Sometimes you do everything right and stuff still happens

[grayhawk]

Ump-attire's own Scott Kennedy was U2 on this play.  I have NO criticism for him as I believe he did everything right, but it was just an oddball play.  He's set for the critical action, waits for F6 to show him the "ball" and then calls the out.  However, the ball had slipped out of F6's glove (apparently even F6 didn't know this at first), and was behind the runner and shielding Scott from seeing it.  He stays engaged with the play and notices that F6 is reaching for something.  He moves to get a look and sees that the ball was on the ground.  He then makes a strong safe call.  Hook comes out, but accepts the explanation quickly and heads back to the dugout.  As the title says, sometimes you do everything right and stuff still happens.

Good job @Scott Kennedy.  This could happen to anyone.

 

 

[grayhawk]

By the way, I did not upload or name the  youtube video.  In fact, I think the video title is off base.

[BT_Blue]

I saw this on Facebook as well... along with the thoroughly unhelpful comments of some of the respondents. (Such as "this is why we as to see the ball... Not just the glove.")

I'm not sure Scott could have don't anything different. He watches the play all the way through. And the players are the ones that make it difficult on him. He waits to have F6 show him his glove  (more than likely, both properly assuming he still has possession of the ball). And calls him out.

It wasn't until he gained more information he was forced to change his call.

I would love to get Scott to walk us through this play. It would be fascinating. 

[johnnyg08]

Maybe I'll be the only one to say it...but he didn't do everything right which is why he initially got the play wrong. 

I'm not sure about "fascinating" 

The facts are that the umpire called a runner out w/o seeing the baseball in the fielder's possession after the tag. When he saw the fielder pick up the ball off of the ground, he changed his call to the correct one.

It happens to all of us when we're too quick. 

The umpire was too quick on the play. If we're going to call him out, wait until you see everything you need to see, then make your call. 

In the end, he got it right by sticking with the play even after the out call. In my mind, that was the most important part of this play, because he didn't see the most critical component of the play until the very end and it allowed him to get the play right.

The play comes down to a couple things. Proper use of eyes is proper timing (Evans). If he waits until he sees the baseball, he makes one "safe" call and everybody moves on.

That's really all there is to it. If this play isn't about proper timing, what is it about?

NCAA defines a tag as:

Tag: The action of a fielder in touching a base with any part of the body while holding the ball securely and firmly in the hand or glove or touching a runner with the ball or with the glove while holding the ball securely and firmly in that hand or glove. The fielder shall maintain or regain control of his body and if he drops the ball due to his lack of body control or control of the ball, it is not a tag. A voluntary and intentional release is substantive proof of complete control.

[johnnyg08]

In a way, a similar play occurred years ago between the Yankees and the Indians.

http://m.mlb.com/video/topic/6479266/v22622417/clenyy-fan-who-caught-disputed-dewayne-wise-ball

http://m.mlb.com/video/topic/213252306/v22614397/must-c-call-wises-leaping-effort-leads-to-dispute

"Show me the ball" is different from "Show me the glove"

[stkjock]

From the second link it would have appeared that U3 had a decent angle on the catch/no catch.

[BrianC14]

13 minutes ago, stkjock said:

From the second link it would have appeared that U3 had a decent angle on the catch/no catch.

I don't know.... his line of sight must have been blocked by the guy in the long sleeve t-shirt (navy blue).  Like @johnnyg08 said - show me the ball, not show me the glove.   

And this led to the batter being ejected...  so U3 died with this (incorrect) call.   

[stkjock]

13 minutes ago, BrianC14 said:

I don't know.... his line of sight must have been blocked by the guy in the long sleeve t-shirt (navy blue).  Like @johnnyg08 said - show me the ball, not show me the glove.   

And this led to the batter being ejected...  so U3 died with this (incorrect) call.   

I guess, however it appears he had a pretty straight view of it.  the screen shots are from approximately the same moment in time from two angles.

the thing that makes me wonder, U3 is standing there, seems to say something to Weiss and then Weiss leaves and the ball is never seen.

 

 

[BrianC14]

3 minutes ago, stkjock said:

I guess, however it appears he had a pretty straight view of it.  the screen shots are from approximately the same moment in time from two angles.

the thing that makes me wonder, U3 is standing there, seems to say something to Weiss and then Weiss leaves and the ball is never seen.

