Recontra

According to the Evans/Nelson Maximizing Manual, a recognized secondary duty of the PU is to watch out for and call any obstruction or interference that the BU may have missed. If BU doesn't point and make a call or give a "that's nothing" call after a collision which results in both players on the ground, then I've got to assume BU either didn't see it or didn't see enough of it to know whether the fielder actually obstructed or was still in the motion/momentum of trying to field a ball that has now passed by, so at that point, if I'm PU, I need to step in and make a call (if I got one) or a "that's nothing" safe mechanic if it were just a train wreck--then it's my call for a coach to challenge. If neither umpire makes a call after two players end up on the ground, and a coach comes out (guaranteed one or both will be coming out), optically it's probably a good time for the umpires to get together and speak with one voice (as opposed to having successive conversations with the coach). Just my two cents.

(1) I agree with the comments on asking to see the ball. It's my job to see the ball. If I'm not sure there's secure possession or the ball might be on the ground hidden by the tangle or a cloud of dust, I'll start moving. The coach (and good players) will know what the deal is, and low and behold, I'll hear a coach yell, "Show him the ball!" Or I'll just wait till I can see it. I'd never ask a player to show me a live ball. (2) Each game and play is different. But if there's a weird tag play, like on the helmet as the runner slides in feet first, or on the cleats as the runner slides head first, or a tag on the chest on a BR at first, I think it's perfectly ok to either verbalize or touch your head (or the appropriate body part) with a "He got him, on the foot, he's out!" For me, it can spare me a conversation or make any one that happens much quicker. I also respect anyone who says they'd never do that. (3) R-1 beats the throw and tag at second, but loses momentary contact with the bag, I know the two players and I might be the only ones in the yard who saw that. I think it's fine to give an "Out! . . . he's off the bag (motion like we do when F-3 is off the bag), he's out!" I know that's not in any mechanics book, but I honestly did it last week in a very high level game, and OHC never said a word--and he's notoriously wordy 🙂 (4) I look at a double safe mechanic just like a huge bang out on a very close play. Sometimes they're appropriate, and like Thunderheads said, sometimes it just comes out! 🙂 Our job is to communicate our calls, but also (if appropriate) let everyone know what we saw. I've drilled the Basic Six repeatedly for hours many a weekend and weeks. Sometimes the Basic 6 just don't communicate the call we need to make. A big punchout isn't in any accepted Umpire Mechanics book. But we all know what it is, why it's necessary, and when to use it. And I say this, being a guy who actually doesn't like to see excessive signalling mechanics when it's not necessary by base umpires. While less is often more, sometimes more is exactly what the play and call require.

Going to watch other great crews and umpires work was something I routinely did my first few years if I had no game, a cancellation or even a rain-out when I knew other local fields (turf) would be playable. I still do it! And if you show up early, they'll probably let you be a fly on the wall of their pregame and post-game in the parking lot or locker room. You do that a few times, and you just might find some of those veteran umpires requesting games with you from the assignor. Guaranteed you'll learn loads and become a better umpire by just watching one game.

I reiterate, because I do basically the same thing as Thunderheads suggests: Hand or hands up, "Time! . . . Step off! . . . Let the batter get set." Not saying that's gospel mechanics, but it works for me. And invariably, once done, I'll never have an issue with quick pitching from anybody for the rest of the game.

Personally, I don't like the LL mechanic where the PU goes 1st baseline extended. I prefer to point to the right up the 1st baseline, give an audible unless everyone is already shouting it, clear the catcher to the right and move a couple steps toward 1st base. This puts me in perfect position to (actually) see any tag on the BR's backside as he's running toward 1st. If I move 1st baseline extended (like the LL video), I'm straight lined on any tag and might be just guessing that it looked like there was a tag. Then once BR has cleared the plate area, eyes go toward possible running lane interference, and I'll often move back to or toward the line (staying out of the catcher's way). Moving toward 1st lets me actually see any tag. Just my two cents picked up from a great partner.

