Recontra

I agree as to everything above as to consistency and not having different pitching rules with and without runners. But how about this one, because it's arguably the same thing, and I've never seen it called: FED Rule 6, Art. 3 "For the set position, . . . He shall come to a complete and discernible stop. . . . Penalty: The ball is dead immediately when an illegal pitch occurs. If there is no runner, a ball is awarded the batter." Anybody calling an illegal pitch with no runners on, if pitcher in set position does not come to a complete and discernible stop? And if it's "overly officious" to call that (which is honestly why I never have, although I've seen a lot of technically illegal no stop pitches from the stretch with no runners on) how is that materially different from the OP? Serious question.

Thanks.

Count is 1-2 with one out. Batter gets yarded for drawing a line in the dirt (or any other reason). Does next batter come up with one out and a clean count, or is the offense required to substitute for the ejected player, and the substitute enters and assumes the count? If it's substitution, what if none are available? Record an out?

I never got that one, either, but hear it all the time: "Hey, the pitcher's wearing sunglasses, he can't do that!" Really? However, if they're mirrored or the sunlight is reflecting towards the plate, then I'll find them distracting and instruct they be removed (at least till the sun moves a bit)--and I might even have a little more ammo this year in FED, as mirrored helmets and face guards are expressly prohibited. But if the sun is pointing the other way, and the kid thinks he looks cool in his Oakleys (or if his mom has convinced him he's a cataract risk 50 years from now unless he wears them--yeah, right), then I don't get the objection. Clearly it ain't in the rulebook.

I don't mean to totally trash "up and back," because it still works for me most of the time for youth ball or even high school games with shorter batters, as long as I can basically see over the top of the batter. But you get a big senior jamming the plate and a big catcher setting up inside--that's a nightmare of a slotless experience that up and back sometimes can't improve and can even make worse. Another thing I picked up along the same lines, is if I'm going to give a distance on the outside of the plate for a strike, I endeavor to give almost the same distance inside. Some guys say they won't take the zone inside, but will give a ball to 1.5 outside. My limited experience has taught me that if you only go outside, by the 3rd inning the batters will have figured it out, they'll all be crowding the plate, and you'll find yourself working a "slotless" game and practicing your "I'm jammed" mechanics on almost every pitch. Just my limited experience.

T-Rav, thanks for resurrecting the thread--awesome stuff. Also, glad to see some upper level clinics and umpires here voicing approval of "down or down and in" when squeezed, instead of "up and back." I searched to no avail, but somebody last spring or summer posted a photo of a MLB umpire actually down on one knee when squeezed--eye opener for me--I'd never go down to a knee--but after I saw that photo, I did experiment last season with going down and even down and in when squeezed, and it worked great. Up and back sometimes results in me not being able to see the release point, OR I lose the ball as it crosses in front of the batter, praying I'll be able to pick it up again before somebody asks, "Was that a ball or a strike, Blue?" I once called a pitch when really jammed after going up and back (as I had been instructed to do) based solely upon where the catcher caught it. I honestly never saw the pitch--just the catcher's mitt when it was caught. I thought that was complete and utter horse$hit (even if I got the pitch right based upon nobody chipping). Down or even down and in is a much better visual compromise--sure you might lose sight of the outside edge catch, but you'll see more of the whole pitch. For me, the mental pain of the extreme anxiety I've felt in not being able to track a pitch is much worse than any brief physical pain I've ever felt after being hit by a pitch because I wasn't in the ideal slot position. Some experienced umpire once posted here, "do what you got to do to see the pitch." I took that to heart last season, and have never looked back. As one of my kids might say, "Up and back is for sucks!!" PS-don't forget to tip your head up a bit if you're going to go down--your face may naturally tilt toward the ground a bit exposing the top of your head slightly--skid marks on the top of the head can hurt for days. And I know, I've already heard it--if you use proper mechanics, you'll never get hit on the top of the head or the throat--just saying--I wear a throat guard because I occasionally might deviate from the standard, so be conscious of a forward head tilt if you do go down when jammed. And by "in" I mean towards the batter. If I set up traditionally in a jammed narrow slot, sometimes by dropping down (head below the top of the catcher's helmet), a visual slot opens up, and you can actually move toward the batter--"in."

