Jump to content

Register or Sign In to remove these ads
VolUmp

Pulled Foot/Swipe Tag

Recommended Posts

I know what the FED Umpire's Manual Says, and I know what the CAA Manual says ... but I still have a hard time following its protocol on these common plays at 1B when U1 is in B or C.  I have partners who, despite the manuals' protocol, feel (as I do) that if my call on a pulled foot or swipe tag would be an absolute guess ... a coin flip ... then we should point to the UIC immediately, in real time, and either ask, "DID HE HOLD IT?" or 'DID WE HAVE A TAG?" in real time.  This, of course, should be pre-gamed.  My reasons for agreeing with this method is that "guessing" and calling the runner out can hinder his opportunity to advance if the right scenario's presented.  "Guessing," and calling the runner safe, can confuse and hinder the defense and cause other runners to advance unfairly.

 

Ex 1:  R1.  0 outs.  Fed Game.  U1 in B.

B2 hits grounder to F6, who bobbles it, decides to throw across, and I see F3 lunge right toward me as he scoops the ball.  No question -  the ball beat the runner, but I just have no angle to know whether he came off the bag.  "OUT!" is my call — a pure guess.

Meanwhile, R1 has rounded 2B and is heading for 3B.  F3 throws wildly across to F5 and the ball goes to the fence and R1 comes all the way around to score.

When the dust settles, the offensive HC asks if I can get help on the play at 1B.  I ask, and my partner says, "I had him OFF the bag clearly," and I change the call to safe.  Now the batter-runner is probably penalized two bases for initially being called out, because of what happened on the ensuing play/overthrow.  He very likely would have ended up on 3B.  At the very least, 2B.

Do we have a mandate, if we change the call, to use judgment to advance the batter-runner to where we think he would have ended up?

 

Ex 2:  R1.  0 outs.  Fed Game.  U1 in B.

B2 hits grounder to F6, who bobbles it, decides to throw across, and I see F3 lunge right toward me as he scoops the ball.  No question -  the ball beat the runner, but I just have no angle to know whether he came off the bag.  "SAFE!" is my call — a pure guess.  Meanwhile, R1 has rounded 2B and is heading for 3B.  F3 throws across to F5 and R1 slides in safely.  Batter-Runner has taken off for 2B.  F5 then throws wildly to F4 covering, and the ball ends up in RF.  R1 scores easily.  Batter-Runner ends up at 3B.

When the dust settles, the defensive HC asks if I can get help on the play at 1B.  I ask, and my partner says, "I had him ON the bag clearly," and I change the call to out.  Now, the defense is penalized because of all the ensuing plays that allowed R1 to score, when, if the call were correct to begin with, never would have happened.

Do we have a mandate, if we change the call, to use judgment to send R1 back to 3B?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Register or Sign In to remove these ads

In both examples you call what you see. You try to get the best angle and watch the ball as it is thrown so you can make adjustments in your position if it is thrown wildly, but still, you call what you see. If you see the ball get there first and can't see the pulled foot it's an out and you can get help on appeal later. If you call the runner safe (even though you know the ball beat the runner) he is safe, this becomes a judgement call and can't be appealed.

Sent from my SM-G928V using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Mike D said:

If you see the ball get there first and can't see the pulled foot it's an out and you can get help on appeal later. If you call the runner safe (even though you know the ball beat the runner) he is safe, this becomes a judgement call and can't be appealed.

If you're suggesting a substantial difference here, I disagree.

As BU we should get our own call first, then get help if (and only if) we need it. But whether we rule that the fielder held or came off the base, it's possible by rule and mechanics to get help and change either call. (One might be more, um, "disruptive" than the other, but that's a game management question, not rules or mechanics.)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As they say,  baseball like life is not always fair.

How much better does it sound when you immediately, in your scenarios go to your partner who yells back "I have no idea, I'm watching the touch at 3rd or I was not watching or, or, or...". 

To me that makes you look a lot worse that possibly making an incorrect judgement call. I agree with @maven that you need to make your call. If you need to get together after that and there is additional information your partner can give you? Great. if he cannot then you are right where you started.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a coach, I look at this pragmatically.   There are a lot of things that can happen in the course of the game that cause a defense to throw the ball when they didn't really need to...most of the time it's their own fault, and once in a while the umpire makes an error.

As your two scenarios show, these kind of things will even out in the long run.  This is the "luck" part of the game and I wouldn't have it any other way.

I don't think your scenario is avoidable short of extreme budget changes that allow four man crews at every game at every level....there's even footage of a MLB 1B ump tanking this call with the first baseman a full step off the base - angles suck.

I wouldn't go to PU in real time because it's putting him on the spot, especially if he's watching something else in the play.

My only thinking would be, if the ball beats the runner, and you can't see the first baseman's foot, call him out.   Does it suck for the runner when he's safe...yup.  I was once called out on a force at second base by PU (only ump) where F6 caught the ball six feet in front of the base.  It happens.   If we didn't want it to happen we'd pony up more money for more umpires.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What happens if you don't make the call and your partner isn't in position to see it? You need to make the call, then if needed after the play, there is a discussion with  your partner to see what he had. If you are in B or C, there are obviously other runners to worry about, and he may be watching them.