 

 

Yeah, that still  shot does look better, I think you're right.   And he never (seems to) ask to see the ball.   

[Lindsay]

4 hours ago, johnnyg08 said:

In a way, a similar play occurred years ago between the Yankees and the Indians.

http://m.mlb.com/video/topic/6479266/v22622417/clenyy-fan-who-caught-disputed-dewayne-wise-ball

http://m.mlb.com/video/topic/213252306/v22614397/must-c-call-wises-leaping-effort-leads-to-dispute

"Show me the ball" is different from "Show me the glove"

This is my favorite out call of all time: http://mediadownloads.mlb.com/mlbam/2012/07/14/mlbtv_sdnlan_23042581_1200K.mp4

[johnnyg08]

2 hours ago, Gil said:

This is my favorite out call of all time: http://mediadownloads.mlb.com/mlbam/2012/07/14/mlbtv_sdnlan_23042581_1200K.mp4

Worth fast forwarding to the one minute mark to hear Vin call this play. I should just make a Vin Scully folder. Thanks for posting this @Gil

[MidAmUmp]

When players screw up, it makes our lives difficult. 

There was no way for him to see the ball on the ground. You've got a fielder and runner blocking the view of the ball. Hell, the fielder even thought he had the ball.

His timing was fine. The player just made it difficult for him to do his job. 

[BrianC14]

56 minutes ago, johnnyg08 said:

Worth fast forwarding to the one minute mark to hear Vin call this play. I should just make a Vin Scully folder. Thanks for posting this @Gil

That is hilarious.... did Vin Scully call him "Greg Coslan" or some such?     LOL

[BrianC14]

2 minutes ago, MidAmUmp said:

When players screw up, it makes our lives difficult. 

There was no way for him to see the ball on the ground. You've got a fielder and runner blocking the view of the ball. Hell, the fielder even thought he had the ball.

His timing was fine. The player just made it difficult for him to do his job. 

I agree.  This is a clusterfluge of bodies going in different directions, and in the middle of it all - somewhere - is the ball.   Wouldn't want to be in that soup, but when this sort of thing happens, what else can you do?  I'm sure he saw F6 take possession of the ball, and then - *presto change-o* the ball isn't where it was.   

That said - Does anyone know if he called for F6 to 'show me the ball' ?

[johnnyg08]

For discussion purposes, I would say that on unusual plays (where the players put us in a position to not see what we need to see) like this, if you have an 'out' make sure you see the baseball, there's no reason to not. 

It's the exact same feedback you'd get if you were at a clinic and this play happened and you had ten big dogs evaluating you and you made two calls on the play.

They would all likely say something along the lines of..."make sure you can find the baseball" 

 

 

[Stk004]

9 minutes ago, BrianC14 said:

I agree.  This is a clusterfluge of bodies going in different directions, and in the middle of it all - somewhere - is the ball.   Wouldn't want to be in that soup, but when this sort of thing happens, what else can you do?  I'm sure he saw F6 take possession of the ball, and then - *presto change-o* the ball isn't where it was.   

That said - Does anyone know if he called for F6 to 'show me the ball' ?

I'm pretty sure the standard is for us to NOT say "show me the ball." We wait until we have sufficient proof that the fielder has firm and secure possession, which they often do by themselves. In this case, F6 clearly raised his glove up, believing he had the ball, proving to Scott that he had firm and secure possession. Or so they thought. Scott isn't at fault here and he was right on top of F6 scrambling for the ball. Great timing and a strong, concise clarification once he gained the necessary additional information. He's calling a Super Regional for crying out loud, he has more than just a handle on what he's doing. 

[BrianC14]

5 minutes ago, johnnyg08 said:

For discussion purposes, I would say that on unusual plays (where the players put us in a position to not see what we need to see) like this, if you have an 'out' make sure you see the baseball, there's no reason to not. 

It's the exact same feedback you'd get if you were at a clinic and this play happened and you had ten big dogs evaluating you and you made two calls on the play.

They would all likely say something along the lines of..."make sure you can find the baseball" 

 

 

I first read that as "...you had Big Ten dogs evaluating you..."        

