NCAA Championship Umpiring

IRISHMAFIA · #1 (**permalink**) Sat May 24, 2003, 09:16am

So far, of what I have seen, the umpires at this year's tournament seem to be doing a very good job.

For those who previously thought of NCAA umpires as robotic, there is pro and con evidence.

On the bases, the umpires almost seem not interested in some plays. That is not necessarily a bad thing. It means they are taking their time, letting the play finish and then making their calls.

At the plate, each umpire shows their individual mechanics. However, I am not a big fan of the umpire pointing at a strike with the right hand as part of the "strike three" signal.

I did notice that F3 for Washington helped lose the game versus Cal by not using the proper mechanics to receive a throw at 1B. This caused the inability to recover when two throws were not on target. Two throws which should have been stopped help Cal score the winning run.

BTW, anyone else noticing that the #2 batter for Cal routinely steps in front of the plate (clearly out of the box) on certain swings?

There is a little leaping going on, but nothing significant.

Any other thoughts?

IRISHMAFIA · #2 (**permalink**) Sat May 24, 2003, 09:46am

Almost forgot this one.

Did anyone else have obstruction on the play at third after the Texas runner was picked-off of 2B? I wasn't sure at first (and I don't think the umpire was either) until I saw it in slow motion. At regular speed, I probably would have seen it as a train wreck which is what U3 saw.

Contact before the ball reached F5. Kicker here was that if F5 is playing at the bag instead of 4-5 feet toward 2B, the throw, and probably tag, would have easily occurred and they could still be playing.

The runner (Gardener?) followed up with a slide at the plate many major league ball players couldn't or wouldn't be capable of pulling off.

oppool · #3 (**permalink**) Sat May 24, 2003, 10:02am

I agree with you on the umping. Here are a few things I have seen and just wondering about or have noted.

In the Texas game yesterday when UT scored their winning run it appeared to me that Cal's catcher set up and blocked home plate early which caused UT runner to slide wide of HP and then reach in to touch HP. I wondered if she had been tag if the PU would of ruled OBS on the play which I think she should have?? There is a picture of this play actually in the Dallas Morning News today.

There was a crucial strike 3 called against WU which was clearly outside BUT we all know that does happen sometimes

Besides that the only other thing I can think of is that it seems that have more women umpire this year working. Which is good to see and they seem to be doing a good job so far.

One other note is Cat's of UT moving her pivot on the pitcher's plate illegal or not. At times it looks like she is just sliding the foot and others times it appears she actually picks the pivot foot up and resets it on the plate

Have a good one. I will be watching what I can today

Don

IRISHMAFIA · #4 (**permalink**) Sat May 24, 2003, 02:35pm

Anyone notice the pitcher for 'Bama pushing off from the left side of the pitcher's plate and stepping way outside the 24"?

Also, F3 for Oklahoma has foot up on top of bag on every play at 1B. How does a player make it to this level and NOT know how to play the position?

oppool · #5 (**permalink**) Sat May 24, 2003, 05:05pm

The PU today in the Bama vs OU game lost his focus today in about the 5th or 6th and had some really bad calls. I guess it proves it happen to even the best

JMO

Don

Rachel · #6 (**permalink**) Sat May 24, 2003, 09:23pm

Did anyone see the first run for OU tonight? The runner intentionally removed her helmet before rounding 3d. No call.

IRISHMAFIA · #7 (**permalink**) Sun May 25, 2003, 11:32am

Quote:

Originally posted by Rachel
Did anyone see the first run for OU tonight? The runner intentionally removed her helmet before rounding 3d. No call.

Yes, I saw it. However, I understand that in NCAA ball, there must be an apparent play for a ruling to be made for removing the helmet.

Other things. I've noticed quite a few pitchers getting outside the "H".

Nuvemann failed to immediately note that the batter may not advance to 1st when the base was occupied. All the graphics changed and it took a minute or two before the announcers backed off and were forced to explain why there was no longer a runner on 1B.

Play at the plate last night would have caused an ejection in ASA ball. The catcher was definitely where she didn't belong, but the runner raised the right forearm into the catcher's face.

The only first baseman which seems to handle the receiving mechanics correctly is Veronica Nelson. The rest just love to put their foot on top of the base.

So far, the outcome of at least half the games I've seen can be connected by F3's failure to play their position properly.

oppool · #8 (**permalink**) Sun May 25, 2003, 06:56pm

Why does FED let the pitchers step back when NCAA and ASA do not?

