Opinions requested

[Andy]

Play: ASA rules. No runners on, 1 out. X -2 count on the RH batter. Pitch is not in the strike zone, batter moves bat off of her shoulder, but was not close to a swing. PU rings batter up saying she swung.

3rd base coach takes objection and want to discuss swinging third strike call with PU. PU comes to BU (me) and says, "she held up that swing, didn't she?" I tell PU that I did not have a swing. PU asks how we should handle it. My answer was that we eat the call and stay with the strike. My reasoning in that moment was that I don't want any coach thinking they can appeal a swinging strike called by the PU. I have had some other umpires I respect tell me we should have reversed the call since it was so obviously wrong.

Thoughts?

[Rich]

How does this conversation even happen? A coach left his position to argue balls and strikes -- is that acceptable in the fastpitch world?

(Seriously, I'm asking this as a baseball umpire who may end up working some softball eventually. In baseball, a PU's decision of a swinging strike is not appealable. That's what the PU *should've* said to the coach unless things are really different in fastpitch.)

[Big Slick]

Originally Posted by Rich

How does this conversation even happen? A coach left his position to argue balls and strikes -- is that acceptable in the fastpitch world?

The conversation should not have happened, but not for that reason. This is the reason:
(btw, he didn't "argue balls and strikes," he asked about judgement on a swing)

(Seriously, I'm asking this as a baseball umpire who may end up working some softball eventually. In baseball, a PU's decision of a swinging strike is not appealable. That's what the PU *should've* said to the coach unless things are really different in fastpitch.)

PU should have said: "Coach, I have it as a swing, it is a swing." Case closed. Asking your partner's opinion is for after the game.

If I were Andy:

Originally Posted by Andy

PU comes to BU (me) ...

I'm stopping PU before he gets there with the phrase: "you called it a strike." Quite possibly an emphatic point.

I can understand why Andy may have had a full conversation, as he might be training newer umpires. If my partner is a newer guy, I'm saying the same, but maybe not so overtly (or where other can hear). Then we have a good post-game.

[chuck chopper]

I would tell the Coach, if he had a beef with the PU's call- go talk to HIM.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Big Slick

The conversation should not have happened, but not for that reason. This is the reason:
(btw, he didn't "argue balls and strikes," he asked about judgement on a swing)


PU should have said: "Coach, I have it as a swing, it is a swing." Case closed. Asking your partner's opinion is for after the game.

If I were Andy:


I'm stopping PU before he gets there with the phrase: "you called it a strike." Quite possibly an emphatic point.

I can understand why Andy may have had a full conversation, as he might be training newer umpires. If my partner is a newer guy, I'm saying the same, but maybe not so overtly (or where other can hear). Then we have a good post-game.

That's arguing balls and strikes in the baseball world.

[tcannizzo]

You can't un-ring a swing.

[EsqUmp]

Originally Posted by Rich

That's arguing balls and strikes in the baseball world.

That applies to PITCH LOCATION, i.e., the strike zone. That's what the rule is intended to prevent. Checked swings, bunt, slap, etc., is not subject to the warning for arguing balls & strikes. It doesn't mean you can't warn them, just not for that reason.

[EsqUmp]

If the plate umpire starts coming out toward me, I am going to say, "You have a swing on that. Let's play ball." I am going to turn around and not allow anything further to happen. I'm not going to show up my partner. I'm not going to allow a conversation where I'm going to be partially to blame for an incorrect call. Play ball.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by EsqUmp

That applies to PITCH LOCATION, i.e., the strike zone. That's what the rule is intended to prevent. Checked swings, bunt, slap, etc., is not subject to the warning for arguing balls & strikes. It doesn't mean you can't warn them, just not for that reason.

In baseball, it's arguing balls and strikes. Period.

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by Big Slick

If I were Andy:

I'm stopping PU before he gets there with the phrase: "you called it a strike." Quite possibly an emphatic point.

But would that actually stop him? Saying that out loud sounds like publicly rubbing it in to the PU that he made a bad call! He knows what he called it. Isn't there some more diplomatic way to put it, such as, "By rule your call of strike must stand."?

