, but I'm off of the "center line" that goes from HP to 2B. On a runner coming from 1B, I'm more towards the 2B/3B baseline. On a runner that's already touched 2B, I'm more towards the 1B/2B baseline. I'm inside, but I'm out of the way.

I'm not saying that rimming's the end all, be all. Nor am I saying that the inside/outside theory is bad. Each has their merits, each has their flaws. I would just like the ability to pick my poison.

I would move inside and head to 3rd.

Being out of the way is fine, but you will not have as much in front of you, nor be able to see the play develop. Plus you will not be in as good of a position to see the play at second because you are "out of the way".

I agree. ASA does not. I think that was Wade's point.

Inside toward shortstop ... wouldn't you? PERFECT spot to see the tag, the foot, and the bag all at once.

I know you were using this example as a vote for outside... but do you REALLY think that's a better view on this play?

What? That is the perfect spot to be in. From behind there's a lot of opportunities to be blocked from either the tag or the foot hitting the bag (or obstruction for that matter by the SS's feet).

I will admit that in my area I do rim on one and only one play - and only because I've asked my UIC and have approval (others do this here too). When R1 from first is heading to 2nd on a WP or PB - and there's no chance of a play at 2nd, but a decent chance of a play at 3rd. I'd rather stay ahead of the runner than wait and cross in.

Yes, but now you've got some catching up to do because you're trailing the runner, which is the absolute worst place to be when making a call.


Actually, I don't have a problem seeing it develop. If the ball is at the plate, I know I need to be off to one side or another on a baseline. If the runner has already touched 2B, I should be closer to baseline between 1B and 2B, ready to cover 3B if necessary. If the runner is coming from 1B into 2B, I should be closer to the baseline between 2B and 3B.

In both of those cases, I have an easy time of getting a good 90º to the tag, and I don't have nearly as much distance to cover if the runner should I need to cover 3B.

I understand both sides to the coin: ASA needs to get almost 50k umpires (according to their website) up-to-speed with good techniques, but there are other advanced ways of covering plays.

The problem comes when you have an advanced umpire with an inexperienced one. Whose mechanics should dictate the other's behavior?

I thought the issue was what keeps more of the field/play in front of you. I don't see how jerking your head back and forth from home to second as the play at second develops then trying to move back "in the way" to see it is more advantageous than taking the runner from 1st to second from the outside.

And yes, I REALLY do think it's a better view of the play.