What about LL?

It is a pretty basic concept, actually. Hard to understand why some might have issues grasping it. If/when U1 goes out, and you revert to two umpire mechanics, which remaining umpire is now the base umpire?

As a plate umpire in that system, I would read if my U3 got a bad jump, or appeared unlikely to get in a good calling position; I might communicate a deviation on that play;).

OK, yes, you answered. But not accurately. You told him this was an advanced mechanic that you could only learn in schools. I'm aware of your need to tie every post, somehow, to a way to denigrate ASA... but I hadn't seen you flat out lie before.

This (the "chute") is absolutely not an advanced mechanic. In fact, it's one of the very first things you need to learn, right after "where to start" depending on where runners are.

Its just a name given to a play for 3-man mechanics, it was asked and explained why it is endearingly named as such and the difference between ASA and NCAA. Where did you learn it and why didn't you just answer it simply when asked?

Over moderating and over officiating are similar failures. If you can't resist a knee jerk white knuckle reaction, you can take it off-line. Or, you coulda simply answered the question better yourself and saved your aggravation.

A) What exactly do you think I moderated?
B) Every post by a "moderator" is not moderating - we are officials too.
C) I don't feel aggravated ... and promise I was never white-knuckled over anything. I simply disagreed with your intimation that this was some sort of hi-tech super-umpiring technique only learned by spending your money. Disagreement is not moderation. It's just disagreement. Moderators can disagree with someone, and/or call them out when they flat out lie, just like anyone else.

You lied. Me saying so is not "over moderation". And it didn't need to be taken off-line.

I hope that is the end of this particular "conversation". :rolleyes: :o

3-man is advanced AFAIK from when I called ASA. I never learned any 3-man at any ASA rules or mechanics clinic, and at ASA national school, it was touched on briefly without much fanfare or thought. Almost all 3-man and variations of it from ASA vs NCAA, I learned in approved NCAA camps, which I consider "advanced".

I didn't know it was even called the chute play till worked one of my first college fall ball games with a tried and true golden indicator ASA veteran. He explained the origin of the names, the chute, the rabbit. And, funny, he explained, "after 8 years of loyalty and working hard in the ASA, I realized I really know nothing". He's just breaking into non-conference D1 ball now.

It is a term I have never heard in over 25 years of working ASA/ISF 3-umpire mechanics, so maybe that is why people are asking.

Regardless of what anyone or organization wants to claim, U3 has the best look at a possible play @ 1B. Well, I should say a competent U3 as I know of a few that would just walk toward the SS assuming there will not be a play @ 1.

I guess it has been handed down from the generations, and I am fortunate or unfortunate enuff to be blessed with that knowledge. It was conveyed to me by an established ASA vet on a college field and game, not an advanced ASA camp, so go figure. Perhaps we are now both liars according to the language patrol and factoid hall monitors who goes without saying must have attended every advanced camp.

But whether 3U or PU has a better look at 1B is debatable. Its the one that has the better hustle to get to position, angle and distance to make that call to consider. In 3-man, an NCAA PU must be able to get there to make that call in angle and distance. ASA seems to prefer age and experience behind the plate not mobility, and speed and youth at the rabbit (3U). I call that, the seniority factor.

There may be no initial play at 1B, but there is a high likelihood of a throwback after rounding. I like the PU distance and angle on the throwback. I like U3 waiting at 2B ahead of the play. I prefer the PU for those reasons, and U3 can continue towards the SS onwards to 2B ahead of the play.

I never heard the term, but it is the exact mechanic I use when being the rabbit.

I will take a competent U3 coming across every time. But what would I know, I've never worked a DI game, so I must be an idiot. I've just been trained by MButler, HPollard, BPeterson, WSparks, NDavis, DEpperson, etc. And did I happen to mention TMason? Yeah, you're the lucky one.

See ya, meat.

A competent U3 has to read off of a competent U1. If U1 hesitates, which happens often, you better read U3 or hustle and trail all the way up if there's gonna be a hole. Better to have a complete competent crew than rely on one guy to fill that hole.

Who cares who trained you.

I don't see the problem. Let's break it down.

No runners on base.
B hits fly ball to RF.
U3 sprints inside towards 2B.
U1 hesitates, then goes out. Now we are 2-man.
U3 is already at least half way towards 2B, and then diverts towards 1B.
F9 would have the only potential non-TWP at 1B (assuming she was playing deep) and couldn't come in for a short pop fly to RF, picks up ball and tries to get BR at 1B.
U3 anticipates the play and gets into calling position, or to follow BR towards 2B.

What is the difficulty with this?:confused:

Since you asked, and FWIW, the LL Field Mechanics Manual for the 60' diamond calls for U3 to go into the working area, but be responsible for the BR touching first, any play back to first on the BR, and any plays on the BR at second and third.

The problem is, the "working area" is defined as a rectangular area behind the pitcher's mound/circle. The manual doesn't require U3 to go all the way to get to that 10'-12' point as taught in ASA. It's going to be tough for U3 to make a call from this working area on a throwback to first base should the BR turn wide.

Oh, the manual also says the PU should stay in foul territory and drift toward third base. It doesn't have the PU trailing the BR to first should U1 chase a trouble ball. Go figure...

Slow down there partner. Who cares? I care.

I don't know how many of us (in addition to Irish) here on the Forum go back to the days of Tom Mason, but I do. Having had the opportunity early in my career to attend several of Mason's regional clinics; Tom's simplistic, direct, no nonsense style of presentation allowed me to start understanding the rules and how to apply them as opposed to just memorizing them. There's 'stuff' from Tom's clinics in the 70's that I still remember and utilize today. I guess it can be said that Tom Mason pretty much created the model for umpire clinics and schools.

Henry Pollard, only met (and umpired for) Henry once. To this day the best UIC I ever worked for. Aside from his knowledge and understanding of how the game should be umpired, he was the first guy (beyond my local area) who recognized something in my umpiring ability. Having Henry take me aside and explain to me the umpiring 'road map' gave me the confidence to know that by continuing to work hard at my game I had (IHO) the ability to become a real good umpire.

Merle Butler, I have in my files copies of many of Merle's articles on umpiring and still refer to them at the start of each season. Excellent teacher and writer.....much like EA.
While I regret that I've only attended one ASA Umpire School, the one I did attend (we're talking the early days here) had in addition to Butler who was NUIC, on the staff Bill Humphries and Bernie Prafato.
Again, much like I learned from Mason and Pollard, today I still hear in my head umpiring concepts that these guys taught and talked about at the school.

Where am I going with all this? Whatever kind of umpire I am today, whatever level I'm able to umpire at today, whatever ability I have today to understand the nuances of rules and mechanics and execute them on the field, I owe a huge part of that to three guys you're dismissing with your "who cares who trained you" comment.

AFAIC, when you're talking Mason, Pollard, and Butler; you're talking umpire royalty.