Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Posts posted by johnnyg08

  1. 1 minute ago, BigBlue4u said:

    The pressure is a privilege? Please explain that.

    Sure. The pressure of a big game, someone or entity trusting me & my crew to handle an earned assignment or important situation...it's a privilege to be on the field, put there as a steward of the game to maintain its integrity. Within that privilege is a certain amount of pressure to succeed and perform the job we were asked to do. 

    Happy New Year! 

    • Like 1
  2. On 11/6/2021 at 8:38 PM, catsbackr said:

    The fatigue factor is the primary reason I'm wanting us to work behind the mound.  We may have to do a 7th grade/8th grade DH or 9th grade/HS JV DH with 1 umpire.  Asking us to work 2 straight solo games behind the plate is not something I'm going to ask our umpires to do.


    I'm anxious to hear from @noumpere as to why he says "Don't. Do. It."

     I think it's a safety factor too. I don't ever want a head injury...but the risk feels greater to me the younger they are. 

    As for fair/foul...do the best you can if you work behind the mound. If you're working alone, there are lots of calls we make that don't give us a good look...but I look at percentages...the one, maybe two fair/fouls in an entire game to have been angles/distances for the bases behind the mound...and not risking head injuries...if I'm going to work those, I'm not going behind the plate for the youth stuff.

  3. 18 hours ago, Steven Tyler said:

    The part where it says all runners would mean that the batter, or  technically speaking, batter-runner are awarded 2 bases.  Diaz was off on the pitch, had rounded 2B, and almost to 3B when the ball went dead.  Kiermeier had rounded 1B when the ball went dead........so technically, we had two runners.  Diaz should have been given home and Kiermeier awarded 3B.

    I just recall when doing FED (I know not OBR) awards were given from the time the ball went dead in a situation like this.

    I'm perplexed why something like this is a TOP award.  Doesn't sound right that the offense basically gets penalized for the bad play of the defense. 

    So under that thought...you'd be comfortable putting the batter/runner at 3B in this play?


  4. 41 minutes ago, Steven Tyler said:

    Hmm...2B ump immediately ruled no catch on the play....and Jackson did intentionally stick his leg out.

    He did...I don't believe that was the correct judgment on that play...and as for Reggie's actions...I guess for me what was there wasn't enough...but what do I know? 🙂 Not a lot. 

  5. 38 minutes ago, Jimurray said:

    At our level we don't give time for any little thing and if an adult league wants to emulate MLB with time after every play we enthuse them but not before looking around to ensure relaxed action. Who asked for time when R1 noticed 2B uncovered and Gibson gave it without a clue? Non starter as BOS won with next at bat but sht could have happened unless I didn't see the whole sequence of who asked for time or even if it was asked for.

    Agree...at our levels...keep it live as often as possible. Keep things moving. 

  6. 1 minute ago, Velho said:

    Thanks @johnnyg08 Sam did a good job. Only nit I have is I think it'd be more powerful to refer to the rulebook directly. The language is so clear already. Take out of the middleman of the MLBUM and quote the source.

    Also, his intro stated the assembled media there never let the umpires speak. I found that odd. I expect they'd always give them time. Not to mention why he thinks he needs them to get his message out.

    I agree with that. My understanding, again from the MLBUM, is that the Crew Chief has the discretion whether or not to speak to the media. And yes, the rule book language helps the casual fan & player because very few people have access to the MLBUM...which I wish would change. The media & commentators could have one in their booths if they wanted to...or their fact finders. 


  7. 28 minutes ago, lawump said:

    And every MLB umpire I have spoken to about that play believes that crew got that call correct (although they missed the intentional drop prior to this throw).  They believed that Reggie turned to avoid being hit in the front, rather than him turning to intentionally be hit by the ball.

    The point being: if the MLB umpires' belief that the Jackson play was not interference is correct, then Grandal's play was definitely not interference because Jackson did a hell of a lot more than Grandal.

