Talk to partner, or wait till coach ask for conference

[White47]

Outs don't matter, rule set doesn't matter

Runner on second stealing in play, is hit with a batted ball after it has passed diving third baseman, no one else had a shot to field it. BU calls interference incorrectly (he admits it).

My question is as PU should I confer with him and get it right, or wait until a coach questions it and asks us to get together, which never happened. I had him safe the whole time, bc it passed the fielder an no one else had a play.

Turns out it didn't really matter bc it was 28-2.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[noumpere]

If it's a rules issue, get together.  If it's a judgment issue, leave it alone.

 

It can be hard to tell which it is. SO, just step out from your normal position, make eye contact and let your partner decide.

[White47]

If it's a rules issue, get together.  If it's a judgment issue, leave it alone.

 

It can be hard to tell which it is. SO, just step out from your normal position, make eye contact and let your partner decide.

 

That was my thing, I didn't really know if it the scenario would fall under a rule

Application or judgment.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ElkOil]

4 minutes ago, White47 said:

 

That was my thing, I didn't really know if it the scenario would fall under a rule

Application or judgment.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This would be a rule application.

But since nobody said anything, did you at least address it with your partner in a post-game discussion?

[MT73]

It was a rule question.

Ball went by an infielder and no other infielder had a play on the ball so no interference.

Unless you are sure best not to get involved unless asked.

[White47]

This would be a rule application.
But since nobody said anything, did you at least address it with your partner in a post-game discussion?

Yea, we talked about it during a pitcher switch. It was the sixth game of the day, 6 crappy games at that. He apologized and said he just got lazy.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[White47]

It was a rule question.
Ball went by an infielder and no other infielder had a play on the ball so no interference.
Unless you are sure best not to get involved unless asked.

The OC didn't say anything, he just sent his kid on and told him to be more aware. If he had even acted like he was going to go out on BU I would have probably held him off and went out and got it right, but with him not even saying anything, I figured just leave well enough alone and get the out. Like I said it was a crazy blow out.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ElkOil]

4 minutes ago, White47 said:

Yea, we talked about it during a pitcher switch. It was the sixth game of the day, 6 crappy games at that. He apologized and said he just got lazy.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This is a good reminder why six games in one day should be avoided. You can't help but get worn down.

[White47]

This is a good reminder why six games in one day should be avoided. You can't help but get worn down.

Agreed. 3 is usually my max.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ElkOil]

6 minutes ago, White47 said:

Agreed. 3 is usually my max.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

And 15 is my limit on schnitzengruben.

[stkjock]

14 minutes ago, ElkOil said:

And 15 is my limit on schnitzengruben.

But are you from Havana?

[ElkOil]

8 minutes ago, stkjock said:

But are you from Havana?

Baby, please.

[Replacematt]

1 hour ago, ElkOil said:

And 15 is my limit on schnitzengruben.

It grubens schnitzens.

[johnpatrick]

I believe this is a judgement call, at least in OBR.   The fact that no other fielder had a play on it doesn't really matter.  The judgement is whether the ball went through or by (within a dive) a fielder and the runner had a reasonable expectation of that fielder making a play.  This is why it's a  judgement call.  In OBR a runner hit by a batted ball is expected to be called OUT, unless the ball went immediately through or by a fielder, and even then he might be out of another fielder had a play on the ball.

[UmpJeff]

On 5/28/2017 at 2:24 AM, johnpatrick said:

I believe this is a judgement call, at least in OBR.   The fact that no other fielder had a play on it doesn't really matter.  The judgement is whether the ball went through or by (within a dive) a fielder and the runner had a reasonable expectation of that fielder making a play.  This is why it's a  judgement call.  In OBR a runner hit by a batted ball is expected to be called OUT, unless the ball went immediately through or by a fielder, and even then he might be out of another fielder had a play on the ball.

Yes, it most certainly does. The OP stated, " Runner on second stealing in play, is hit with a batted ball after it has passed diving third baseman, no one else had a shot to field it."

Having said that, the runner is NOT out. And, by the way, runners are never "expected to be called OUT".  You have to umpire...anticipated the play, not the call. 

So, what I would have done in this situation is to conference with my partner and get the call RIGHT.  Whether or not the coach(es) came out to question the original call or whether the score of the game was 1,000 - 0, you get the call right.

Based on the OP, BU made an error in rules application.  This is not an judgement call and the misapplication of rules should be corrected.

[LittleBlue]

I try to get the call right. Maybe no one came out to argue because of the score of the game but maybe they knew that the BU was incorrect. If the score is different then maybe they come out and ask but now they probably figure the call gets them one out closer to the game being over. Just saying that if they know the rule and know that the BU was wrong, they may remember it the next time he makes a call in a closer game.

[UmpJeff]

57 minutes ago, LittleBlue said:

I try to get the call right. Maybe no one came out to argue because of the score of the game but maybe they knew that the BU was incorrect. If the score is different then maybe they come out and ask but now they probably figure the call gets them one out closer to the game being over. Just saying that if they know the rule and know that the BU was wrong, they may remember it the next time he makes a call in a closer game.