I would think at this level NCAA World Series there would be some tape watching and going over the games so the stepping outside the 24 by the pitchers and the batters that have a tendicy to step out of the box the umps would be waiting for

Weakest Mechanic seen: the Strike 3 call by many of the Blues would be called at the best WEAK. Also dont see them getting far enough down the 1st base line trailing the runner as I have been taught

UCLA batter today called out for being out of the batters box was not even close to being out do not know what the PU saw on this play when so many have been during the tournament

Coaches have seemed to handle themselves very well BUT the Defensive play by almost all teams seem to have been pretty weak so far

JMOs

Don

whiskers_ump · #9 (**permalink**) Sun May 25, 2003, 07:06pm

Don,

Maybe PU was from Texas, and trying to help get us back
into the game...

glen

DownTownTonyBrown · #10 (**permalink**) Tue May 27, 2003, 09:48am

Yeah, saw the out of the box call. Ridiculous. Batter didn't even move her feet - just pivoted as she hit. No obvious lines; no foot movement; no call would have been proper. Terrible call. Coach accepted the call with minimal conversation... wonder if the TV cameras inhibited her from really voicing her opinion?

The next game (UCLA vs. UT) the umpire couldn't find the zone. First pitch of the game looked to be a foot up and a foot outside... STRIKE. What??? Left handed pitcher (Cat O.) can't get a call on the inside edge of plate but she got a couple on the outside. Seemed wrong to me... pitch across the plate (left to right) can't get the call; pitch completely outside the plate (left to left) get that call. UCLA (Goerl) seemed to get a more generous zone. It looked mediocre at best. Funny looking strike signal... thumb forward, arm extended toward pitcher... Oh well, I was watching TV, they were working. Guess that shows what my opinion should count for.... nothing.

It was great to see the games on the tube.

Rick Vietti · #11 (**permalink**) Tue May 27, 2003, 09:58am

I enjoyed all of the games on TV. The out of the box call was ridiculous. Even Jennie Finch commented that she was surprised and it is a very rare call.

The strike view via TV was hard to tell. I thought a lot of the strikes looked low via the camera set up in center field. Then they showed a side view of one that I thought was low but on that view it came across the batters thigh. I am not a TV camera expert, but pitch locations could have been distorted from center field because the camera is raised.

Maybe the best look would be from directly above and then from the side.

IRISHMAFIA · #12 (**permalink**) Tue May 27, 2003, 12:09pm

Quote:

Originally posted by Rick Vietti
I enjoyed all of the games on TV. The out of the box call was ridiculous. Even Jennie Finch commented that she was surprised and it is a very rare call.

The call was rare, but the violation wasn't. There were at least a half-dozen instances over the weekend in which it seemed a batter stepped in front of the plate to hit the ball. Especially the two slappers which lead off for Cal

Also, the TV angle gives the viewer a distorted view of the pitch. With one midgame exception by a particular umpire, I thought the strike zones were pretty decent.

However, during that period, the announcer made another stupid comment (don't know which one). The strike zone is "from the bottom of the letters to the knee". No kidding!?!? If that were the case, every team would have their team name at their waist. For those who are not umpires, the "letters" have nothing to do with the strike zone.

Yerout · #13 (**permalink**) Tue May 27, 2003, 12:37pm

I concure with Mike's earlier post that the colision initiated by the Cal runner on the catcher constituted interference and ejection by most other softball standards. The replay (I know, the ump didn't have that advantage) showed the runner bringing her arms up for the colision. The catcher cleary is receiving the ball. On almost all other close plays at the plate, the runner would slide headfirst behind the plate and reach out to touch the plate, which seems to be the trend now in baseball and softball. On a late-inning close play at first on Sunday, the Cal batter-runner never got into the running lane and as she hit the base threw a forearm up. The first baseman missed the throw. I don't have an NCAA rule book--perhaps they are not as protective with their base running restrictions.

Yerout · #14 (**permalink**) Tue May 27, 2003, 12:39pm

I concure with Mike's earlier post that the collision initiated by the Cal runner on the catcher constituted interference and ejection by most other softball standards. The replay (I know, the ump didn't have that advantage) showed the runner bringing her arms up for the collision. The catcher cleary is receiving the ball. On almost all other close plays at the plate, the runner would slide headfirst behind the plate and reach out to touch the plate, which seems to be the trend now in baseball and softball. On a late-inning close play at first on Sunday, the Cal batter-runner never got into the running lane and as she hit the base threw a forearm up. The first baseman missed the throw. I don't have an NCAA rule book--perhaps they are not as protective with their base running restrictions.

Panda Bear · #15 (**permalink**) Tue May 27, 2003, 05:09pm

Can someone more familiar with the NCAA advise if maybe the umpires are directed to be the stick figures many have commented on? I know they have to be veterans to be selected, so inexperience isn't the problem.

On any call that isn't bang-bang, it appeard they were afraid to a) have any enjoyment in being there, and b) sell themselves for when a call is close.

I haven't seen such stiff motions since watching badly animated South Park cartoons! But if the NCAA requires this, we shouldn't be critical of the umpires. I do hope the NCAA doesn't think the elimination of personality from the umpires (or anyone else involved) is in their best interests. Competence and individuality are NOT mutually exclusive.