Jump to content

Matt

Established Member
  • Posts

    4,328
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    96

Posts posted by Matt

  1. 5 hours ago, Guest DarylM said:

    Found an interesting article on the subject. https://www.camdenchat.com/2016/4/22/11486388/wieters-ejection-highlights-mlbs-checked-swing-problem

    Yes, my original question was answered (didn't know it was a rule), but that doesn't mean I agree with the rule. This is no different than saying only a safe call at first can be appealed, but not an out call. There is no other rule AFAIK that only allows 1 team to appeal or challenge and IMO that just isn't fair.

     

    Here's your chance. Define a swing. Solve the problem in the article.

    • Like 1
  2. 1 hour ago, The Man in Blue said:

    Matt, for a change, this isn't to challenge your post ... can you point to any data source?  That is something that has always interested me.

    Edit: Sorry, I may have misread your post.  If you were talking about society in general, disregard.  I thought you were talking about stats on sports officials.

    Yep, I was talking about society in general. Being a former crime analyst, I could go way deeper into the constraints, causes, and just about everything else regarding what I am about to share, but I don't do it anymore for a reason or two. It's still a passion of mine, but passion only goes so far. 

    https://www.statista.com/statistics/191219/reported-violent-crime-rate-in-the-usa-since-1990/

    • Like 1
  3. 8 hours ago, SH0102 said:

    I pray for his recovery, both physical and mental.  An absolute travesty.

    I actually am Shocked this doesn’t happen more often…the USA has become a trash pit…a guy yesterday shot and killed his 2 year old and shot the mom bc they were arguing, a 72 year old woman was shot in the head while sitting at a stop sign, prob bc she was driving too slow for someone.  The moral Compass of our society has disappeared.

    The data shows otherwise. This has always happened, and usually in worse numbers...you simply hear about it more often.

  4. 3 hours ago, flyingron said:

    The posting of ads on uniforms (players and officials) is probably inevitable.   The removal of the memorial patch however is sort of reprehensible.    I'll have to tell you that the camera time (which is carefully measured by advertising consultants in this sort of thing) isn't probably much more with the shoulder.   90% of the umpire exposure is the plate umpire, head on.

    I had to look up what FTX was anyhow.   I'm not sure how effective that is for advertising anyhow.

    You looked up what FTX was. Now you have exposure to it that you didn't before.

    • Like 1
  5. 1 hour ago, BCBrad said:

    If they are going to take an impartial third party who administers the rules of the game and pimp out their uniforms like a cheap sandwich board, at least they can do is use the new revenue to:

    • Give those fellas in black a 10% raise
    • or give the profits to charity like Ump Cares. 

    I know it won’t happen. When did the ghost of Charlie Finley become Commissioner of Baseball? No shame to cheapen the game of baseball for a buck. Just wait folks for the return of the orange baseballs.

     

    How is it cheapened?

    More precisely, is there even a reason to care? JFC. It's a business...nothing more, nothing less. 

  6. 32 minutes ago, rhinolith said:

    Babe Ruth rules

    R1. RHP makes a hop pickoff move to 1B. The right foot (pivot foot) disengages from the pitcher’s plate, but in front of the plate. 
     

    Can I confirm that this is considered stepping off, or not? It matters on base awards if the pitcher throws it into dead ball territory.

    Thank you very much.

    Is the foot landing before the throw? 

  7. 2 hours ago, Thunderheads said:

    it's referring to being 'suspended' or 'muted' on the "Umplife" facebook page .... super strict over there, ...Ray and his moderators run a SUPER tight ship!  (sometimes too tight in my opinion, but... it's his page ;) )

    I would say it's probably needed, give the dumpster fires that all the other FB groups become. One of the big differences is that is a group related to his business--with the other umpire groups, anyone can go start a new one, even if it was their creation to start. He's got financial skin in it not becoming a cage match.

    • Like 1
  8. 1 hour ago, noumpere said:

    I know.

    If RH F1 just turns to his left and throws to second, that's legal.

    But if he first lifts the leg (to use another phrase from the OP) toward the balance point (iow, starts a move to his right) and THEN turns left to go to second, that's a balk.

    Not any more of a balk than if he turns the other way.

  9. This is why kids don't want to play in their teenage years. They're playing something someone chose for them for a dozen years ago, and have realized that they don't know if they truly like it or just think they do because that's what they're supposed to do. Then when they take a year off at 14-15 to get their bearings, their still-playing cohort passes them by, making the decision permanent.