If he doesn't give you any information to change your call, then you go with it. It is the BU place to make the call, not the PU - we need to do our best to see the foot/tag (adjust).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PBUC does have guidance, with no runners on, in the rare case where the BU is blocked on a swipe tag, for the BU to go immediately to the PU and ask if he has a tag.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Jimurray said:

PBUC does have guidance, with no runners on, in the rare case where the BU is blocked on a swipe tag, for the BU to go immediately to the PU and ask if he has a tag.

No guidance in the PBUC with runners?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If you're suggesting a substantial difference here, I disagree.
As BU we should get our own call first, then get help if (and only if) we need it. But whether we rule that the fielder held or came off the base, it's possible by rule and mechanics to get help and change either call. (One might be more, um, "disruptive" than the other, but that's a game management question, not rules or mechanics.)


We can get help on certain things. But this is a pulled foot appeal, not a pushed foot appeal.

I think of it this way, I'm not going to make a safe call and say F3 was off the bag unless I see F3 off the bag. If I see it I am going to signal 'safe' then signal and say "He's off the bag." I would look pretty foolish doing all that on a guess then having to go to my partner for help.
The other way I see it if I see that the BR has apparently been thrown out there are many more ways he can become safe...pulled foot, bobbled or dropped ball, etc. Once he's safe, he's safe, he can't get any more safe barring action after he is safe.



Sent from my SM-G928V using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Mike D said:

I'm not going to make a safe call and say F3 was off the bag unless I see F3 off the bag. If I see it I am going to signal 'safe' then signal and say "He's off the bag." I would look pretty foolish doing all that on a guess then having to go to my partner for help.

The other way I see it if I see that the BR has apparently been thrown out there are many more ways he can become safe...pulled foot, bobbled or dropped ball, etc. Once he's safe, he's safe, he can't get any more safe barring action after he is safe.

I have no idea if you are in agreement with my argument, against my argument, or just expressing related scenarios.

The OP assumes I have no idea if the F3 pulled his foot.  Either I got an unfortunately bad angle, or I was blocked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have no idea if you are in agreement with my argument, against my argument, or just expressing related scenarios.
The OP assumes I have no idea if the F3 pulled his foot.  Either I got an unfortunately bad angle, or I was blocked.

If I don't see the pulled foot, I'm banging him out...no going to my partner unless the offence asks.

Sent from my SM-G928V using Tapatalk

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎3‎/‎19‎/‎2017 at 11:19 PM, VolUmp said:

Ex 1:  R1.  0 outs.  Fed Game.  U1 in B.

Do we have a mandate, if we change the call, to use judgment to advance the batter-runner to where we think he would have ended up?

 

Ex 2:  R1.  0 outs.  Fed Game.  U1 in B.

Do we have a mandate, if we change the call, to use judgment to send R1 back to 3B?

A way I learned from a well respected umpire in our area was this; "Whatever happens after the play in question, happens independently of the play in question.  You cannot assume a batter, fielder, or runner is going to do or not do something, you can only judged based upon their actions."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Thawk751 said:

You cannot assume a batter, fielder, or runner is going to do or not do something, you can only judged based upon their actions.

Though true in general, this apothegm doesn't work for rules such as spectator INT, where the umpire must place runners and rule outs based on what would have happened without the INT. Doesn't work for OBS either, whether the penalty specified by rule requires that we place the runner based on where he would have ended up without the OBS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, VolUmp said:

(Is, "The Hands Are Part Of The Bat" an apothegm?)

No, and apothegm is generally witty, or contains an instructive meaning. "The hands are part of the bat" is just plain wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, ElkOil said:

No, and apothegm is generally witty, or contains an instructive meaning. "The hands are part of the bat" is just plain wrong.

Another UWNSOH

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On March 20, 2017 at 11:10 PM, VolUmp said:

No guidance in the PBUC with runners?

No, in any other instances the guidance given in many of the replies would be appropriate. They do give an example of where this    might apply. Bunt fielded down the 1B line and tag attempt on the back of the batter- runner past the 45' line. BU call but PU has best view. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, maven said:

Though true in general, this apothegm doesn't work for rules such as spectator INT, where the umpire must place runners and rule outs based on what would have happened without the INT. Doesn't work for OBS either, whether the penalty specified by rule requires that we place the runner based on where he would have ended up without the OBS.

Really??? I find myself running to the rulebooks several times a day, now I have to look this up in the dictionary! I know you teach philosophy but we're umpires, not rocket surgeons. I had to google it and......crap, I learned something........I need a nap.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Specks said:

Really??? I find myself running to the rulebooks several times a day, now I have to look this up in the dictionary! I know you teach philosophy but we're umpires, not rocket surgeons. I had to google it and......crap, I learned something........I need a nap.

Mea culpa. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Matt said:

No, it's just a symptom--whether it's green or yellow helps to determine the ailment.

Only a handful of English words have -gm- in them, and we've mentioned 2 of them in this thread!

[That should conclude the most boring hijack in the history of the internet — and maybe just in history.]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, maven said:

Only a handful of English words have -gm- in them, and we've mentioned 2 of them in this thread!

[That should conclude the most boring hijack in the history of the internet — and maybe just in history.]

hmm, this could lead to an entirely new paradigm....

 

...I'll show myself out now

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, scrounge said:

hmm, this could lead to an entirely new paradigm....

 

...I'll show myself out now

I can think of another one that would probably get me banned.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×