JHSump

​@Majordave thanks for the Cliff's notes version! Interesting.

​I've been hit in the shoulder a number of times, using my WVG, including games at the varsity HS level. I have never felt anything.

Everyone who tries the Unequal talks about the low profile or slimming effect. I have the Small/Medium WVG, not TW retrofitted. As a matter of fact, @Majordave, I purchased the S/M size after reading your comments about it some years ago. Now I see you are using the Unequal. So, your comparison from the point of view of size would probably interest me. Also, I seem to be reading that while people feel nothing when hit using a WVG (I feel nothing, too), some say they feel it when hit using an Unequal and some say they get bruised and even hurt using an Unequal. Is the slimmer profife (if at all, compared to a S/M WVG) worth the potential pain? I am not likely to switch from the WVG. It has never failed me and is not large on me. My curiosity in the Unequal stems mainly from your switch, Majordave.

​Kudos to the mods! Another good reason to like U-E.

Actually --- and this will make an even bigger impression on your 12U players --- the correct call in your case is to call the batter out and send the runner back. So, the batter pays a heavy price.

Next time a coach tries to argue with me, I'm going to say, "Well, coach, that just shows your lack of perspicacity." @Tksjewelry I like your contributions to the forum. Keep up the good work! @Dbellyflop that's a shame that you know of umpires who refuse to join or have left. U-E is, to my mind, the best umpire site on the web. Ignore the bad responses...and there are not that many. I've seen much worse elsewhere. The helpful, useful information far far outweighs the junk. I tell all my umpire partners to look at U-E. Sometimes the conversation starts when they spot my 9.01(c) U-E sticker!

That bit of advice (pre-plan responses) is truly very important.​ Practice your responses like you probably practice your mechanics! That bit of advice alone will get you through a great deal of potential trouble and boost your confidence.

Wow, Warren! Sorry to hear about all that. While I have never accumulated such a tally of hits in one game, I certainly understand the issues with F2 letting balls go that pelt me. In one 11-12 year-old game, with a hard throwing F1 and nearly non-existent F2, I starting calling pitches from the "super super super slot," i.e., to the *left* of a RHB! I just watched where the ball passed F2, or hit him, and called it accordingly! And, I was once hit in the thigh during an 11U game on a Saturday, just a few days after I had been hit there in varsity HS game. Yeah, no picnic. After I walked it off for a bit, one of the coaches that had come out asked if I got hit in the boys, and if I was wearing a cup. That is how bad I reacted. I like the idea of considering belt buckles as protective gear. I hope you feel better as the day goes on.

I do 10U tournaments where leading and stealing are allowed and balks are called. I have seen many 10U pitchers perfectly able to avoid balking. But, I have also seen pitchers that have clearly not been instructed properly by their coaches, and these pitchers balk. In that case, it's the coach's fault. IMO, based on what I have seen, 10 year-olds are perfectly able to not balk. It does not require physical abilities they do not possess. Not balking is easier than running, as a physical skill, and they can all run without falling down. If leading and stealing are allowed, balks need to be called --- at least the more obvious balks. Otherwie the runners are at a disadvantage.

That all makes sense @maven.

What did happen eventually? F2 walked away and never reappeared in the scene. Meanwhile, near the end of the clip it appears F2's manager is out and talking with PU. The manager has his head down. I would not be shocked if the umpire simply told F2 you are done, and at the end he is explaining that to the manager.

​I don't know about that! I've seen kids swing that late! How about: when the ball's on the way back to F1?

I have used the GD stance, with my fingers around the sides of my knees, thumbs somewhat hiding under the shin guards. But lately I cup my inside hand under my thigh. I can get lower this way and my hands are better protected. I could not put my eyes at the top of the strike zone using GD, and I thought my upper zone was less consistent with GD. Now I find the upper zone much easier to gauge. And, I never worry about my hands being hit. @blue23ll I used to think locking in was a great feature of GD. But, in practice I am not having any issues with my inside hand behind my thigh. I suppose this is partly because the other hand, behind the catcher, is on my knee (but that arm is bent). I keep pretty still during the pitch in this stance. And, I set up with eyes at the top of the zone for each new batter. So, I have not felt there is a problem not locking my arms on my knees (as I used to do in GD). I guess it is impossible not to be locked in using GD, but it is possible to be locked in otherwise, with a little care using the hand/arm behind the catcher.