I can't wait to start awarding balls to the batter next season: "Illegal pitch! Time, that's an illegal pitch! Failure to lean!" "Illegal pitch! Time, that's an illegal pitch! Yes, he leaned, but he did not pretend to receive a sign from the catcher when he did so!" Of course, if NFHS publishes approved signalling and audible mechanics for those calls, I'll certainly utilize those with zeal! There's already a Quick Pitch Rule. Why not simply make that a point of emphasis? If quick pitching is an issue in some states, just reiterate and emphasize that rule. It already prohibits the harm this new rule is trying to address. Or, even add a section to 2.0 and define exactly what a quick pitch is and isn't. This seems silly to me.

(1) The Wilson Platinum or Gold will virtually eliminate the coverage problem, but you won't be running as fast or as agiley down the line--I originally got the Golds years ago, because they were bullet proof, but quickly bequeathed them because I felt like Gumby or a Transformer running anywhere; (2) I have the F-3's and yes I occasionally got nailed in the side ankle bones of my right foot, and every time, it was because my foot was turned at an angle behind the catcher--so it was my improper mechanics that was causing the pain, not the equipment. So, here's what I did this year to fix the problem: I went back to the "heal--toe" stance that I first learned at a LL weekend clinic that was championed by Jim Evans (except I hide my hands behind my thighs when I drop). I initially had to check my stance a few times by looking down during the game. Turns out over the years I got lazy with the "heal-toe" and had more of a box stance, and as my lower back got stiffer and my knees sorer over the years, I started flaying that foot that's behind the catcher. I can go "heal-toe" narrower than my boxier stance, and still keep both of my feet (and my shin guards) pointed at the pitcher; (3) After making that change, I stopped getting occasionally nailed in the ankle. Got nailed a couple of weeks ago, though. I looked down, sure enough, my foot was flayed outward, and I wasn't in a heal-toe configuration. (4) I've actually found the heal-toe foot alignment with a narrower stance is much easier on both my knees and my lower back--and I can always drop down low without effort or strain. I also don't have to adjust my feet as I drop--and if I ever feel myself needing to adjust a foot as I drop down, it's always for the same reason: I'm less than heal-toe.

As Maven points out, it's all about feinting a throw to 1st base to protect the runner at 1st base, it has nothing to do with the dominant throwing hand of the pitcher. A right handed pitcher can fake to 3rd just like a left handed pitcher can. The rules are not discriminatory. The balk rules are there to protect runners, and runners at 1st are much more likely to be trying to steal the next base than runners at 3rd or 2nd, and are much more likely to be taking a bigger lead. Repeated game-delaying feints to 1st may also be a part of this particular balk rule. I tried to find the historical basis for preventing a feint to 1st, and I couldn't find anything. Could be like so many of the other balk rules, that it's been so long since pitchers have been allowed to do certain prohibited things, that we've all forgotten the deception/trick that the rule prevents--like dropping the ball while engaged--we all have just automatically balked that all our lives, that we've never actually seen the deception that would happen if it were permitted.

Last Friday, batter squares to bunt, and pitch is right at him in the box, pitch hits him in the chest. I'm blocked behind the plate. I immediately jumped out to my partner in "C," "Did he go?" "No!" "Then that's a hit batter!" So much for not checking with your partner on bunt attempts or when he's in "C."

I will always work happily with any mobility issues a willing, dedicated, and reliable partner might have due to bad knees, hips, lower back, or just plain old age, or even simply being young and inexperienced. Some of my favorite partners over the years have been older veterans who I knew couldn't get up to 3rd from the plate (I just didn't go out or rimmed on trouble balls and they'd have my touch and throw back at 1st), or who I knew couldn't get to 3rd from A. I always learned a lot from those guys (they usually had the most perfect angle possible on any play--however far away they were). Can't remember any play we kicked, but I can remember getting a better work out than other games, which was always good for me. I also remember the fun, and learning what they had to share. Some eventually got new knees or a new hip! But stress the "willing, dedicated, and reliable" part. Even inexperienced is fine. Big difference between physical limitations, and laziness or ineptitude. The latter two having no place on a ball field.

High inside pitches are often tough to see offers on. Catcher or HC should have asked for an appeal. Here your tracking of the pitch took the bat completely out of your field of view. Could you have sua sponte gone to your partner for help when you heard something weird must have happened? Sure. Is it your fault you didn't? Nope.

