CJK
Established Member-
Posts
267 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
5
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Store
Articles
Reviews
Everything posted by CJK
-
This is the reason you can't wait. What happens when your partner had two things to watch and chose the other one, knowing that you had primary responsibility for your call. You turn and ask for help, your partner looks at you blankly and shrugs, and you both look like lazy morons.
-
I appreciate the thoughtful responses and discussion throughout the thread. In the clinic where this case play was presented, it led to virtually the same thoughtful discussion, with at least 2 and possibly more potential outcomes, all fully backed by the rule book. The "get 2 outs" guidance was given by the state UIC, who I literally see either 0 or 1 time(s) per year, depending on whether he decides to show up at the clinic. I happened to be standing within 3 feet of him during the discussion, and I told him essentially the same thing that @grayhawk said, that if this happened in a game I was working, I would not likely be able to reasonably justify getting 2 outs. F1 should have caught the ball, but instead acted like a tool in an effort to confuse the umpires/runners. I hate the idea of rewarding that behavior with a second out, so unless the actions by the BR were egregious, I'd probably just get 1 out and move on, feeling like none of the 3 teams on the field got cheated. He still thought I was wrong, but must have decided it was a point of view not worth defending, because we left the question behind shortly after that with no real "official ruling."
-
The trailing team was inbounding, and committed an unspecified violation. So the leading team was awarded a throw-in, completed it, and then is penalized with the punching violation. The trailing team would be awarded a throw-in from the out-of-bounds spot nearest the SOP (spot of the punch) with 1 second remaining. The officials for the completion of the game apparently will receive no compensation. Nice. Hope that throw-in doesn't lead to a foul, a single made free throw, and 2 overtimes.
-
R1, R2, 0 out. The ball is popped up in infield, playable by the pitcher with ordinary effort (in the judgment of the umpire) and called out as an Infield Fly, and runners retreat to their bases. The pitcher allows the ball to fall untouched in fair territory, its spin causes it to bounce toward the 1B line, and it touches the BR who is running inside the line (in fair territory). In the clinic where I heard this example, the guidance given was to get 2 outs on the play (BR on the infield fly, R2 on interference). In which rule set(s) would the guidance be correct? In which rule set(s) would the guidance be incorrect? ((Just for the record, this particular clinic was USA Softball.))
-
Why would the B1 be safe in situation B (a)? Unless the pitch was uncaught (which surely should have been specified if it's part of the situation), s/he's out on strikes, no matter where s/he runs.
-
This is inappropriate regardless of any other factor.
-
I agree with @wolfe_man that you must be locked in when it's time to be locked in, and you must work hard when it's time to work hard, but I think one of the most important things for new umpires is to RELAX. Find the small moments during the game when you can roll your neck around, flex your fingers, clench your butt cheeks, squeeze your eyes tight, bend your knees, or whatever else works for you. You'll stay fresher longer, your attitude will remain more positive, and you'll have more fun.
-
I would generally agree with you if everybody had done things right, but I think you have to be open to something like, "Look, Richvee, I kicked the ever-loving vegemite out of this one, because I broke for 2B when I saw the overthrow and didn't see whether BR turned," or "I didn't anticipate the little half-break, got completely screened, and couldn't even see if the tag went down in time." There's clearly a longer discussion to have during your post-game, but I think you still have to be willing to grab the crappy end of the stick if that's what it takes to avoid an egregious miss as a crew.
-
If you had posted this anywhere else, people would think you're a weirdo. But here, we're all nodding in agreement.
-
Your pictures look significantly different than the one on the "Review" page.
-
There might be some HTBT, because softball guys jump into foul territory all the time when their buddies make solid contact down the first base line (in accordance with the "everybody has to go to work tomorrow" overtones of the sport). If he jumped back before the tag attempt, you might not have two outs. Of course, if you can sell two, you've absolutely earned them.
-
He took second "on the throw." The rule book language that you're quoting addresses a player who singles with a runner on second, and then advances to second when the throw from the outfield goes to the plate in an attempt to prevent a run. He ends up at second, but he's credited with a "single, advancing on the throw." If you're having trouble with something, I think it should be explaining why he reached first base safely. It still seems to me that the play that allowed him to reach was an FC, even though I understand and agree that the batter should receive credit for a sacrifice.
-
Probably not. Likely scoring decision: BR safe at first (FC) advancing to second on the throw.
