Drop 3rd strike mechanic

[IowaBlue]

Ahh....but it is not the exact same angle

Ummmmmm....Yes it is.

Do you even know what "angle" means in this instance? For any position or view that you can achieve from inside the diamond, I can achieve a corollary and IDENTICAL angle from the outside. There is nothing inherently superior to either inside or outside position in this instance. You may want to brush up on your geometry.

Sure, and who is covering 2B? You are not going to outrun the BR to 2B and you cannot take the same shortcut available inside the diamond. Don't know how many times I've seen an umpire not coming inside end up making a call from behind the runner.

Again, you demonstrate a lack of understanding.

You are ending up in exactly the same position outside the diamond at 2B that you would be in if you had buttonhooked inside. But because you didn't buttonhook, you have actually moved a shorter distance and thus it will take you LESS time to get there.

Think about that for a moment.

No matter what it is, one needs to at least do it correctly.

Agreed.

The slot is the only way to go.

Whoa, Bubba, I didn't say that. I don't believe you do get the same look. Not only that, but once inside, an umpire can get a better angle with fewer steps while seeing all the same essential portions of the play.

Again, you are demonstrating that you don't really understand the concept of "angle" as it pertains to officiating.

Whether you are in front of or behind the runner, the "angle" is exactly the same. You are simply not used to being outside therefore you feel less comfortable. That doesn't mean that your view is actually any different.

As far as "beating the runner to 2B," it is no more difficult than achieving the same position from roughly the same starting point on a steal play.

[youngump]

Originally Posted by IowaBlue

Ummmmmm....Yes it is.

Do you even know what "angle" means in this instance? For any position or view that you can achieve from inside the diamond, I can achieve a corollary and IDENTICAL angle from the outside. There is nothing inherently superior to either inside or outside position in this instance. You may want to brush up on your geometry.



Again, you demonstrate a lack of understanding.

You are ending up in exactly the same position outside the diamond at 2B that you would be in if you had buttonhooked inside. But because you didn't buttonhook, you have actually moved a shorter distance and thus it will take you LESS time to get there.

Think about that for a moment.



Agreed.

The slot is the only way to go.



Again, you are demonstrating that you don't really understand the concept of "angle" as it pertains to officiating.

Whether you are in front of or behind the runner, the "angle" is exactly the same. You are simply not used to being outside therefore you feel less comfortable. That doesn't mean that your view is actually any different.

As far as "beating the runner to 2B," it is no more difficult than achieving the same position from roughly the same starting point on a steal play.

I'm afraid what's demonstrated about angles here is that you don't understand the concept of a negative number. These aren't free floating angles in space. Now for some plays I'll agree that the angle negated against the base line is about the same but certainly not for all of them. Maybe if you'd slow down and actually try and talk with Mike instead of trying to demean him you could express your concerns, learn a bunch and possibly even have a positive influence.
________
Lure_into

[IowaBlue]

Originally Posted by youngump

I'm afraid what's demonstrated about angles here is that you don't understand the concept of a negative number. These aren't free floating angles in space.

How in the world are they not?

Around any base or runner is an imaginary 360 degree circle. Each position that you take on the circle has an equivalent position on the opposite side.

The only thing that makes one position favorable to another on any particular play is your ability to move from that point to your next potential position for a subsequent play.

If this secondary consideration is rendered neutral either because movement from Point A to Point B is essentially the same in either scenario, or because you have a partner ahead of you to help out at Point B, then it doesn't matter which of the primary positions that you chose to assume.

Maybe if you'd slow down and actually try and talk with Mike instead of trying to demean him you could express your concerns

I began by having a civil discussion with him over different ideas presented from two national softball organizations, and instead of taking a purely intellectual approach he resorted to inferring that I was lazy, out of shape, and that by daring to question the almighty ASA manual with some new ideas that I should just take my ball and go home.

Maybe if he was better able to defend his positions (literally and metaphorically) without subtle insinuations then we could all have a more civil discourse on this board.