    • Like 2
  10. On 7/5/2021 at 11:27 AM, noumpere said:

    This has been discussed here several times in the past couple of years.  Matt has a good analysis of it.  I think the ruling is that the free foot must cross the rubber.

     

    Someone with better search skills than I can find it.

    There you go, sport.

  11. 2 hours ago, Richvee said:

    I had someone tell me something similar a few weeks ago about the jump turn. Told me on the jump move for a RHP to 1b, the pivot foot must land on the ground first….,and  closer to 3b than where it originally started, plus the free foot gaining ground towards 1b. 

    Technically, yes.

    Nope.

    Only if it's from the rubber, which goes back to the first comment. We generally allow the pivot foot to be the first movement and be a disengagement as long as it is not contemporaneous with the free foot's initial movement. If you can't tell them apart, it's from the rubber.

  12.  

    9 hours ago, MulletUmpTheSecond said:

    12u playoff game, I'm doing bases and my partner is on the plate. First couple innings I hear some stuff about what my partner is calling but nothing deserving of a warning. Then 1 out with runners on, he calls strike 3 for the 2nd out of the inning.

    The pitch looked a little high, but I ultimately didn't have his angle. Neither did anyone on the HT but they all wanted to cut his head off anyway. There was a lot of yelling from the HT dugout that I couldn't make out but obviously they hated the call. Coach is arguing "HE FRAMED IT FROM UP HERE!!!" (pointing at his shoulders) my partner is yelling back "THAT WAS RIGHT HERE!!!" (Pointing at his chest) not taking SH*# from anyone. I liked that.

    So the inning ends, and as I'm going to my partner for feedback on my performance so far (This was only my 8th career game on the bases) I hear the coach arguing the call again and finishing off by saying "YOU SUCK" 

    My partner asks back "I suck? I suck?" Then tells the HT manager that his assistant is ejected for saying he sucked. 

    The game ends with a furious comeback from the HT who went from being down 6-1 to winning 7-6 by scoring 6 runs in the bottom of the 5th, then turning a double play with 1 out in the top of the next inning when the batter hit a screaming line drive to the first baseman who caught it and promptly stepped on the bag to end the game. I guess the ejection must have fired up his team. For all I know he got ran on purpose to fire them up. I've heard stories like that on this forum.

    As the HT was celebrating, the ejected HTAC returned to the field and shook hands with both of us and apologized for his behavior. Which is fine but he still should've left the area after being ejected. My partner was indifferent to me pointing this out to him so I let it go but obviously I don't want it to happen again.

    Your partner needs to learn how to STFU. By going tit-for-tat in the argument, he's legitimizing the complaint and delegitimizing his authority.

    Also, don't go to your partner for an evaluation during the game, because they have their own things to do. Also, and specific to this situation, I wouldn't trust anything your partner said, because it's readily apparent that his advice is worth less than the time it would take to get it. 

    Lastly, and supporting my previous assertion, your partner didn't give a SH*# about you being right about what he did. Thus, even with your relative inexperience, it would seem that you are ahead of him in skill.

    • Like 1
  13. 16 hours ago, agdz59 said:

    Yes.  But if the pitcher engages the pitcher's plate to help the deception, I'm calling a balk every time.  Same with the case if time was dead and he engages the plate to get me to put the ball in play.  The defense has deceived.  By rule, I'm calling the balk.

    How many rules are you going to F*#K up at once?

    • Haha 1
  14. 3 hours ago, beerguy55 said:

    No...juries want it.  They like to hear a story and understand "why" someone did something in order to convict.   They want to know why a witness said or did something.   "Why" is otherwise irrelevant in virtually all aspects of the law, administrative or otherwise, unless you start dealing with hate crimes.    

    And nothing in a report is admissible to that end (hence my comment about probative value) unless it is an observable fact (e.g. an excited utterance by the perpetrator.)

  15. 5 hours ago, mark38090 said:

    But it's what the lawyers want, that's all they care about. 

    No, they don't. It's not probative and it can only impeach you. Maybe, just like in umpiring, someone with some power decided that this is the way to go contrary to the law (rules,) and has been passing down bad practice for generations.

    Not that I had to write the same types of reports for years or anything...

    • Like 1
  16. On 6/24/2021 at 6:53 AM, mark38090 said:

    I'm a 20 correctional officer and I was thinking your report was short and sweet... Guess we went to the same report writing training. 

     

    Who, what, when, where, and why. BY, who what when where and why.  FOR, who what when where and why. CONSEQUENCES, for who what when where and why. And finally, CHARGES, for who what when where and why. Then add any details you think may be factors in the decision. 

    That's redundant, and the "why" is pointless.

×
×
  • Create New...