Timing Play

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by Manny A

I used to point at plays when I first started umpiring. But I was drilled and drilled that I had to get rid of the point, so I make a conscious effort not to use it anymore. That's really why I don't point in this scenario. If it is acceptable to point, I have no problem doing it. I just didn't think the point was acceptable for any play.

If you were pointing all the time, I can understand why you were drilled and drilled to cut it out. Now that you've cut it out and understand it's not appropriate on every play, you should now begin using it judiciously when it is helpful to communicate something.

[Manny A]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

If you were pointing all the time, I can understand why you were drilled and drilled to cut it out. Now that you've cut it out and understand it's not appropriate on every play, you should now begin using it judiciously when it is helpful to communicate something.

Since you asked the question in the OP, I suppose a judicious point would certainly help. But I don't believe that's the "school solution" for helping a partner on a timing play. In fact, I've never heard of one ever mentioned in a clinic, but I could certainly go with a point.

But even a point, to a degree, could backfire, as I mentioned. Just like you don't want to make an immediate Out call until you've seen the play through its conclusion, you really don't want to point immediately either. Poor timing may bite you.

You mentioned the lack of a signal leaving the PU in the dark 100% of the time. But that 100% really only applies to extremely close calls as what happened to you. In reality, most timing plays aren't very close. So not getting a conspicuous signal from a partner on the bases isn't going to make or break the final call.

[MD Longhorn]

Fair enough.

This is why I asked the question - to see what the "general" consensus was around what umpires might do differently after using the, ahem, 2-outs slash look what time it is signal. Obviously, my partner's understanding of that and mine differed - and given that he's the big fish in comparison, I was looking for input from a more national audience.

Thanks all.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by Manny A

But even a point, to a degree, could backfire, as I mentioned. Just like you don't want to make an immediate Out call until you've seen the play through its conclusion, you really don't want to point immediately either. Poor timing may bite you.

How do you figure? A point isn't an out call. All we are talking about in this case is giving your partner an indicator so he can note the position of the runner. There is no extra credit for the plate umpire to jump in with a decision quicker than necessary.

If you point at something that causes a safe call, the position of the runner is irrelevant as there is no decision to be made.

[Manny A]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

How do you figure? A point isn't an out call. All we are talking about in this case is giving your partner an indicator so he can note the position of the runner. There is no extra credit for the plate umpire to jump in with a decision quicker than necessary.

If you point at something that causes a safe call, the position of the runner is irrelevant as there is no decision to be made.

The one situation I brought up where a point could be immature is when the umpire sees the initial tag, but the fielder loses possession of the ball (or never had it to begin with, and the umpire pointed in error), and then regains possession and applies a "real" tag of the runner before the runner safely touches the base.

I actually saw a play like this that happened in a high school state quarterfinal this year that I worked. I was U3, and there was R1 on third. The batter hit a slow roller to F5, and R1 took off for home. F5 threw low to F2, who went down on her knees to catch the ball. The ball arrived just before R1, who slid into F2 short of the plate. On the slide, the ball came out of F2's mitt, but landed on R1's leg. F2 was able and quick enough to grab the ball with her hand, completing the actual tag.

My PU partner was set up in such a way that he didn't see that the ball popped out of F2's mitt. He came up with the sell out signal before F2 regained possession of the ball. As it turned out, R1 was out, but the out actually happened after the PU's call.

If a similar play had happened at second or third base on a timing play, the sell call could have taken place before the runner touched home, but the actual out could have happened after the plate touch.

Yeah, I agree it's a rare situation. But it could happen.

[MD Longhorn]

Manny, I hear you. But the fear of something weird like that happening shouldn't stop you from doing your best to get the call right. If BU points on a normal play when it appears the tag is made, helping PU decide if a run scores in time, it's helpful to the PU, and to the game.

If something weird happens, and he points, but the ball gets away, and THEN a tag is made anyway (how often does this happen anyway???), I would suggest he go talk with his partner and describe the play so he can make his best decision about the run. After all, we're a team out there. We've already acknowledged (with our rebellious timing play signal) to each other that there COULD be a play that we need to help each other out with... so when that happens - we should do what we can to help.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by Manny A

The one situation I brought up where a point could be immature is when the umpire sees the initial tag, but the fielder loses possession of the ball (or never had it to begin with, and the umpire pointed in error), and then regains possession and applies a "real" tag of the runner before the runner safely touches the base.

I actually saw a play like this that happened in a high school state quarterfinal this year that I worked. I was U3, and there was R1 on third. The batter hit a slow roller to F5, and R1 took off for home. F5 threw low to F2, who went down on her knees to catch the ball. The ball arrived just before R1, who slid into F2 short of the plate. On the slide, the ball came out of F2's mitt, but landed on R1's leg. F2 was able and quick enough to grab the ball with her hand, completing the actual tag.

My PU partner was set up in such a way that he didn't see that the ball popped out of F2's mitt. He came up with the sell out signal before F2 regained possession of the ball. As it turned out, R1 was out, but the out actually happened after the PU's call.

If a similar play had happened at second or third base on a timing play, the sell call could have taken place before the runner touched home, but the actual out could have happened after the plate touch.

Yeah, I agree it's a rare situation. But it could happen.

And a meteor could land on the field, end up in the circle and the question will arise, "Is the LBR still in effect?"

After I teach the fingers on my left hand to grow up, I'll have my mature fingers turn to Page 30 of the 2012 ASA Rule Book and reference the definition of "tag". If I'm pointing at a timely tag, I'm pointing at an out. Subsequent action is irrelevant.

[SRW]

As someone important once told me, "Don't diminish the Power of the Point through overuse." Use it when it's necessary, and not when it's not.

[CecilOne]

Originally Posted by irishmafia

"is the lbr still in effect?"

lol :d