Approved Mechanic? (ASA)
 

I think this has been discussed before, but want current thinking.

ASA - ump-to-ump communications:
Signalling two outs by placing the two fingers from right hand somewhere near/at the wrist of the left hand.

Someone recently suggested that this was not an approved mechanic.
Please advise.

Not sure if that's an approved mechanic or not, but that's what I give to my partner when there are two outs with a runner on base, to let him/her know we have a potential time play. Without runners, I don't bother giving that mechanic.

The "timing play" signal is not an approved mechanic.

So ... don't do it at clinics.

Every SINGLE umpire I know (other than rookies, who learn soon enough) uses this signal.

Do you see it listed among all of the approved signals in the umpire manual?

No, but wouldn't this be part of communicating with your partner?

I guess it would be, but the question was "Is this an approved ASA signal".

What is ASA's rational for it not being an approved signal?

My opinion is because it isn't necessary and it is not consistent..

If a crew is on top of it, one could argue that none of the signals to keep each other informed are necessary. :)

The "approved" ASA mechanics leave a lot to be desired. For example, when the PU asks for help on a checked swing, the book tells us to say, "Did they go?" "They"? There's only one batter up there, chief. :p

Not to mention that "go" doesn't seem to accurately reflect language in the rule book.

And where did they go to? :p

MTD, Sr.

Well, that isn't to what I was referring, but apparently too many umpires had a hard time understanding a point and "Swing?"

Not sure you want to limit that to umpires.

Maybe not, but who "should" know especially after the training offered and publication of the mechanic?

Problem is, "Swing?" isn't necessarily appropriate for all situations. If the batter tries to bunt and misses, but the plate umpire didn't see it, a "No" response to "Swing?" would technically be correct. :p