D3K, Check Swing Appeal

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by MNBlue

I know this is a stupid thing to say, but catchers should be coached to tag the runner BEFORE asking for help on a checked swing. If they think the batter may have checked her swing, she has to make a play anyway. Make it easy - tag her first and ask for help on the checked swing second. If there are runners on base, get the ball into the circle before asking the PU for help on the swing to prevent runners from advancing while you are standing there with the ball waiting for an answer from the base ump.

Yet we all know umpires who simply won't call the strike if catcher (or PU) doesn't ask immediately, no matter the count or sitch. OTOH - clinicians have said before not to honor this appeal with 2 strikes if it's made so late that the BR was put in undue danger because of the delay.

Tag first, yes.

Throw to pitcher and THEN appeal? Not a good plan.

[MNBlue]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

Yet we all know umpires who simply won't call the strike if catcher (or PU) doesn't ask immediately, no matter the count or sitch. OTOH - clinicians have said before not to honor this appeal with 2 strikes if it's made so late that the BR was put in undue danger because of the delay.

Tag first, yes.

Throw to pitcher and THEN appeal? Not a good plan.

The tag has to be there too - tag, return to pitcher, appeal.

[jr131981]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

Yet we all know umpires who simply won't call the strike if catcher (or PU) doesn't ask immediately, no matter the count or sitch. OTOH - clinicians have said before not to honor this appeal with 2 strikes if it's made so late that the BR was put in undue danger because of the delay.

Tag first, yes.

Throw to pitcher and THEN appeal? Not a good plan.

i dont understand this theory.... lets recap, the batter has 2 strikes, and tries to check her swing, the PU incorrectly rules it a ball, and now the PU is not supposed to get the call right by going to his partner bc a certain length of time has expired? doesnt that defeat the whole purpose of having umpires, to get the calls right?

how about the BR was put in danger bc she swung the bat, the umps are supposed to protect her from danger?

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by jr131981

i dont understand this theory.... lets recap, the batter has 2 strikes, and tries to check her swing, the PU incorrectly rules it a ball, and now the PU is not supposed to get the call right by going to his partner bc a certain length of time has expired? doesnt that defeat the whole purpose of having umpires, to get the calls right?

how about the BR was put in danger bc she swung the bat, the umps are supposed to protect her from danger?

OK... 2 strikes. Batter tries to check and the ball gets past the catcher. Rolls around a while. Catcher retrieves, throws to pitcher ... and THEN appeals.

[IRISHMAFIA]

What some people overlook, except in NCAA or another org with similar mechanic, is that an umpre should go for help when the umpire believes it is possible some element of the play could have been missed, not because a coach asks you to get help. If you have no doubt that you saw the every element of the play and rendered the proper decision, it is not inappropriate to respectfully decline. If asked, just tell the coach you saw the play/swing and made the appropriate ruling. And, yes, I know a check swing isn't the easiest thing to see, but sometimes it is a no brainer.

[jr131981]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

OK... 2 strikes. Batter tries to check and the ball gets past the catcher. Rolls around a while. Catcher retrieves, throws to pitcher ... and THEN appeals.

assuming the appeal is going to be ruled a swing, this means the batter swung her bat, theoretically, far enough to be consider a strike. this if there was any doubt in her mind, she should run to 1B.

what im saying is, why the need to protect the batter who 1) swung and 2) made no effort to run to 1B when there is no downside to running

[tcannizzo]

ummm because PU called Ball?

[SRW]

You're all over thinking this.

x-2 count, she checks, and F2 drops the ball?

Just ring her up and be done with it.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by jr131981

assuming the appeal is going to be ruled a swing, this means the batter swung her bat, theoretically, far enough to be consider a strike. this if there was any doubt in her mind, she should run to 1B.

what im saying is, why the need to protect the batter who 1) swung and 2) made no effort to run to 1B when there is no downside to running

I'm not sure what bothers me more - your dogged determination to "win the argument" or the implication that in this OBVIOUS situation it sounds like you'd still honor the appeal that late (notably the exact opposite of what I've personally heard in many different levels of clinics, for several years).

Holding the batter to the standard of running every time you call ball on a check swing that hits the ground is not a good idea (especially in the case listed here).

[AtlUmpSteve]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

or the implication that in this OBVIOUS situation it sounds like you'd still honor the appeal that late (notably the exact opposite of what I've personally heard in many different levels of clinics, for several years).

I have never attended a clinic where I have been directed or even suggested to refuse a check swing appeal based on when it was made (other than before the next pitch). Nor could I justify that reasoning.

Our job is to call the game; the game they play, no matter how well or badly they play it. If the batter swings, and we miss it, and they appeal it, then we answer what they did. The entire reason the check swing appeal even exists is recognition that the plate umpire does NOT have the best view when tracking a pitch, as should be done. The base umpire has a better angle, and makes the call when asked by the plate umpire.

We didn't put the batter in jeopardy; the swing and subsequent appeal did. Definition of appeal: "A play on which an umpire may not make a decision until asked".

To decide to refuse to honor a legitimate appeal that you WOULD honor with one strike, only because the dropped third strike rule would apply with two strikes, is total BS in my opinion.

[topper]

On a D3K and a checked swing, I'm going for help immediately to minimize any confusion caused by a delay. That's what I was taught. It makes sense paricularly in NCAA play, but I do at all levels. Of course I check when asked at all levels too. I've never understood why a PU wouldn't.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by AtlUmpSteve

I have never attended a clinic where I have been directed or even suggested to refuse a check swing appeal based on when it was made (other than before the next pitch). Nor could I justify that reasoning.

Our job is to call the game; the game they play, no matter how well or badly they play it. If the batter swings, and we miss it, and they appeal it, then we answer what they did. The entire reason the check swing appeal even exists is recognition that the plate umpire does NOT have the best view when tracking a pitch, as should be done. The base umpire has a better angle, and makes the call when asked by the plate umpire.

We didn't put the batter in jeopardy; the swing and subsequent appeal did. Definition of appeal: "A play on which an umpire may not make a decision until asked".

To decide to refuse to honor a legitimate appeal that you WOULD honor with one strike, only because the dropped third strike rule would apply with two strikes, is total BS in my opinion.

Understood (and in my game this is moot - I'm asking my partner immediately in this sitch). However, is not the appeal to ask your partner for help just exactly the same as any other appeal to ask your partner for help? In ANY other situation, if you were asked to confer with partner and it resulted in a changed call, you would rectify the situation with ANY runners that were disadvantaged by the initial call. The clinics I'm referring to are using this same logic. In this situation, had the correct call been made (or the appeal been made immediately), the batter would have easily made 1st base on his own. But solely because of the delayed nature of the overturned call, he's screwed. And that is wrong.

[jr131981]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

I'm not sure what bothers me more - your dogged determination to "win the argument" or the implication that in this OBVIOUS situation it sounds like you'd still honor the appeal that late (notably the exact opposite of what I've personally heard in many different levels of clinics, for several years).

Holding the batter to the standard of running every time you call ball on a check swing that hits the ground is not a good idea (especially in the case listed here).

i must apologize, for whatever reason, the way i was envisioning the play in my head, i didnt realize the PU is calling a ball and not going for help right away.

EDIT: if the PU thinks the swing wasnt close enough to warrant going for help in the first place, i dont see why they would go for help once asked by the C or DC