[youngump]

Originally Posted by IowaBlue

How in the world are they not?

Around any base or runner is an imaginary 360 degree circle. Each position that you take on the circle has an equivalent position on the opposite side.

The only thing that makes one position favorable to another on any particular play is your ability to move from that point to your next potential position for a subsequent play.

If this secondary consideration is rendered neutral either because movement from Point A to Point B is essentially the same in either scenario, or because you have a partner ahead of you to help out at Point B, then it doesn't matter which of the primary positions that you chose to assume.



I began by having a civil discussion with him over different ideas presented from two national softball organizations, and instead of taking a purely intellectual approach he resorted to inferring that I was lazy, out of shape, and that by daring to question the almighty ASA manual with some new ideas that I should just take my ball and go home.

Maybe if he was better able to defend his positions (literally and metaphorically) without subtle insinuations then we could all have a more civil discourse on this board.

Maybe like this will be more clear. If you're standing 10 feet toward first and toward right of 2nd base, you have a 45 degree angle 1st, to 2nd to you. And you have a 135 degree angle 3rd to 2nd to you. But if you're inside you now have a 45 degree angle for both angles. So clearly they aren't the same.

Now, as to whether Mike was civil with you or not, I wasn't paying that much attention, with no offense intended to him Mike has always seemed gruff and I'm used to it having been here for a long time. You on the other hand are new and without any general personality backlog against which we can file your outburst so it comes across as much more harsh at the instant moment. This is why it's often best to tread carefully when joining a message board.

To my point that your geometry left something to be desired. You replied with "how in the world not". That may just be your personality, but it comes across as attacking because of a message boards tendency to harshen words and my lack of familiarity with you. This is a great place to learn a lot but you won't do it by trying to make the board more confrontational.
________
condos for sale Pattaya

[IowaBlue]

Originally Posted by youngump

Maybe like this will be more clear. If you're standing 10 feet toward first and toward right of 2nd base, you have a 45 degree angle 1st, to 2nd to you. And you have a 135 degree angle 3rd to 2nd to you. But if you're inside you now have a 45 degree angle for both angles. So clearly they aren't the same.

The relationship between two different bases vis a vis your position is not relevant. You are only concerned with your angle in reference to one particular runner or base, and in this instance they would both be exactly the same.

Once you start adding additional factors like another base, this would obviously change your preferred position based on what subsequent action you might have to take on a secondary play. Where your partner is at and what responsibilities he/she might have is also of great concern.

Of course I already stated this, but it's worth repeating for clarity's sake.

[youngump]

Originally Posted by IowaBlue

The relationship between two different bases vis a vis your position is not relevant. You are only concerned with your angle in reference to one particular runner or base, and in this instance they would both be exactly the same.

Once you start adding additional factors like another base, this would obviously change your preferred position based on what subsequent action you might have to take on a secondary play. Where your partner is at and what responsibilities he/she might have is also of great concern.

Of course I already stated this, but it's worth repeating for clarity's sake.

This simply isn't the case because there are all sorts of anchoring factors. The direction of the throw for example. Now I'm not commenting on the specific play as I don't really have much there. But suppose it were a steal. Do you really think 45 inside is as good a position as 45 outside?
________
Zoloft Settlement Information

[IowaBlue]

Originally Posted by youngump

This simply isn't the case because there are all sorts of anchoring factors. The direction of the throw for example. Now I'm not commenting on the specific play as I don't really have much there. But suppose it were a steal. Do you really think 45 inside is as good a position as 45 outside?

The correct answer is neither. You don't want a 45 degree angle on a steal play, you want 90 degrees with the runner's path to the bag, at the point that the runner and the bag intersect, or to the runner's path at the time a fielder is attempting a tag. And in that case, yes, either inside or outside position will suffice.