Maybe.  But, our (read umpires...) integrity is what sets up apart, IMHO.  As I mentioned above, the score and/or whether or not someone questions our calls, shouldn't dictate how we apply the rules of the game.  Our job as umpires is to get the call(s) right...and to do it to the best of our ability in an unbiased fashion.

With respect to the above,  why give "them" that opportunity? 

 

[noumpere]

1 hour ago, UmpJeff said:

Yes, it most certainly does. The OP stated, " Runner on second stealing in play, is hit with a batted ball after it has passed diving third baseman, no one else had a shot to field it."

Having said that, the runner is NOT out. And, by the way, runners are never "expected to be called OUT".  You have to umpire...anticipated the play, not the call. 

So, what I would have done in this situation is to conference with my partner and get the call RIGHT.  Whether or not the coach(es) came out to question the original call or whether the score of the game was 1,000 - 0, you get the call right.

Based on the OP, BU made an error in rules application.  This is not an judgement call and the misapplication of rules should be corrected.

Unless, of course, BU judged that the ball didn't go "through or by" (in the rules sense) F5, or judged that F6 really did have a play.  And, as PU at the time, you can't knpw that.

 

I have seen where going out raised a question in the team's mind that they hadn't thought of before -- and caused a problem in the game that could have been avoided.

[UmpJeff]

Just now, noumpere said:

Unless, of course, BU judged that the ball didn't go "through or by" (in the rules sense) F5, or judged that F6 really did have a play.  And, as PU at the time, you can't knpw that.

 

 

True.  I'm just going off the OP saying that "no one else had a shot at it."

[White47]

12 minutes ago, noumpere said:

Unless, of course, BU judged that the ball didn't go "through or by" (in the rules sense) F5, or judged that F6 really did have a play.  And, as PU at the time, you can't knpw that.

 

I have seen where going out raised a question in the team's mind that they hadn't thought of before -- and caused a problem in the game that could have been avoided.

My question all along was is this a rule issue or a judgment issue. It seems pretty split on here. I think if its a grey area like this you are better off to wait, and get it right when asked. you cant know for sure why your partner ruled it that way. Maybe he saw something you didn't.

Now, if the call was flipped and he didn't call it when he should have that is an easy one to grab, because all you have to do is kill the ball and call runner out. But in OP, we would then have had to place runners and thing becuase BU killed the play. 

[LittleBlue]

23 minutes ago, UmpJeff said:

Maybe.  But, our (read umpires...) integrity is what sets up apart, IMHO.  As I mentioned above, the score and/or whether or not someone questions our calls, shouldn't dictate how we apply the rules of the game.  Our job as umpires is to get the call(s) right...and to do it to the best of our ability in an unbiased fashion.

With respect to the above,  why give "them" that opportunity? 

 

That's what I was trying to say. The coaches may not argue in this game because the score is what it is but that doesn't mean they don't know the call was wrong. Get it right if you can.

[noumpere]

10 minutes ago, White47 said:

My question all along was is this a rule issue or a judgment issue. It seems pretty split on here. I think if its a grey area like this you are better off to wait, and get it right when asked. you cant know for sure why your partner ruled it that way. Maybe he saw something you didn't.

 

Right.  So use whatever "prearranged signal" you have to let BU know you have information.  For me, that was just making eye contact with BU.

 

The coaches know the "hat off" etc. signals.

[White47]

1 minute ago, noumpere said:

Right.  So use whatever "prearranged signal" you have to let BU know you have information.  For me, that was just making eye contact with BU.

 

The coaches know the "hat off" etc. signals.

I agree, that would be a much better way of handling it. especially if he calls time and walk down to you. Your not making him look as bad that way and taking away partners credibility. 

[LRZ]

14 minutes ago, White47 said:

My question all along was is this a rule issue or a judgment issue. It seems pretty split on here. I think if its a grey area like this you are better off to wait, and get it right when asked. you cant know for sure why your partner ruled it that way. Maybe he saw something you didn't. 

There are judgment/rule hybrids. Did my partner just kick a rule? Depends on what he judged.

[johnpatrick]

21 minutes ago, UmpJeff said:

True.  I'm just going off the OP saying that "no one else had a shot at it."

I'll say it again UmpJeff, it doesn't matter that "no one else had a shot at it" if it didn't go through or by the fielder (as noumpere said).  You have fallen into a misconception held by many umpires by a literal reading of the rule.  I'm talking OBR now, other codes may be different.  Here's the classic PBUC play that illustrates this concept.  By the way, "a runner hit by a batted ball is expected to be called out" is a direct quote from professional umpire training...maybe they were wrong.

 

Play 5: Runners on first and second, both runners stealing. Batter shows bunt, the first and third basemen move in, and the shortstop moves to cover third. The batter swings at the last minute and hits a ground ball in the direction of the shortstop position. However, the shortstop has moved to cover third base, and no one is in position to field the ball. The ground ball strikes the runner advancing from second base.

Ruling 5: Runner from second is declared out for being struck by a batted ball. The batter-runner is placed at first base. The ball is not considered to have gone through or by an infielder in this play.