Weird or maddening "mechanics"

[jmkupka]

Every time there is a pitching change, I'm always watching my partner (BU or PU), & thinking to myself, "please don't, please don't"...

If I were an OC and had an umpire do this, I'm sure I'd have words with him.

[teebob21]

I've been lucky enough to work with good partners so much recently I haven't seen weird mechanics for a while. Last season, I worked with a partner that called "Ball Down! Ball Down!" on anything to the outfield that wasn't caught. Is that a baseball thing?

Regarding new pitchers, I don't give them the situation except for one exception: after an injury to the previous pitcher when someone comes off the bench to throw. Even then, I only give the outs and count if applicable from behind the plate after making eye contact. (The outs is partly to ensure my partner and I are on the same page after an injury timeout, and partly for the new player.)

I've never had anyone comment on that mechanic. Thoughts?

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by teebob21

I've been lucky enough to work with good partners so much recently I haven't seen weird mechanics for a while. Last season, I worked with a partner that called "Ball Down! Ball Down!" on anything to the outfield that wasn't caught. Is that a baseball thing?

Regarding new pitchers, I don't give them the situation except for one exception: after an injury to the previous pitcher when someone comes off the bench to throw. Even then, I only give the outs and count if applicable from behind the plate after making eye contact. (The outs is partly to ensure my partner and I are on the same page after an injury timeout, and partly for the new player.)

I've never had anyone comment on that mechanic. Thoughts?

Outs is not necessary, really. Count is appropriate though. You would give the count before a pitch anyway - no problem reminding pitcher and batter what the count is after a delay.

[CecilOne]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

Outs is not necessary, really. Count is appropriate though. You would give the count before a pitch anyway - no problem reminding pitcher and batter what the count is after a delay.

Even the existing pitcher gets the count after a delay or after a running play (mostly for my partner), but not outs AND CERTAINLY NOT runners.

[teebob21]

Originally Posted by CecilOne

Even the existing pitcher gets the count after a delay or after a running play (mostly for my partner),

Agreed. I do this as well, but not as consistently as I should after a steal/passed ball.

Originally Posted by CecilOne

but not outs

Duly noted.

Originally Posted by CecilOne

AND CERTAINLY NOT runners.

Agreed. They're standing on the bases; just look around before you pitch!

Is there ever a time we give the entire field the outs? Other than what I mentioned I do, I never give the outs, unless a smart player has learned to steal my two-out timing play/wiping off IFF sign to my partner.

[CecilOne]

Originally Posted by teebob21

Is there ever a time we give the entire field the outs? .

Yes, when there is confusion about how many outs.
Maybe, when more than one player asks at the same time.

[Manny A]

Originally Posted by teebob21

Last season, I worked with a partner that called "Ball Down! Ball Down!" on anything to the outfield that wasn't caught. Is that a baseball thing?

Ummm, No.

[Moosie74]

Originally Posted by teebob21

I've been lucky enough to work with good partners so much recently I haven't seen weird mechanics for a while. Last season, I worked with a partner that called "Ball Down! Ball Down!" on anything to the outfield that wasn't caught. Is that a baseball thing?

While most of us use it in baseball, it does come over to softball fairly often which is quite helpful while I am still coming in and if you don't give a verbal catch, I have no idea what's happening behind me.

[charliej47]

Originally Posted by Moosie74

While most of us use it in baseball, it does come over to softball fairly often which is quite helpful while I am still coming in and if you don't give a verbal catch, I have no idea what's happening behind me.

My instructor told the class to say "On the ground, on the ground" to mean that the ball touched the ground. I carry this over to baseball.

[Tru_in_Blu]

Originally Posted by charliej47

My instructor told the class to say "On the ground, on the ground" to mean that the ball touched the ground. I carry this over to baseball.

I also use "on the ground" when working w/ a partner. If there are baserunners, however, BU has to be taking a peek at when first touch occurs for tag up purposes.

Too many times I'll see a base partner gandering at the outfield w/ no runners on and he has no clue if the BR touched first base.

I've asked at NUSs and Nationals regarding the fouls directly back to the fence. Got different answers. Some are of the opinion that "everybody knows it's a foul ball - save your energy" and others, as noted in this string want everything called and/or signaled.

That's why I ask the questions. One to know what to do in a particular tournament (when in Rome), and two, to try and figure out what the actual standard is.

[Manny A]

Originally Posted by Moosie74

While most of us use it in baseball, it does come over to softball fairly often which is quite helpful while I am still coming in and if you don't give a verbal catch, I have no idea what's happening behind me.

No biggie. If I don't hear my partner say "Catch", I'm assuming one wasn't made. I'm not listening for "on the ground" or "ball's down" or (Heaven forbid) "no catch".

And quite often, I will know myself whether or not one was made because I'll watch the ball and only glance at the runner as she reaches the base.

[Tru_in_Blu]

I always use a verbal "no catch" on a trapped ball with a safe signal.

Especially with runners on base, I think I should make a call as soon as I can so as not to put anyone in jeopardy.

I've had partners not say or do anything and runners are hung out to dry - not knowing whether to go back to their base or attempt to get to the next base.

So what's a better protocol/mechanic for a line drive that F4 traps on the backhand. A runner on first and the BU might not be able to tell.

[Andy]

Originally Posted by Tru_in_Blu

I always use a verbal "no catch" on a trapped ball with a safe signal.

Especially with runners on base, I think I should make a call as soon as I can so as not to put anyone in jeopardy.

I've had partners not say or do anything and runners are hung out to dry - not knowing whether to go back to their base or attempt to get to the next base.

So what's a better protocol/mechanic for a line drive that F4 traps on the backhand. A runner on first and the BU might not be able to tell.

As was stated earlier, if you say "NO CATCH", players may only hear "CATCH" and wonder why you are changing your call later.

On a play like you describe, I will sometimes just say "NO" with a big safe signal.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by Andy

As was stated earlier, if you say "NO CATCH", players may only hear "CATCH" and wonder why you are changing your call later.

On a play like you describe, I will sometimes just say "NO" with a big safe signal.

I agree. And it should be very sharp/short so it cannot be confused with an "out" call.

[AtlUmpSteve]

Originally Posted by Manny A

No biggie. If I don't hear my partner say "Catch", I'm assuming one wasn't made. I'm not listening for "on the ground" or "ball's down" or (Heaven forbid) "no catch".

And quite often, I will know myself whether or not one was made because I'll watch the ball and only glance at the runner as she reaches the base.

The prior regime heading the ASA NUS recommended/urged/pushed "one word" and simple calls in any possible situation, to minimize any possible misunderstandings. Secondary advantage of being less likely to misstate what you saw. Of course, as you might expect, the newer regime disavowed the recommendation.

"Out", "safe", "swing", "YES!", "ball", "foul", and "NO!" are examples that are difficult to claim were heard differently. There are worse things than "catch"; "no catch" would be one such worse thing.