I can see your point;  I know that when I've had a mini-dogpile on a play, I have been trained to refrain from signaling anything, and call out " Show me the ball".   This typically will freeze the runner on the bag however he might be touching it, and then it prompts the fielder to (if he has to) untangle himself and show the content of his glove (or hand).  Then the signal can be made based on what was just previously seen.   I've had evaluators (paraphrasing here) say that when you call to 'show me the ball', it's always going to be an out if the ball is there, and most coaches / players understand that (level depending on that last part).

[BrianC14]

4 minutes ago, Stk004 said:

I'm pretty sure the standard is for us to NOT say "show me the ball." We wait until we have sufficient proof that the fielder has firm and secure possession, which they often do by themselves. In this case, F6 clearly raised his glove up, believing he had the ball, proving to Scott that he had firm and secure possession. Or so they thought. Scott isn't at fault here and he was right on top of F6 scrambling for the ball. Great timing and a strong, concise clarification once he gained the necessary additional information. He's calling a Super Regional for crying out loud, he has more than just a handle on what he's doing. 

Agree w/ what I put in bold.... seasoned players know to show the ball; that's what makes this specific situation pretty rare.   

For the record, I've been instructed by numerous DI umpires over the years, and while we didn't always have this come up, it did present itself on enough occasions to where the instructors would tell us to request proof of possession.   Again, I think @johnnyg08's point is valid:   show me the ball is different from show me the glove.  I'm not pointing fingers at any umpire here, let alone one who works at a level I can't even dream about;  it isn't about finding fault, it's about using this as a learning situation.

[udbrky]

6 minutes ago, Stk004 said:

I'm pretty sure the standard is for us to NOT say "show me the ball." We wait until we have sufficient proof that the fielder has firm and secure possession, which they often do by themselves. In this case, F6 clearly raised his glove up, believing he had the ball, proving to Scott that he had firm and secure possession. Or so they thought. Scott isn't at fault here and he was right on top of F6 scrambling for the ball. Great timing and a strong, concise clarification once he gained the necessary additional information. He's calling a Super Regional for crying out loud, he has more than just a handle on what he's doing. 

I never say show me the ball, but if I'm not sure where it is, I try to look around and move to see another angle. The fielder usually realizes what I'm doing and shows it.

[johnnyg08]

No where will you see me saying anything overly negative about a Super Regional umpire or any umpire for that matter. See Gil's play above about an MLB umpire. 

We all make mistakes, this is an easy mistake to make because it looked like all of the pieces were there. 

But I guarantee, like I said above..if you're getting evaluated at a clinic or camp and you make two calls on a play like this, they're going to tell you to make sure you see or try to see the baseball. Or some version of that. We shouldn't be so protective or defensive when some of our brothers make a mistake that any of us could have, have made, or will make...our mistakes simply aren't on ESPN. 

No more of a reason as to why the replay overturns in MLB are right at 50%. Were those umpires, who are the best in the world, in great position to see the plays, but simply got them wrong and were overturned on replay. Yep. Doesn't mean that they don't belong in MLB...just that they're human...like the rest of us.

 

 

[Lindsay]

24 minutes ago, BrianC14 said:

That is hilarious.... did Vin Scully call him "Greg Coslan" or some such?     LOL

Greg Carlson.

If I'm not mistaken, Mark Carlson had worked the plate for a Dodgers game the previous night or so.

[udbrky]

The tough ones, imo, are where you don't expect the ball to get loose. 

 

[BrianC14]

17 minutes ago, johnnyg08 said:

No where will you see me saying anything overly negative about a Super Regional umpire or any umpire for that matter. See Gil's play above about an MLB umpire. 

We all make mistakes, this is an easy mistake to make because it looked like all of the pieces are there. 

But I guarantee, like I said above..if you're getting evaluated at a clinic or camp and you make two calls on a play like this, they're going to tell you to make sure you see or try to see the baseball. Or some version of that. We shouldn't be so protective or defensive when some of our brothers make a mistake that any of us could have, have made, or will make...our mistakes simply aren't on ESPN. 

No more of a reason as to why the replay overturns in MLB are right at 50%. Were those umpires, who are the best in the world, in great position to see the plays, but simply got them wrong and were overturned on replay. Yep. Doesn't mean that they don't belong in MLB...just that they're human...like the rest of us.

