JHSump

Yes, it's true you can't go entirely by their reactions! Got to use all the info you have. The Ole MIss player's work was amateurish --- a bit delayed and way to over the top given the possible slight nick and protection he had there. In addition, I'll bet there was absolutely not sound of a nick in the Ole Miss guy's case. Jeter's work was MLB level. Immediate and more subtle, even though the ball certainly impacted something. But even it might have been possible to distinguish the sound of a ball hitting a bat knob from a ball hitting an elbow pad (can't tell if it's hard). It might have also been possible to *see* the event. But apparently the umpire was fooled. There is a case from a few years ago with Giambi. The ball hits either his knob or his hand and flies off. The PU looks up at Giambi and Giambi doesn't have any reaction. So, it appears, the PU decides it's a foul. I didn't find a video, but only spent a minute looking for it.

I think everyone is concentrating too much on the fact that it is A-Rod in this clip. Blank out that fact and just view the clip as an important learning moment. The real point of this post by Thunderheads, and the only real reason to be interested in the clip, as far as I am concerned, is that a sharp click sound + ball ricocheting quickly away apparently do not, by themselves, indicate that the pitch hit the bat (or hit the bat only). Like in most umpiring, you have to use your eyes and ears to take in all the information available before making a decision. In this case, the additional information is the batter (it could have been anyone) *immediately* reacting dramatically. That his hand was indeed broken just underlines the fact that he was really hit by the pitch, and so we can be completely confident that the above lesson is true.

At 1:40 it does look like it hit the knob. And the sound was a very solid click. But he is now on the DL with a broken hand. Lesson? Maybe the player's immediate reaction is the tell.

Here's another twist on this stuff. I had to eject an assistant coach because of this base business the other day. 11U baseball game (just so we are clear). BR slides into 2B, dislodges it. Ball gets away, he takes off for 3B. I'm BU. I move into position to make a possible call at 3B. Meanwhile, I'm hearing people from different directions telling me that the bag at second is loose. Of course, I'm ignoring that. When the action is over, BR is at 3B, and I look back at 2B. F4 is putting the base back into position. Not exactly simple since there is dirt in the way, etc. I go over and watch, giving him a few words of encouragement. AC on the defense yells out from dugout asking why his player is doing this. I ignore him, as the player is doing fine. My partner quietly says, "That's not our job coach." He should have ignored the AC also, I think. But, what was said, was said. Now AC starts asking loudly, "What is your job?" to my partner and then to me. I tell AC to be quiet...but he continues to ask, I give him one more shot at being quiet, he doesn't take it, so ... "You're done!" His response was, "You've been done all day." But, he leaves, and we never saw him again. Moments later the TD shows up with a little trowel and fixes the base properly. After the game, the manager of that team apologizes to us for his AC's behavior. (He only got that chance to apologize because we have to stick around to get the managers to sign the card ). Anyone else have a similar story?

The crew on the field is the judge and jury. Since they didn't call it, I have to assume they didn't feel he intended to cause a balk. HTBT. Maybe it's obvious and doesn't need to be said too often, but it should perhaps be said occasionally: often the umpires on the field have to make a judgment, not just about a fair/foul, safe/out, ball/strike, but about the actions of a player or coach. Trout's comment is right on the mark about this case, I think.

Wait...wait, I've found the transcript of the Giants announcers. Here it is. Count is 1 and 2. Here's the pitch. Called strike three. Wow, that ball was definitely inside. Pagan is arguing. And, he's thrown out! Oh, that's a quick hook. You know, it's a myth that you can't argue balls and strikes. The actual rule has a little known clause in it that you can argue if you keep it to less than 5 seconds. It's the 5 second rule. Bochy is out to argue, and rightly so. Ok, here's our Pitch F/X view...and that's clearly at least a foot inside! Wow! Unbelievable. Baseball needs to rein in these umpires. They can't be allowed to inject themselves into the game like this. Such a crucial game and such a crucial at bat, and now Pagan is gone. Brutal. This is just another argument for replays! You've got that right. What's that? We just received a call from Vin Scully. He says he wants us to sign up for his clinic in November. Wow, what an honor! I can't wait to give the lecture on how umpires are ruining the game. The rest of the transcript is at: www.SWMBOvsJaxRolosAvatar.com

It would be interesting to hear the Giants announcers.

Are there any replays with a closer look? Did the umpire get it wrong (it can happen), or did the runner do something funny (happens also)? The runner may have executied his stand-up slide in such a way as to not actually step on the base until moving to an upright position --- I've seen that before.

Wow! That actually sounds like it was potentially explosive, what with all the players already outside their dugouts. And a manager leading the interaction. It could have tipped in a hurry. But, it also sounds like you handled it very well.

Do you find that these sorts of pleasant interactions reduce issues with fans? Or, can you tell or not? I could perhaps pull that off. Just wondering if it acts to "calm the natives."

