This was clunky...

[KJUmp]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

I think that some posters have posted good advice and correct rulings for long enough that when they post one can feel confident they are giving good advice.

And I think the opposite is true as well. I just hope the newbies and lurkers can tell the difference. The endless supply of completely and utterly incorrect advice from a couple of posters is becoming tiresome.

Fair point.

I'm just not a proponent of the practice of 'sham' conferences with my partner(s) just to appease a coach who disagrees with a call.

And yes, it's especially important that the newbies here when and how to properly go to your partner for help.

[Chess Ref]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

I just hope the newbies and lurkers can tell the difference.

This room ain't that hard to read.

[EsqUmp]

Actually, NCAA says to go for help first; not blow the call and try to straighten things out later on.

[EsqUmp]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Proof? Are you one of these people who just keep on throwing shit while screaming "roses" hoping that eventually, everyone will believe it is roses?

Opinions are not evidence of proof, right Puddin'?

I disagree with your opinion based on my 46+ years of experience in multiple games at multiple levels. I have always made the call first, even in 1966 when I was doing baseball & have never had a problem. As I've said before, response of the teams is usually that of appreciation of at least checking. And that was probably quite a bit before ASA decided to take that stance, so this isn't a following the leader thing.

Learn to read. I'm not talking about opinions expressed when the question is raised whether to ask first and try to sort out the shit storm later. The point I raised is that multiple people bring this up every year. And the people who bring it up are always those who didn't think things went as smoothly as they could have and are seeking opinions and advise.

[EsqUmp]

It looks like the clones (not referring to anyone in particular so please safe your demerits) are demonstrating their vulnerability here.

There are umpires from all walks of life disagreeing with them and no despite the number of valid points brought up, they reject them all.

Considering not all associations even agree on the issue, it makes the "It's ASA's way or the highway" argument even weaker.

[EsqUmp]

Originally Posted by Andy

There is no requirement that the PU wait to be asked to go for help on a checked swing. The PU can initiate a request on his/her own.

I have been taught and I teach that with a check swing not initially called a strike and U3K situation, go for help immediately, don't wait to be asked.

Nah, it would make so much more sense to wait a while, let R3 from third score the tieing run while the BR does go because she only heard "ball." Wait a few more seconds, then ask for help, get the ol' yes she swung, as the catcher tags her out.

Sorry coach, line 'em up.

Wouldn't that make so much more sense? Just ask a clone!

[Manny A]

Originally Posted by Andy

There is no requirement that the PU wait to be asked to go for help on a checked swing. The PU can initiate a request on his/her own.

I have been taught and I teach that with a check swing not initially called a strike and U3K situation, go for help immediately, don't wait to be asked.

That's what I would do as well. But is that the ASA "approved solution"? Or do they teach the PU has to wait until someone requests that he/she go to his/her partner first?

There should be some consistency here. Either we always make the call first, or we always leave the door open to ask for help before making that call if need be. We subject ourselves to criticism if we can go for help without being asked on the checked swing, but we don't go for help without being asked on a potential pulled foot/swipe tag.

But that's just my opinion. When in Rome...

[CecilOne]

Originally Posted by EsqUmp

Actually, NCAA says to go for help first; not blow the call and try to straighten things out later on.

Probably where my earlier confusion came from.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by EsqUmp

Nah, it would make so much more sense to wait a while, let R3 from third score the tieing run while the BR does go because she only heard "ball." Wait a few more seconds, then ask for help, get the ol' yes she swung, as the catcher tags her out.

Sorry coach, line 'em up.

Wouldn't that make so much more sense? Just ask a clone!

Except that's not the teaching at the clone schools I've been to. On a D3K check swing, PU should ask for help immediately ... for exactly the reason that you would think they should.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by Manny A

We subject ourselves to criticism if we can go for help without being asked on the checked swing, but we don't go for help without being asked on a potential pulled foot/swipe tag.

1) So what? We subject ourselves to criticism when we walk on the field. If we are umpiring to avoid controversy, we are not umpiring.
2) No we don't. Two completely different situations; two completely different reasons for the mechanic.

[CecilOne]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

Except that's not the teaching at the clone schools I've been to. On a D3K check swing, PU should ask for help immediately ... for exactly the reason that you would think they should.

I hoped he was being facetious.

[Big Slick]

Originally Posted by EsqUmp

Actually, NCAA says to go for help first; not blow the call and try to straighten things out later on.

Is that how you interpret page 33 of the 2013 manual?

[shagpal]

Yes. Attend any NCAA camp, that is exactly how it is interpreted.

Originally Posted by Big Slick

Is that how you interpret page 33 of the 2013 manual?

[Big Slick]

Originally Posted by shagpal

Yes. Attend any NCAA camp, that is exactly how it is interpreted.

I have, and let's just say that it was never discussed.

Mostly, this play, in an of itself, is a very, very very very low chance possibility in the eyes of the manual. The manual is designed for 3 umpire system (even removing the two umpire mechanics in 2013), and a base umpire will never be in this situation.

I actually had another point about this. In a former version of the manual (2012 and prior), it did allow an umpire can go for help on his or her own, however, you do this at the conclusion of the play (or you kill the play).

[shagpal]

This exact play has been discussed over and over, and beaten to death.

On a simple call, like a swipe tag or a pulled foot, do not wait. Go immediately and directly to your partner openly and ask aloud yes or no, and by openly, I mean out in the open, no conference, no calling dead ball to get help. Then make the call, and the coach cannot come out to ask you to ask for help, because you already did, just like on a check swing. One caveat, word the question so that if your partner cannot help or is blocked, he will default to answer NO.

If your partner cannot help, he simply answers no, and end of story.

Originally Posted by Big Slick

I have, and let's just say that it was never discussed.

Mostly, this play, in an of itself, is a very, very very very low chance possibility in the eyes of the manual. The manual is designed for 3 umpire system (even removing the two umpire mechanics in 2013), and a base umpire will never be in this situation.

I actually had another point about this. In a former version of the manual (2012 and prior), it did allow an umpire can go for help on his or her own, however, you do this at the conclusion of the play (or you kill the play).