I think you also could have been arguably correct if only one strike were called. This batter did not request time and then step out. The batter has an obligation to not interfere with the catcher and the play at the plate, and if the PU judged the batter was conceding the strike and leaving the box to get out of the catcher's way, I think an argument could be made there is no second penalty strike--the batter was not trying to cause unnecessary delay or disconcert the pitcher, he was doing what he was supposed to do--not interfere with the catcher's attempt to retire R-3. The purpose of this Rule is not to require batters to stay in the box motionless when R-3 is stealing home on the pitch, or to prevent runners from stealing home with one strike and 2 outs. The purpose of the Rule is to prevent batters from delaying the game or disconcerting the pitcher. I would not have a strike-out on this play, and I'd score the run. The pitch is a strike as long as it reaches the plate.

Another good reason to pre-game this is it often avoids conflict or protracted conversations. I prefer the PU and BU both call these instantly, who cares if both umpires call, "Time!" simulaneously?? BU isn't stepping on PU's toes--just like a balk. Also, Time! is the correct call for the BU, not Foul!. It's PU's job to determine if the dead ball is foul or whether the batter might be out. Then, if it allegedly happens again later in the game and neither umpire calls it, it's a quick conversation with the offensive HC: "Sorry, but neither of us have a batted ball touching the batter." "Can you go check with your partner?" "I don't need to. We pregamed this and you saw him call it earlier in the game, if he would have seen it, he would have called it right away." Pretty much end of the conversation.

One of the things I'm working on again this year is taking a longer read step with balls hit to right field while I'm in A. There's actually lots of time to read the quality of the hit, as well as the right fielder. I used to just come charging in pretty quickly, or making the decision to come in or go out too quickly (probably still do that too quickly too often--I'm a work in progress :-). An old timer once told me to "count" my steps to slow down, and once I figured out what he meant, that helped. I've had this exact play you describe, and it's always nerve racking if I just come charging in and pivot--possible throw from F-9 coming from behind me that I can't see--situation fairly common in youth ball games, much less common when F-9 playing deeper. For me, my past mistake in this situation was that I didn't take the time to properly read the hit and the fielders before deciding to bust in. If I pivot on my right foot and put my left foot also on the foul line facing the field and "Stop", it's amazing how much I'll see (trouble, routine, being pressured/being pushed as others above refer to it), and it's also amazing how much time I actually have to do that. If I read a short bounding ball to F-9 and he's charging in, I'll know there's a reasonable chance of a throw to 1st, and a very low chance of a double (BR only going to second if there's an overthrow--in which case there's plenty of time to get to the working area or even into the cutout at 2nd). So, from A, I run towards the 1st base dugout to get the best angle and distance in foul territory that the play allows for a throw to 1st--but not so foul that I can't get to 2nd. If I do that, the call is easy peezy. BR is not going anywhere--the anticipated "play" will be at 1st or there won't be one.

Batter better have CLEARLY offered at the pitch (no question in anyone's mind) before I'd overrule my partner behind the plate on that one, especially since it's CLEARLY an inexperienced or rookie plate umpire, made no audible call on the check swing, and didn't come up quick for appeal to partner. That should be an automatic. We ALWAYS pregame check swings, even if it's a partner I regularly work with, helps remind me to always make an audible call and come out quick to my partner on the bases with two strikes: "I'll always try to make an audible call on check swings (i.e. No, he did not go!), but if the catcher asks me to appeal, I probably will even if I'm confident, so give me what you got. With 2 strikes I'll come quick to you if the pitch is dropped and it's even close to an offer." I appreciate there's a newer "trend" to have the PU not make an audible on a no-go, and just let the catcher appeal. Until I get a written memo on that, I ain't doing it!

Great thread, thanks for posting, agdz! If you did 12 games in 90 degree sun over the 3 days, and that's the only time you and a partner got jammed up, I'd say you had a kick-ass umpiring weekend!! I remember those Memorial Day tourneys in the heat. By the last game on Monday, muscles all over my body were spasming with cramps, my eyes were burning, my knees were swelling, I almost felt like crying, was praying for a 10 after 5, and I couldn't wait to get to the nearest grocery store to chug an entire jar of pickle juice 😀. I simply can't do that any more. But what fun they were, what great friends I made!! How my umpiring skills improved! I do agree as to the above advice from the UE Masters: Pregame by PU to BU: "You've got all fly balls to the outfield, unless I call you off."

