This was clunky...
 

R1 on 3B. I'm in C slot.

Grounder to F5, on the throw I move in towards 1B, and have one of those "did she pull her foot" deals. I couldn't see the pulled foot , just noticed there was a giddup over there, so I came up with the out.

After about 10 seconds or so, the 1B coach, asked if I could go for help on the pulled foot. I did, partner had a pulled foot, ruled runner safe, and all hell broke loose.

The defensive team was still on the field making there way to their huddle outside the dugout. The runner was still standing on 1B.

Is there anything I could have done differently in this sitch to be more fluid ?

I always recommend going for help first rather than cleaning up a $h!t storm afterward. Others disagree with that, but I have yet to hear a logical reason why. For 15 years + I have simply said, "<Partner>, was her foot on?" Followed by <partner> saying "yes" or "no." Of all the stupid things that umpires call "preventative umpiring" that amount to nothing more than coaching, I don't understand why more umpires don't PREVENT themselves from getting into these situations. I am going to strive to prevent myself from getting into trouble before I prevent a team from doing something wrong.

Some people say, "Well, what if the plate umpire isn't looking?" That is a cop out BS answer. We shouldn't avoid using good mechanics because we have a partner with bad mechanics. If we work with a lousy umpire, do we no longer go for help on checked swings? Umpires need to pay attention and anticipate plays or the partners going for help. They should not anticipate calls; but they ought to be on guard and be prepared and alert to help when needed.

What are you going to do with the runner from 3rd base? Score her? Send her back? Did she just fade away and go to the dugout when you called the BR out? Sure, you need to employ the, "Umpires can put runners in jeopardy" theory, but why not avoid the jeopardy in the first place?

Ask first if you have a pulled foot before making your call.

NO, but immediately after, not waiting for the OC to "make the call".

Agree - always make your call first.

You called what you saw, what more could be asked. You went for help when asked because you realized there was an element you believed you could have missed. When you received more information, you made the call correct.

I would not have done anything different.

Any clinic I have ever attended has said make the call based on what you have, then go to your partner if there is a question. You cant always immediately go to your partner, if you have runners advancing at other bases and possible subsequent plays you have to make the call and sort it out later if there is a question.

Well the proof is in the pudding, folks. When you make the call first, then reverse it, there are problems. Saying that you "did things as taught" doesn't make it right because it doesn't make the teaching right.

How can anyone logically argue that it is wiser to guess a call, hope it isn't argued, but if it is, go for help then? How can anyone further argue that doing that is better than simply doing something to get the call right in the first place?

Everything we do on the field is in an effort to get calls right. Why in this case do we change that?

"Well, you called what you saw so great job buckaroo!" BS - Not knowing what you saw is not calling what you saw. It's calling what you didn't see. In this case, an out is called despite not seeing the foot on the base.

I would implore people to forgot what they were taught initially. Just envision the play. Envision how it would LOGICALLY, not historically, best be handled. Come to a conclusion that creates the least controversy, doesn't look as if a coach is influencing an umpire, keeps the coaches in the dugout, gets the call right from the start and doesn't put players in jeopardy.

In what walk of life does it not make sense to use a source of information to check or confirm something, rather than screwing it up and trying to rectify it?

If you're not sure whether you have your house keys on you, do you conclude, "Yeah, I must have them," then lock the door behind you saying, "Well, if I don't, I can always call a lock smith?" Or is it more logical to just check from the start?

I have a question: If there is a Runner on 3B, doesn't PU have more important things that watching to see if F3 pulled his/her foot?

MTD, Sr.

What If, What If, What If ???? The BU has a much better angle on a pulled foot or a swipe tag from the POP than the PU in "C" position... BU a simple "IS HER FOOT ON" PU "YES" PU "OUT" ?????

If you go before making the call and the PU cannot help, you must call the BR safe.

Nope, and you have never heard me say that.

If you check every call where you do not have 100% bit of information, you would have to go on half your calls from behind SS you would spend half the game talking to your partner. And as has been pointed out, the PU has other responsibilities that have a lot higher priority than a play at 1B.

You see it, you do your job and make the call. If there is a question based on a valid point, you can ask for help then.

Everything I have ever been told is that you make the call the way you see it, then if needed go for help from your partner. Sometimes you can immediately go for help on the call, and sometimes you need to wait until all playing action is completed. If you have any question on the call I do suggest going for help with the call at your earliest opportunity rather than wait for the coach to start arguing the call and then go for help. If you don't have any question about a call but the coach insists you go for help you can always got for help and quietly tell your partner you were 100% sure of the call and won't change it. This will appease the coach a little, while at the same time allow you and your partner to look like you are working together.

I always believe it is best to get together to make a call and make sure it is correct rather than blow a call.

Have never had a problem, whether on the local field or ASA HOF Stadium or Plant City Stadium when the need arised to ask for help and possibly correct a call. Never anything other than a note of appreciation for checking even from the folks who didn't get what they want. Don't know why you seem to have a problem.

You may guess, a good umpire will make a decision based on all the information available to them at the time.

You may change it, I don't. I strive to get the call right every time.

Speaking of bullshit. So, you are telling me that if you hear F3 slap a BR on the back, you know, the side you cannot see from your position, you are not going to make a call because you did not SEE the tag?

So you officiate a game in a manner to placate the coaches and avoid controversy?

Ever have a gun pointed at you in an attempted armed robbery? Do you wait to hear the round leave the barrel to confirm the shot before you react? I've known people who have hesitated on the job or didn't get the chance. They are in the ground.

Wow, you are really stretching, but let's play the game. Here's a thought, don't lock the door. If someone wants to get in, the lock isn't going to stop them and the attempt to deter them will only instigate the cause of damage to the house that can be expensive, but not enough to make it worth filing a claim.

Why make the call, then go for help unrequested?

You will be asking either way, but asking after suggests you are willing to make up calls before making the call.

There has to be a reason that this issue comes up on multiple forums multiple times a year. There is a common thread as well: The umpire didn't go for help right away. Usually, all $h!t breaks loose, even if the game ends all warm and fuzzy.

You know what you don't see? Umpires who go for help right away posting this issue.

This has nothing to do with appeasing coaches, because I appease them as much as I do clones on this forum. It has to do with getting the call right as quickly as possible and doing it on my own, not at the request of the coaches. One way to keep coaches in the dugout is to get calls correct. That's what I prefer to do.

I've always said to be prepared to help your partner out, but not to the detriment of your own calls. Here, we have a runner on 3rd. The plate umpire ought to move up the 3rd base line and keep on eye on the play, while checking for obstruction at 3rd base. That's not so difficult. If you can't do that with two eyes and a head that can rotate, you ought to quit officiating and perhaps see a doctor. The plate umpire's angle is going to be better than the base umpire's angle for at least 40 feet up the 3rd base line from home plate.

Proof, meet pudding.