I'm assuming this was a crew of 2, therefore one of them would've been the umpire in chief. Does it matter which one of them is? In some sports it would, but I don't know if softball is one of those.

Did the PU start to move toward the BU before the coach objected, or after? If it was before, I don't see how it could look to the coach like an example of getting them to change a strike call.

As to the apparent misconduct by the coach, doesn't that just create a separate issue to deal with? Or does it somehow supersede the strike ruling?

[robbie]

What about this response to the DEFENSIVE coach.

Coach, She didn't swing. I know it, you know it, we all know it. I simply had a brain cramp and came up with the "strike call."

I'm sorry, but it's a ball - Let's play......

[Big Slick]

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

But would that actually stop him?

If it doesn't, I'm repeat it until he get this point. Maybe it will sink in that he should have told the coach that and to stop making a bad situation worse.

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

Saying that out loud sounds like publicly rubbing it in to the PU that he made a bad call! He knows what he called it. Isn't there some more diplomatic way to put it, such as, "By rule your call of strike must stand."?

Too much to say when you are keeping the game on pace. "You called it a strike" has the subtext: "Get back behind the plate and call the next pitch."

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

I'm assuming this was a crew of 2, therefore one of them would've been the umpire in chief. Does it matter which one of them is? In some sports it would, but I don't know if softball is one of those.

Doesn't matter in softball. The PU may be "in charge" but doesn't give him any more rights to not follow standard protocol.

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

Did the PU start to move toward the BU before the coach objected, or after? If it was before, I don't see how it could look to the coach like an example of getting them to change a strike call.
As to the apparent misconduct by the coach, doesn't that just create a separate issue to deal with? Or does it somehow supersede the strike ruling?

It seems you have misinterpreted the OP. The DC asks PU about the swing ("objects"), that's when PU goes to BU. That's not misconduct, he is asking about a judgement call and wants a different opinion. This is not uncommon. I had a high level men's FP tournament this year, and every time PU called a swing, the phrase "you have to ask about that" was said. It happened a few times; after we explained that "if PU calls a swing, it really is a swing" it was said in jest and we got a good laugh.

[teebob21]

Originally Posted by Andy

Play: ASA rules. No runners on, 1 out. X -2 count on the RH batter. Pitch is not in the strike zone, batter moves bat off of her shoulder, but was not close to a swing. PU rings batter up saying she swung.

3rd base coach takes objection and want to discuss swinging third strike call with PU. PU comes to BU (me) and says, "she held up that swing, didn't she?" I tell PU that I did not have a swing. PU asks how we should handle it. My answer was that we eat the call and stay with the strike. My reasoning in that moment was that I don't want any coach thinking they can appeal a swinging strike called by the PU. I have had some other umpires I respect tell me we should have reversed the call since it was so obviously wrong.

Thoughts?

Ouch, but if I am PU, I have to eat that call. Same as the call I have to eat if I ring up the batter on strikes with a pitch across the chin or shins.
Also, I've made this call. I ate it. It did not taste good, but I learned when in doubt on a short swing that fools me, ball the pitch and go for help. Sometimes even before the catcher can ask. I don't know if this is an approved mechanic in any code I work, but I've never yet had a problem with it.

[CecilOne]

Originally Posted by teebob21

when in doubt on a short swing that fools me, ball the pitch and go for help. Sometimes even before the catcher can ask. I don't know if this is an approved mechanic in any code I work, but I've never yet had a problem with it.

AFAIK, that is the correct procedure, and that we never change a swing/strike call; even though we can change a non-swing call to a strike. If the PU sees enough of the swing to call a strike, so be it.
If the swing is at a bad angle or whatever and the PU does not see it well while concentrating on the ball; then changing to a strike makes sense. Usually, it is a high swing at a pitch not that high with PU in a squat.

[prab]

This is a very interesting thread. If I read the OP correctly, BOTH umpires agree that the batter DID NOT SWING at the pitch and that therefore the call of a swinging strike was wrong. Then BOTH AGREE that nothing should be done to correct the error. Everyone who has posted so far seems to agree that no change should be made. Isn't there something fundamentally wrong here?