One way of looking at this that might help some (but perhaps confuse as many) is that technically, a "force out" is an out on a runner who was "forced" to advance because of the batter becoming a runner. The batter is not "forced" to run to 1st. He's just out if: "(10) After a third strike or after he hits a fair ball, he or first base is tagged before he touches first base." Other runners are out if: "(6) He or the next base is tagged before he touches the next base, after he has been forced to advance by reason of the batter becoming a runner." The distinction between a "force out" and an out on the batter runner is also memorialized in the Scoring Rule: "EXCEPTION: A run is not scored if the runner advances to home base during a play in which the third out is made (1) by the batter-runner before he touches first base; (2) by any runner being forced out; or (3) by a preceding runner who is declared out because he failed to touch one of the bases." The Rules don't say that no run scores if any runner including the batter runner is "forced out." Some might think this is a distinction without meaning, but it helps me remember lots of rules, not just the scoring rule, but others that provide that all runners advance only if forced--umpire interference, for example, or runner interference with a batted ball. The batter-runner is not forced to first, he just needs to get there before he or the bag is tagged.

The Batter Runner is out for abandonment. Once he attains 1st base safely, he's then a regular runner and is out if the umpire judges that he abandoned his effort to run the bases. Before reaching 1st base (say on a dropped 3rd strike), the Batter Runner has until he's entered the dugout or dead ball territory to correct his mistake and run to 1st. 8-4-2-P: A runner is out when: . . . after at least touching first base, leaves the baseline, obviously abandoning his effort to touch the next base; or NOTE: Any runner, after reaching first base, who leaves the baseline heading for the dugout or his defensive position believing that there is no further play, shall be declared out if the umpire judges the act of the runner to be considered abandoning his efforts to run the bases. Contrast this rule regarding "base runners" with the batter runner before reaching 1st base. 8-4-1-i: A batter runner is out when: . . . on a dropped third strike, he gives up by entering the bench or dugout area, or with two outs he does not attempt to reach first base before all infielders leave the diamond at the end of the half-inning;

Here's the $75 question: What are you going to do about it? I've had this happen once. I stepped back to the point of the plate. Both teams ran out to line up and exchange "good games." Both teams think the game is over. And that was good enough for me. As soon as I heard the first "good game!" I walked off the field with my partner.

This might be hypertechnical, but if his first movement is to step forward with his pivot foot and engage the pitcher's plate, then I'd be inclined to not find anything illegal about that. There is no requirement that he stand motionless in a "windup position" for any length of time. In my mind, as soon as he steps onto the plate, he may begin his pitching motion--ruling that he assumed the windup position as soon as he stepped onto the plate. If, however, he's making any other movement associated with the pitch as he's stepping forward and engaging the plate, then that'd be illegal. Why would anyone do that? Youth ball. Kids do all sorts of stuff--just because it looks weird and makes no athletic sense doesn't mean it's illegal. Young kids often try to emulate experienced players they've seen, except they get it a bit wrong trying to embody the movement they see on t.v. A lot of youth coaches are dads who stepped forward, not experienced coaches. If a kid can get the ball over the plate with regularity, the coach himself might not be competent to fix the aberration. And if I'm wrong, someone who knows more than me will hopefully chime in.