(1) Great instructional clip. By not stepping and getting chest to ball, he lost the ball and didn't notice F-5 never gloved it and it was fielded deeper by F-6--and then turned away before the imaginary throw of the imaginary ball. There should be a comment to Evans' rule about anticipating all play possibilities but not their outcome--your health might depend upon it. There have been a couple of times where I've found myself in a throwing lane and had to dive--embarassing, but I've always been facing the fielder at the moment I realize I might be meeting my maker. In both "B" and "C" there's a spot they can hit it to F-6, and if I start the double play mechanic and F-6 changes his mind about throwing to 2nd, I could have an "Oh, $hit!" moment. Don't know if there's a way to eliminate even that very rare event--if there is, I'm all ears. (2) I believe the fashion crime was likely caused by not communicating days before leaving for the field, or even pre-gaming together away from the field. Almost everyone has at least one black and polo, and if not you'd think the association would have a default jersey that everyone is expected to have with them. And if you're new and only have one color, all the more reason to be communicating as soon as the assignment comes up on Arbiter or elsewhere.

This is off topic, but on topic in convoluted sort of way if the sub-heading to this thread is me struggling (and you all helping me) to become a better umpire. So, for the record, I owe Mr. Johnny08 a very public thank you, a very loud public apology, but mostly more thanks for telling me REPEATEDLY what I most needed to hear, even if it took me too long to finally hear it. And here's what my apology looks like: Me: "Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah." Johnny08: "No, everything after the 1st 'blah' was unnecessary, and even that, because somebody already said, 'blah.' " Me: "Yeah, but . . . blah, blah, blah, blah, blah." Johnny08: "Yeah, but nothing." Me: "Yeah, but . . . blah, blah, blah, blah, blah." Johnny08: "YEAH, BUT NOTHING!!" Me: (Eventually) "Holy crap, he was right, I was wrong--again!! God damn-it." Thank you, Brother. I needed that. I really did. It should come as no surprise that the one thing I need to work on the most in 2015 is my own mind. Hopefully you won't need a bigger hammer.

Out of profound deference and respect, I will of course give you the last word: The definition of foul tip just says that this isn't one. Exactly.

"I know I earlier said I was done talking about this subject, Coach, but . . ." Several days ago, after wrestling with the OBR's on the guest's question (even if you might find it shocking), I also came to the fairly rapid conclusion that: "Because, he's not out, it's a foul ball, that's just the way it is." That's also obviously the best answer for some really good umpires, and the only one needed. There are lots of rules in baseball like that. It's similar to: "that (or basically almost any) throw to 2nd base is not a balk, it's just not a balk, it's not a balk, it's never a balk, it never will be a balk, so stop over-complicating it by trying to figure out why it's not a balk, the only thing you need to worry about is just to remember it's not a balk and quit wasting time trying to figure out why it's not a balk." I also concur that FED has cleared up the rule in the ways mentioned above (I also always wondered why that particular definition of "line drive" was in the FED book but not the OBR's). I now read above that NCAA has clarified the rule. It may not be important to many umpires why both FED and NCAA modified their rules, just that they have. I'm happy for you if your brain doesn't work like mine. I tend to have to understand the whole before I can understand and forever remember the little pieces. Some people can easily remember all the little random pieces and that helps them comprehend the whole. While how I learn and how my brain works clearly aggravates some, I will say that once I finally understand and comprehend the whole, it's generally in my long term memory as tight as my name is. Then I really don't have to worry about remembering all the little pieces, because they're just the logical result of the whole. So get off my back!!

Matt: My bad. I was in the process of trying to fix the misquote of you, when you posted. Hopefully it's now corrected. Please don't sue me for libel, cuz I'm not insured for that. I agree with you on the rule book--the right answer "that we all just know" to this very, very simple play is actually (or at least arguably) the wrong answer according to the literal meaning of the words in the rule book. I also agree with Johnny 08 that I have used up a lot of bandwidth. I feel like apologizing, but I know that by wrestling with the rulebook on this "very, very simple play," I learned a hell of a lot.

I hear ya', brother, and I'm as guilty as charged. The OP asked why a batted ball that goes sharp and direct to the catcher's body or equipment and then is caught by the catcher is not a caught foul batted ball and thus an out. The guest asked, "I think it's a catch, batter out, ball is live, But others think it's just a foul and the ball is dead. Please advise who's correct." Even the guest acknowledges it's not a "foul tip." That's a no brainer. On our side, we all know it's a caught "foul ball," no out, and the ball is dead. That also is a black and white no brainer that even many sand lot rookies know. But the question I then struggled with was where in the rule book was that answer to be found? Agreed, it's a straight forward play. It's not a "foul tip." But that wasn't his question. His question essentially was, "why isn't that caught in flight batted foul ball by definition not a 'line drive' foul and thus an out?" Reading the rules and definitions literally, I saw why somebody might think that could be a reasonable literal interpretation of the rules. The answer is, "because it wasn't a 'fly ball.'" But that answer ain't expressly in the rulebook. In fact, the rule book arguably says something quite different. Sorry about wasting valuable bandwidth--I clearly wasted more than anyone. I'm done with the subject.