Lots of good comments in this thread. I guess in the end, formal education my play only a very small role in how they act, or in their baseball knowledge. The one thing that struck me about the Davey Johnson article was his keying in on statistical analysis apparently long before that became fashionable in more recent times (as in Moneyball). Seems like it resonated with his math education. But I have no idea what his personality is like, and how he interacts with umpires.

Also, very true.

Quite true. I know some coaches that are clearly well educated, but can be way wrong when it comes to baseball or baseball rules.

Hahaha ...that's hilarious!

Yes, I noticed who it was, and agree.

Better off to call it when it happens and then waive it off then to call it only when it causes a problem. Calling it right away can help flush away the s***storm. completely agree. I was caught off guard, so I hesitated. Bad timing on my part. Interesting. I thought you were supposed to wait to see the result of the play. If the runner it out, no interference. If he's not out, then call interference. But, you say to call interference right away, then waive it off it it's unnecessary. Is that the standard procedure?

Interesting article about Davey Johnson: http://www.nytimes.c...h-movement.html Makes me wonder: are highly educated managers (at any level) more likely to be reasonable/professional in their dealings with umpires? Or, are they more likely be be devious? What are your thoughts/experiences? (And I have no idea about Johnson in this regard, so comments on him would be interesting also.)

That is the ugliest triple play I have heard of! Meanwhile, it sounds like nobody got ejected for the bench clearing ruckus. Run through how you decided that. I think you make very level headed entries in these boards, and I'll bet your explanation will be useful (to me, at least, others may already be able to read between the lines).

Looks like the runner's extended foot/leg passed up over the plate --- didn't touch it. Tag was applied before the back leg reach the plate.

I think you're right, I was looking for "confident." Good catch. Actually, I can say that when I do local league games, many people are familiar with me and I am familiar with them, so I will interact with the fans and it's never really antagonistic. In the story I posted above, this was a tournament and these were people I was not familiar with, on both days. So, I wanted to really stay out of interacting with them, and it worked well. I'll bet, nevertheless, that you are probably better than I am at striking the correct balance in these interactions. So, I have a question then: what sort of interactions do you have when you work games where you are not familiar at all with the fans? I won't be surprised if I learn a thing or two here.

I can't really say I'm an expert in game management, ignoring fans, etc. But, I learned something yesterday. Two 9U games. I was BU in first game PU in second (my partner and I switched). After a few calls did not go one particular team's way, one of their fans starting getting on us over and over, for all sorts of things. Where we were standing, how long we took between innings, any calls he did not like (i.e., against his team), calls he did like (mocking our "accuracy"), etc., etc. Not that he knew anything about umpiring. He was just a blowhard. Before the games I told me partner I was going to work on one thing during these two games: ignoring all fans -- no acknowledgement, no talking with fans, no nothing with fans. The day before I had stopped a game when loud thunder occurred. Some fan said, "It's been thundering for 20 minutes," as I was walking past the fence. I said, "Then you should have told me 20 minutes ago." (I hadn't heard anything --- maybe I was not paying careful enough attention to the distant thunderstorm.) She keep quiet after that (when we resumed the game) but I felt I should not have answered at all. Anyway, I decided to not respond to anything at all from fans, in yesterday's games. So, the blowhard kept at us all game long. My partner and I never acknowledged him in any way. As the day progressed, I felt more and more powerful (if that is the right word) because I was able to avoid responding in any way to this guy. He had a few fans around him partaking in the taunts, but eventually they stopped. At one point he tried to start up a chant, "No pay for Blue. No pay for Blue...." But nobody else joined him. He was all alone. When it was all over I felt very satisfied. Much more so than if I had exchanged any words with him, clever or not, or even gave him any looks. The power in keeping complete control of myself was quite satisfying. After the game, my partner had fun when we laughed about the bozo.

I agree. In this case a spectacular show of disrespect for the game.

The atmospheric conditions would certainly affect the extent of the expansion of the fireball. It's exactly as you say: the density of the air is important. This effect was worked out back in the 1940s as part of understanding the nuclear tests. I've seen it applied to supernovae explosions (same idea, the density of interstellar gas affects the range and rate of expansion of the shock wave). But, if you ask me about how large the effect would be, that's a detail a "back of the envelope" calculation would not so easily capture. So, I don't have that answer. I think the website where the OP comes from will be posting such discussions weekly. I doubt they will be baseball related much of the time, but I think they want to address "everyday" things, and they welcome submitted questions. The site is http://what-if.xkcd.com/1/ and their motto: ANSWERING YOUR HYPOTHETICAL QUESTIONS WITH PHYSICS, EVERY TUESDAY And, remember, every Thursday "The Big Bang Theory" airs on CBS (sorry, just a plug for my favorite TV show).

Vin Scully should give "announcer clinics"! Great timing. Does not rush. Clear and concise. Impartial. Respectful of the game and the participants, including the umpires. Etc., etc.

LOL ! You should try it at plate meetings...during games...when making calls... Isn't there a Seinfeld episode where Elaine is confused by some guy calling himself Jimmy? Imagine the confusion on the field.