    Nevermind...I understand now...the intentional drop on this play...which I think is relevant to this discussion...not the intentional drop but Reggie's failure to vacate. This clip is actually pretty cool because Lasorda and/or the umpires are mic'd up and we have audio of the discussion.

    Here's two videos mashed together. One is the TV broadcast and the Lasorda/Umpire audio begins around the 3:10 mark:


    • Like 1
  8. 2 hours ago, Jimurray said:

    It was intentional. But drifting to to screen a throw doesn’t get called. To call intent it seems you need a more overt action such as an arm move or lean into the ball as it approaches. 

    I don't think there's any dispute there...but for the purpose of enforcement on this play, it has no bearing where the runner is running. And when we explain these plays to coaches, "Coach/Name, I hear you, but that's not how this is interpreted. He needs to do something inconsistent with simply running the bases" or some version of that. 

  9. These plays are covered very nicely in the MLBUM:

    OBR Approved Ruling: 5.06(b)(4)(H)

    However, the Approved Ruling also provides that if the pitched ball (or thrown ball by the pitcher while in contact with the rubber) goes through or by the catcher (or fielder), remains on the playing field, and is subsequently kicked or deflected out of play, the award is two bases from the time of the pitch. 

    The above rulings apply if the deflection is unintentional on the part of the fielder. If, in the judgment of the umpires, a fielder intentionally kicks or deflects any batted or thrown ball out of play, the award is two bases from the time the ball was kicked or deflected. 

    Relevant Case Plays:

    • If a fair ball not in flight is deflected by a fielder and then goes out of play the award is two bases from the time of the pitch
    • If a fielder has complete possession of a batted or thrown ball and subsequently deflects or kicks the ball out of play, the award is two bases from the position of the runners at the time the ball was kicked or deflected. 
    • If, in the judgment of the umpire, a fielder intentionally kicks or deflects a batted or thrown ball out of play, the award is two bases from the time the ball was kicked or deflected. 


    • Like 1
  10. On 10/6/2021 at 9:28 PM, Jimurray said:

    Stick to what you have been trained for. Do not emulate Joe as in the fifth inning where on a check swing he used his right arm with a righty batter to ask if he went. His crew knows Joe and there was no confusion. I've even seen Joe use his right arm with an open becoming hand asking U1. It won't work for us. 

    I disagree. While I wouldn't teach it...if my base umpire is that dense to think that "Oh...I don't know...I thought you called it a strike" We shouldn't lock ourselves into processing what's happening around us to not realize what our PU might be asking us as the base umpire. 

    Yes, we should go with the left....but umpires need to use their brains too...this falls under "sometimes you just have to umpire" 


    • Like 1
  11. 22 hours ago, Velho said:

    also the announcers clearly say "there was no call on the field by Laz Diaz". Completely allowing for the chance the broadcast did a poor job here 😂

    Diaz may or may not have signaled "safe" on the appeal. We're forced to believe them b/c there's no video footage of an actual appeal. 

    What dugout were the Dodgers in? Perhaps J. Turner was relaying what they were yelling from the 3B dugout, assuming of course that was the LA dugout. 

    Or he was watching the play and was aware that he probably did miss 2B on his way back. I struggle thinking that Diaz would've missed it being that's essentially his only responsibility on that play. 

  12. 54 minutes ago, Thunderheads said:

    you mean .... replay wasn't conclusive, thus they called him safe?   I thought for sure that he missed 2nd, but I'm not looking at all of the replay angles in NYC either ;) 

    I'm not trying to argue with people over this..but don't we think that if at any point Laz or Replay knew that he failed to retouch in in his last time by, that they'd have upheld the appeal? 

    Here's J. Turner calling for the appeal for those who say (because they didn't see it on TV...then it didn't happen)...that they indeed appealed before going to replay. 


    Screen Shot 2021-10-07 at 8.06.09 AM.jpg

  • Create New...