I don't think the rule needs changing. There are more than 100 years of wisdom from experience encapsulated in the rules of baseball. I can't say what the history is here, but I do think there is much wisdom in the ruling @maven is presenting. When a runner is securely stationed on a base and a fielder pushes the runner off the base and tags the runner, nobody would allow that. It's obviously in contradiction to the spirit of the game. But if a player overslides a base or falls off a base, he is in danger of being tagged out. The question is, where is the borderline between those two extremes. Contact must occur for a fielder to apply a tag. That contact is unavoidable, and cannot be removed from the game. That contact will certainly add to the difficulty of a runner keeping secure possession of a base. The borderline between an obviously unsportsmanlike push, and the runner falling off the base, must allow for some contact, and therefore force, applied by the fielder. The fielder must also be allowed to keep that force applied, as he must be allowed to continue to apply the tag if it looks like the runner might overslide or lose his control. In this particular replay I think both the fielder and the runner contributed to the result. The fielder did not have secure possession of the base. The fielder pushed on the runner's leg, as he must certainly do if he is applying a tag. Oops. He's out. In this 50-50 effort the scales tip to the defense, as is almost always the case.

Not difficult at all. I just thread the delta flex straps through the t-hooks in the same was as the original straps. But, the delta flex straps may not be as long, so you may need to add material to the flex straps to reach around your body. I did not, but the reach is body dependent. Others have discussed sewing additional lengths onto the delta flex straps. I have not done that. I recall they took the additional lengths from the original straps, and had their local tailor do the sewing.

I am neither an admin nor a moderator. So, as a plain old member I say: you need to be more respectful. Warren is doing a truly excellent job providing this website. There will be kinks due to changes​ of this magnitude. Go with the flow. Hang in there. I am sure the final result will be worth it. Thank you, Warren, for all you're doing. I really appreciate it.

I am not a professional umpire, but I stayed at a Holiday Inn Express last night... That said, here is what I have picked up from this U-E discussion, and a college umpire that has mentored me. Perhaps this will help explain the "no BU indicator" side. Someone has to keep the count, regardless of the presence of a scoreboard, or scoreboard operator skill. OBR 9.05(a)(2) says the PU must keep track of the count --- it's his job. (Fed? I'd have to look.) If you don't use an indicator on the bases, then you can watch all the subtle routines of the pitcher. Yes, if your indicator is notched, you can probably get away without looking at it. But many BUs I see with indicators are constantly looking at it between pitches. That sort of action concerns me. What happens if there is a balk or pick at the moment BU has his eyes on his indicator? And, with practice, you can keep the count in your head. It keeps you in the game. If there is a dispute, the PU's count is the official count (see the rules, again). In the games I work (e.g., HS and lower, even much lower), the pitchers are very creative in how --- and when --- they violate pitching rules. Often other action on the field is weird too. It is all I can do to keep track of all that on the bases, without having to (even occasionally) look at an indicator. If your association says you must use an indicator on the bases, then do so. What they say is what you must do. When my partner and I are going over the coveage before a game, and I am BU, I tell him that I don't keep an indicator on the bases and I give him the reason: so I can continually watch the pitcher and the ball, etc., so he can concentrate on his very complicated job. That way he has one less thing to worry about. I also ask if he gives the count often. Usually they do, or will do so since I am not "using an indicator." This keeps all the players and coaches from asking --- they see the count often. If the PU does flash the count often, that also alleviates my having to keep track in my head. If they don't, I keep it in my head. Regardless, I do keep the number of outs in my head, but we flash that to each other after each one anyway (usually, and I flash the number of outs to the PU if he does not). When a coach asks me the count (as happened last night), I simply say, "Make sure you ask him. His count is the official count." They promplty ask the PU, and never ask me again. They don't seem to get hung up on this, since I don't make a big deal of it (I say it in a non-confrontational tone). If a coach or player asks for the number of outs, I simply flash to him the number of fingers for outs. If a player wants to know the count, I pat my hat to get the PU to give the count. Bottom line: the BU has enough duties to take care of. Looking at an indicator is distracting from my job as BU. The PU has enough duties (including keeping the official count), so having a BU free to watch the ball and pitcher at all times is a great help for the PU.

Great suggestion! "Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime." Inviting your partner to Umpire-Empire.com is a great way to handle many issues. I usually explain how I've learned this or that from U-E and sneak in the bit I really want to get across (e.g., plate meeting etiquette), and make it sound like I'm not confronting him directly, but "....many much more knowledgeable umpires than me on U-E have disussed....". Usually my partner is happy to listen to this, since I go through a laundry list of interesting things I've picked up from U-E, and most umpires a looking to improve.