-
I'm not going to pretend to be an expert, but I looked at the best ISF resource I could find and found this on page 24. It may be the sh!tty end of the stick, but once the lineups are official, I think the rules support an umpire who views the "correctly-spelled" player as an unreported substitute. If you (the offending team) realized it and informed the umpire first, there would be no penalty. If the other team appeals before you notice, the "correctly-spelled" player would be declared ineligible, and if you had no legal substitute, the game would be forfeited. Having said that, if I had been the offending team, I think I'd have considered making the claim that my lineup was correct and the player's name was spelled incorrectly on the jersey.
-
"Son, if the catcher can reach it, so can you."
-
Of course you were. And I was thinking that this was in the thread I started. My mistake, and my apologies.
-
This is brilliant. Someone should make a TV show about it.
-
While I get what you're saying, @zoops, I feel like you're describing something different. It was a day of tournament games (actually girls' fast pitch) with 75-minute drop dead clocks, and we were actually a bit ahead of schedule. We finished 4 of the 5 game slots when the rain came, and we were probably in the room for a half hour when they decided to move the games. I've worked with this same TD a number of times, and the only instance where we had a significant delay, we were scheduled for 3 games, we finished one, and he asked us to stay through the rain and recovery to do the 3rd. We got paid for the two games we actually worked and he added a 1/2 game fee for the trouble. I feel like he's a stand-up guy. I was just curious if anyone had any kind of experience with traveling half-way through a game like this, because this umpire was so adamant that "you just don't do that." I'm of the mindset that if you want the work, you go where the games are. Inconvenient sometimes, but that's just the backside of getting paid a full game fee for working a 45-minute run rule. Thanks to everyone for the feedback!
-
I generally will specify my availability as "all day" or "until 3pm." If I had given "until 3pm" availability, I (like @noumpere) would be apologetic, but I would not feel the slightest bit guilty about leaving. If I had given "all day" availability, I would stay. In either case, I would be in contact with my assigner/UIC immediately, either to indicate that s/he needed to find someone to pick up the late game, or else so that s/he understands that I'm picking up the slack. I don't need the pat on the back so much as I want to be the guy that s/he will call first the next time s/he needs someone.
-
Background: I scheduled umpires for a tournament this weekend where a torrential cloudburst swept through the complex just 10 minutes into the final game slot. The rain was gone after about 10 minutes, but the fields obviously hadn't kept up with the sheer volume of water, and it was showing. The organization had playable fields available in town (about 15 minutes away), so the TD moved the remaining games to alternate locations. One of the umpires in the room was upset at the idea that he was expected to drive to a different facility and indicated that he expected gas money. I responded with something like, "Well, I didn't give you gas money to show up here, either. If you want to work the game, you go where it is." He said, "You just don't ask an umpire to change fields with compensation for the travel. You just don't do that." Actual questions: 1. Is he right? Is there a widespread agreement that umpires should be compensated for in-town travel like this? I didn't even consider it. In my area, I get availability from umpires that live up to 50 miles away, and I give availability to schedulers that will use me even 100 miles away, and nobody even considers travel money. I couldn't even fathom the idea that anyone would expect travel money to relocate to a site about 10 miles away. 2. The timing of his complaint bothered me even more. It seems to me that a discussion like this one should be the furthest from anyone's mind when the TD is trying to make alternate field arrangements, explain his decision to coaches, and get everybody relocated. On the other hand, I understand that the umpire has lost all negotiating leverage as soon as he's worked the game, so I suppose that if he felt like he needed to have the conversation at all, he would also feel like it had to be right then. 3. I've been in a rain delay before, but never a relocation like this. If that has happened to you, what was your experience? Could it have been made better? If so, how?
-
I'll be darned. I looked before I posted, too, because I don't do Little League. After I read your comment, it still took me another 10 minutes before I finally found a source that showed me the 4 inch offset. Thanks for the education, @JonnyCat. My apologies, @basejester, for my mistake.
-
The gap between the plate and the batter's box is specified as 6 inches in every code that I know of. A baseball is just under 3 inches in diameter. A softball is under 4 inches in diamter. Some part of the ball must travel over some part of the plate for the pitch to be a "rulebook" strike (in any code with a defined strike zone instead of a mat). A pitch that travels past the plate one inch into the batter's box is not a "rulebook" strike anywhere, ever. In fact, a pitch that travels past the plate over any part of the chalk is not a "rulebook" strike anywhere, ever. A baseball must be a full 3 inches away from the chalk (and a softball over 2 inches away) to actually catch the plate. I'm suggesting that it's wrong to call the "river." It's generally accepted and often even expected. But it's not "rulebook." Edit: See below for @JonnyCat's correction that smaller LL fields do specify a 4 inch gap. Sorry, @basejester.