Let me give you an example that incorporates many of the ideas involved with this thread, and it is particularly appropriate as I believe it is a "difficult" mechanic that ASA actually endorses:

You are the base umpire in a 2 man system. No runners on base. The batter hits a sharp, sinking liner to RF that takes one hop and is then fielded. In nearly all levels of FP you are likely to have a potential 9-3 put-out attempt.

Now you have basically two options here. You can either attempt to get your normal 45 degree angle with 1B from fair territory, but the downside is obviously that the throw will be coming from behind you and you will lose sight of the ball.

The preferred position in this scenario would be to move to foul ground and obtain the VERY SAME 45 degree angle with 1B. This is an excellent position to see the play, and I can't recall ever missing a call from this spot.

Obviously, the major concern here is that your partner must be alert enough to diagnose the developing situation and bust out to at least the pitching rubber in order to seen a potential play at 2B.

This is an example of how what your partner can/is likely to do will impact the position that you choose on the field. Both angles involved here are IDENTICAL. Each position will have accompanying positive and negative attributes, but the ANGLE is the same, and indeed, as long as you are not hit with the throw or alter it's path, your ability to call THAT INITIAL PLAY will be exactly the same from either position.

What is different from each spot on the field is your ability to adjust and then cover another impending play. Again, if you have a reliable partner, the decision becomes obvious.

Have you ever worked 1-umpire slowpitch? With nobody on and an infield ground ball with a potential play at first, what are you going to do? You should move into fair territory and attempt to gain a 45 degree angle with first. This is EXACTLY THE SAME ANGLE as in the above two situations, only from yet ANOTHER potential position on the field. Three different positions around the same base resulting in three IDENTICAL angles.

As you can see, the only way softball can work with 1 or 2 umpires is precisely BECAUSE the angles are always there, only our position on the field, relative to our next possible responsibility, changes.

Obviously, you always need to be cognizant of how the impending play develops, how the angles change as the runner/field positions change, and how you must move accordingly in order to see all the pieces of the puzzle, so that you are never "blocked out" or screened.

Umpiring actually involves 3 dimensional space, so that sometimes you can actually use an "over the top" view to help you out in certain situations.

Hopefully all of that was clear enough.

[topper]

Originally Posted by youngump

Maybe like this will be more clear. If you're standing 10 feet toward first and toward right of 2nd base, you have a 45 degree angle 1st, to 2nd to you. And you have a 135 degree angle 3rd to 2nd to you. But if you're inside you now have a 45 degree angle for both angles. So clearly they aren't the same.

Clear as mud. The wording in bold has me scratching my head.

Originally Posted by youngump

Now, as to whether Mike was civil with you or not, I wasn't paying that much attention, with no offense intended to him Mike has always seemed gruff and I'm used to it having been here for a long time. You on the other hand are new and without any general personality backlog against which we can file your outburst so it comes across as much more harsh at the instant moment. This is why it's often best to tread carefully when joining a message board.

To my point that your geometry left something to be desired. You replied with "how in the world not". That may just be your personality, but it comes across as attacking because of a message boards tendency to harshen words and my lack of familiarity with you. This is a great place to learn a lot but you won't do it by trying to make the board more confrontational.

In other words, IowaBlue, your "how in the world not", since your "new", is far more offensive to Irish's minions than his condescending tone and familiar name calling (Bubba). I think most of us could see where this thread was heading pretty early on.

FWIW, I agree with you completely and have had similar "discussions" on here. They mostly end just like this. I know there to be some very good umpires on this board that work both ASA and NCAA, but be aware that this is primarily an ASA rules/mechanics/philosophy forum. "Messaging for the masses".

[youngump]

Originally Posted by topper

Clear as mud. The wording in bold has me scratching my head.

Toward Right field I mean. ~14 feet out at 45 degrees measured counterclockwise from the line running from first to second.

And yes, when someone is new there words will be interpreted differently than when they are established. This may be suboptimal but it's still reality.

As for this being primarily an ASA board I think that's just by the questions asked. I've never heard someone given grief for asking about a different ruleset. (Unless it was baseball)
________
Live Sex