In a varsity HS game I had the other day I am on the plate. Catcher is somewhat large, and sometimes sets up near/on the inside part of the plate. Some of the batters are also crowding the plate. I'm doing my best to get some view while remaining in the slot. At some point as I am sweeping the plate before an inning starts I say to the catcher, "Jared, you're leaving me no view of the plate when you go inside on a batter crowding the plate. Let me get a look." He says, "Gotcha." But nothing changes. I tried telling him again, in a different way. He still made no adjustment. I could not get down and in enough on one batter to see the plate/glove (a technique I have been using lately). So, I moved back and up, and --- here is my mistake --- I leaned just a bit over so my head was above the catcher's head. Sure enough, a foul glances off the outside of my mask, twisting in on my head. It was not a direct hit and not a problem. But it made me think I was over-adjusting and setting myself up for possible injury. What should I have done? Start calling balls on pitches I could not see, then explain to the catcher why I had to do that? Talk with his coach? I am not putting myself in harms way again in such a situation. I will likely see this catcher again. How have you handled this situation? What were the reactions of the catcher/coach?

So, he was giving a constant "safe" signal?

6.1.1 says the pivot foot must touch the pitcher's plate. In the OP the heel of the pitcher's pivot foot is touching the pitcher's plate. Legal so far. 6.1.2 says the non-pivot foot shall be on or behind a line extending along the front edge of the pitcher's plate. In my reading of the OP the heal of the non-pivot foot is touching this line, and is therefore "on" this line. (And, yes the line is "tangent" to the heel.) So, I would say the pitcher's position is legal. Besides, in a practical sense this difference between having his non-pivot heel just slightly behind that line vs touching the line (as in the OP) is very slight. What advantage is the pitcher gaining? And, would you really want to make a "federal" case about it during a game?

Good luck Jocko!

Pictures would still be useful. Lots of people trying this positioning have commented that they are not sure they are doing it right. We may be trying as many variants of the "super slot" as there are people reporting on trying it here! One thing that is still very much a question in my mind is the head height. I put my eyes at the top of the strike zone when trying the "super slot," which put my chin *below* the top of the catcher's head in some cases. In other words not only was I more forward in the slot, I was lower (as has been suggested for when one gets squeezed). But, since I was farther forward than before, I had no problems viewing all of the zone, the plate, and the catcher's glove. Am I doing the "super slot" correctly? Maybe. Maybe not. But I was impressed with my view of things and results. And, I was definitely "in the catcher's business." Like I said before, it was almost like being the catcher.

Boom. You are gone. Both of you.

@StrikeToWin I am going to give you the benefit of the doubt here. Your EJ may not have been too quick. It is, as you said, a HTBT. And, as you said, other umpires on site agreed with you. They were there. And I disagree with some of the responses you have received. IMHO, the best responses you received were from @HokieUmp and @MPLSMatt. This player needed, at minimum, a very strong "That's enough!" And, that's at minimum. You do not have to converse with players about any call you make. I would certainly not answer any questions shouted by a player. Suggestions that you answer such a player, calmly or not, other than with "That's enough!" are incorrect, in my opinion. Then you are inviting other players and coaches to shout questions at you. Don't play along with that game. If players or coaches shout "ARE YOU KIDDING?" at you 43 times per game, you need to put a head on a pike. There is no need for you (or anyone else) to take that much abuse. (Ok, I know 43 times per game was an exaggeration. It was an exaggeration, right @blue23ll "? Maybe it was a joke.) The heads you put on pikes should be players or coaches. Ignore the fans. They don't exist, unless they enter the field or engage in actions that really threaten to interfere with or overly disturb the game, then talk to a coach or the site director. I disagree with those that suggest you should have ignored the shout, then turned and jogged or walked to C or anywhere else. If you did not eject F3, and the ball is still live and in the hand of F3, you should not turn your back on F3. What if R1 wandered off 1B and F3 tagged him after you turned your back? And, so, you are left facing a player --- a kid --- with the ball in his hand loudly shouting at you. You could not ignore it. Depending on the volume and ferocity of that shout you should either shut him down immediately with a strong "That's enough" or simply dump him. Do not let it bother you that the coaches got mad or talked about calling the TD. Coaches get mad all the time. That's perfectly fine. The coaches need to control their players. The TD should back you up.