There's nothing religious about the gold chain. If they want to take their religious medal off the chain and tape the medal to their body, they can. The Rule specifically permits this. The Rule does not permit gold chains, just as long as there's a crucifix dangling from it. Non-religious players have the same constitutional rights in a public school game as devout evangelicals. Gold chains are jewelry and are prohibited by Rule. The Rule does not reference religious "jewelry." It references only religious medals. Personally, I'd be much more concerned about a lawsuit for permitting a Christian to wear a gold necklace as long as it also has a tiny crucifix dangling from it, while making the poor atheist young man remove his identical gold necklace. That would be patently unlawful (for those who might be fearful of lawsuits)! And you can collect money for discriminating against atheists a lot easier than you could if a kid got scratched by a gold chain during a collision. I personally think the jewelry rule is dumb. But I also think the Covid mask rule is dumb--the chance of a pitcher, left fielder, center fielder, or right fielder catching or spreading Covid-19 is darn near close to Zero. The chance of a player being injured or injuring another from a thin gold necklace is pretty close to Zero. But the Rules are there. I think the stress and tension come because some umpires in some games think the jewelry and Covid mask Rules are dumb and don't enforce them, and then the crew in the next game takes hell for enforcing the rules. Half the Head Coaches I see are wearing a gold chain. It's what the college and pro guys do. They should just get rid of the rule--but then, even though they say it's because of "risk avoidance," I bet the real reason is that some schools from some parts of town will have lots of pretty gold bling, and the kids from across the railroad tracks can't afford any bling. And if that's the real reason, then I can certainly get behind that, because that would become a true real-life issue. I'm all for getting rid of the jewelry rule. Most of these kids keep their jewelry in their equipment bag--and they put it on only for the game.

Most youth baseball organizations and at least our state high school association have Code of Conduct policies that apply to players, coaches, and fans at all sporting events. In my State, it goes even one step further. A fan who has been asked to leave for violating an established sports league or organization's Code of Conduct commits criminal trespass if they don't leave the field, stands, or complex. And those league or organization policies typically apply specifically to unacceptable language--and I'd think recorded words coming out of a speaker are controlled by whoever hit the "play" button. I'm not disagreeing with the general principle that umpires should leave ultimate parent and crowd control to the TD's, coaches, AD's, or site administrators. I do disagree that coaches and officials have no authority over the fans, or that what happens on the other side of the fence is not our problem. Solving the problem (eliminating the source of the abusive or profane language) is not limited to an umpire shouting at the person and yarding them (seldom does much to de-escalate a situation). I know there are many umpires (on this site) who might vehemently disagree with me. I also know that we have a suffocating and exhausting shortage of paid and volunteer officials in baseball. I apologize, but if I'm working a youth game with minimal league oversite and maybe even coaches scared of the person causing the problem, I'm not going to leave the problem for a 1st year nervous colleague to have to deal with next week as well, and possibly lose a good future umpire. It's situation management. We need to manage the situation, because we're in charge of the game. We're amateur umpires, but we're professional situation managers! We got lots of tools at our disposal: The Rules of Play, accepted umpire mechanics, head coaches, tournament directors (if there's one even there), site administrators (if there's one even there), AD's (if there's one even there), a member of the LL Board (if there's one even there), League Code of Conduct policies (which we should all know, because we've hopefully read them), State law, etc. If all else fails, we can simply stop the game till the problem is resolved. Acknowledge the problem. Talk nicely to someone about the problem and the need to eliminate it. Go from there.

And our 1/2 hour post game was nothing but giggles about our game, about what I did, about what he did, about what we did, and what the players and coaches did. God, I love this game, . . . and us!!

This is my game report for today’s game. We don’t do reports unless something significant happens. Something significant did. I got to work with a retired 70-something partner who has knee issues, but who I’d honestly choose if my life were on the line over Joe West. Score was 15-5 after 6: ”Working a game with _____ is like working a game with myself as a partner. Effortless. I know exactly where he’ll be and why. I know exactly where he physically can’t be and why. And between us, we always seem to get it right, even if we have to get together to get it right. ___ might not always have distance, but he ALWAYS has the most beautiful angle geometry allows. We both got to the field an hour early. We both had intel on the teams and coaches. We discussed dbl play mechanics, because the ________ field has a high probability of a thrown ball going OB at 1st (happened 3 times in our game). After that our pregame was 100% complete, giving us time to catch up. Working a game with _____ is joy. And that’s my game report. Oh, and the (Losing) coach gave me a Covid hug in the 6th. :-)” True story

"In the end R1 thinking he was out before the PU called him out assumed he was out and ran into the dugout So he’s out for abandonment." R-1 is not out for abandonment. He did not abandon anything. He was wrongly called out by the umpire and left the field of play after being called out (that's what runners are supposed to do after being called out). If the error in calling him out is caught after an umpire conference or after the HC complains, he should be returned to the base he occupied at the the time he was wrongly called out. But he's not out a second time for complying with the initial ruling on the field.