 

 

I'll take this a step further for anyone that thinks I'm criticizing Scott Kennedy:   I'm not qualified to do the man's laundry.  I will never be a DI conference umpire, and I don't even have the time left in life to hope that I might be.  What I do gain from these videos of the "big dogs" is a deeper respect for the level they are working and succeeding at it.   Again - this is about taking something away from the discussion and applying it to my tiny little umpiring world.   

 

"What's the most important game you're ever going to work?    Answer:  the one you're working right now."

- quote from a D-I CWS umpire who shall remain anonymous

 

[MidAmUmp]

3 hours ago, johnnyg08 said:

For discussion purposes, I would say that on unusual plays (where the players put us in a position to not see what we need to see) like this, if you have an 'out' make sure you see the baseball, there's no reason to not. 

It's the exact same feedback you'd get if you were at a clinic and this play happened and you had ten big dogs evaluating you and you made two calls on the play.

They would all likely say something along the lines of..."make sure you can find the baseball" 

 

 

If an umpire at my clinic waited as long as he did on a screwed up play like this, I would tell him exactly what I wrote earlier...the player screwed up and made your life difficult. 

Again, this has absolutely nothing to do with timing. The runner was practically laying on the baseball. No one could see it. The timing was good, the fielder held up his glove, he called him out, then the fielder realized he didn't have the ball. Fielder picked it up, umpire stayed with the play, and changed his call when evidence proved the runner was safe. 

We all know most double calls occur because an umpire made up his mind too soon. This was not the case in this situation.

I would say something if a camper immediately called him out, then had to change the call because the umpire didn't take everything into account.

I would say something if a camper made a double call and the ball was obviously not in the glove/on the ground. That didn't happen on this play.

I would have absolutely nothing wrong with a camper handling this play this way.

[johnnyg08]

12 minutes ago, MidAmUmp said:

If an umpire at my clinic waited as long as he did on a screwed up play like this, I would tell him exactly what I wrote earlier...the player screwed up and made your life difficult. 

Again, this has absolutely nothing to do with timing. The runner was practically laying on the baseball. No one could see it. The timing was good, the fielder held up his glove, he called him out, then the fielder realized he didn't have the ball. Fielder picked it up, umpire stayed with the play, and changed his call when evidence proved the runner was safe. 

We all know most double calls occur because an umpire made up his mind too soon. This was not the case in this situation.

I would say something if a camper immediately called him out, then had to change the call because the umpire didn't take everything into account.

I would say something if a camper made a double call and the ball was obviously not in the glove/on the ground. That didn't happen on this play.

I would have absolutely nothing wrong with a camper handling this play this way.

No doubt and trust me...I appreciate your input...I know you know that and I agree with 99.99% of what you're saying...why would I disagree? 

BUT...consider for just a moment...had the umpire simply looked for the baseball versus the glove an extra .5 or whatever small amt. of time?

I get it. I really do...but on a weird-looking play like this when we already have an out in our minds...why is it so difficult to simply locate the baseball before calling the runner out?

Wouldn't that be an area of opportunity to be perfect on a play like that? It's not beating anybody up...he got the play right in a D1 Super Regional and that is ultimately what matters. 

Literally an extra .5 second to physically see the baseball in the glove (or not) and it's one signal, the correct one. Ideally, isn't that what doing it perfectly would look like? 

Isn't that the feedback you'd give to somebody who wanted to be perfect on a play like this? 

Can we still get things right and be imperfect? Sure. Hell, that's the majority of my life. Trying to get things right while being really imperfect. 

I know I sound like I'm being "that guy" who knows better than all of the D1 guys...certainly, that's not my intent.

But you can't tell me that if you show this clip at your clinic that there aren't many things BOTH positive and constructive on how to get plays like this right and look perfect in the process. Certainly many more positives than constructive in a clip like this no doubt. You wouldn't use this clip on how to be perfect on a play like this because the initial call was incorrect even though nearly 100% of the time all of the things that happened in this clip told us we had an out. Yet, it's a great tool to teach guys that the weirder the play...we need to try to slow the game down in our minds even a little bit more because they're making things harder for us out here and we want to try and get it right and look like we belong there in the process. If this clip was of Joe Schmo on high school ball field America...that would be the feedback that should be given to that umpire. "You did everything right and still got the play wrong initially...maybe consider taking just a fraction of a second longer to physically see the baseball and you will look spectacular out there." I believe that good is the enemy of great. Physically seeing the baseball in this case turns a good call into a great call. 

Thanks for the discussion.