It took me a day, but I finally got it, and also think my explanation two posts above to our Aussie Guest is correct. "OBR 6.05 A batter is out when—(a) His fair or foul fly ball (other than a foul tip) is legally caught by a fielder." The OP batted ball was not a "foul fly ball" that could be caught by a fielder (the catcher) for an out. As an aside. The OBR official definition of "line drive" leaves something to be desired. Also, 6.05 doesn't say what happens if the batter's "line drive" is legally caught by a fielder, but that might be just one of those "that's just the way it is, get a grip, and deal with it" holes in the rule book.

Great example of a classy professional amateur umpire doing his job professionally and a classy professional amateur manager doing his job professionally. It ain't personal, it's just baseball--how it was meant to be played.

I can tell by the responses to the OP (how to reach this misguided college umpire) that you all are very experienced umpires with many years experience. I'm starting my 3rd year of high school ball, and I'd consider myself a reasonably intelligent person. I read the rules and the casebook more than once each year, I read what you guys say, I ask questions online, I ask questions at our association trainings, I ask questions pre and post game with more experienced partners, I buy rounds of scotch and beers for more experienced umpires so I can learn from them--that's a cheap clinic for me, even if it's good single malt. I go to at least two clinics a year (this past fall went to the Classic in Tucson--trust me, I spent a solid 3 figures buying J.E. and Mike and some of the other instructors Jack & Cokes and beers in the hotel bar--and it was some of the best umpire training money I've ever spent). But there's still times when I think I've got a rule or rules down, and then somebody pushes me on it to challenge me, and then I realize I knew a lot less than I thought (I'm continuing to learn how much I don't know and still have to learn). Happened just today on this site--some guest from Australia asked a question about why a batter wouldn't be out on a foul back. And I'm now left in my own mind with: "Because, he's not out--that's just the way it is." Sometimes, rookie boneheads like me get mental blocks. The rules are complicated, interrelated, and while many of them are interpreted literally, many aren't. Many rules aren't even in the book, yet we all know they're the rules of play. Giving this guy the benefit of the doubt (i.e. assuming he's not really an arrogant close minded ignorant prick--and a disrespectful one at that), it just never may have occurred to him how the "live ball" rule and the "balk rules" interplayed with each other--and I'd also suggest that for some new umpires (me included), it wouldn't naturally occur to us that if an umpire puts a ball in play that couldn't be put back into play yet under the rules, that's a misapplication of the rules, and not only that, but the ball was therefore never back in play. I'd suggest that's actually NOT a basic concept. I actually experienced something of a mental epiphany when I read that tonight. Helped me better understand the rules. Damn, I still don't know them all yet. As far as teaching and reaching misguided rookies (or those who have been misguided for years), everyone learns differently. If it were me, I'd probably look at you with a blank stare for a bit, and then say to myself, "Holy Crap!! He's right. I was wrong--again!! God damn'it!!" All of the suggested means of reaching the guy listed above sound great to me. I know I'd respond to each of them. And if he doesn't. Well, then you know what he's really all about.

I think my ultimate answer is right, but my explanation of why the batter is not out even though we have "a caught, dead, foul ball" is flawed or at least incomplete. So, please fasten your seat belt, Mr. Aussie Guest, because I need to call in the heavy hitters to straighten me out (won't be the first nor the last time that's necessary). "A FLY BALL is a batted ball that goes high in the air in flight."" "IN FLIGHT describes a batted, thrown, or pitched ball which has not yet touched the ground or some object other than a fielder." "a FOUL TIP is a batted ball that goes sharp and direct from the bat to the catcher’s hands and is legally caught." However, "a LINE DRIVE is a batted ball that goes sharp and direct from the bat to a fielder without touching the ground." "A FIELDER is any defensive player." "A CATCH is the act of a fielder in getting secure possession in his hand or glove of a ball in flight and firmly holding it." So, I confess after reading the above definitions, my explanation of why we have "a caught foul dead ball" but not an out, can't be quite right. Why your OP ball is not a "line drive" I can't really articulate. We appear to have a batted ball, given that a "foul tip" is a "batted ball" and had your OP ball first touched the catcher's hands or mitt, it would have been a "foul tip." So, I believe my stating the batter is not out, because the batted ball was neither a "fly ball" nor a "line drive" is wrong or at least misguided. Somebody please jump in here, before I start drinking again!!

My short answer to our guest (as short as my long-winded self is capable of being) is as follows: We don't have an out. We have a foul ball legally caught by the catcher, and the ball is dead. It was not a "foul tip," because while it went "sharp and direct" to the catcher, it did not first touch his mitt or his hands before it was eventually secured by him (legally caught) before touching the ground. It is not an out, because while it was a batted foul ball legally caught by the catcher before it touched the ground, it was not a "fly" foul ball. It also does not fit the definition of a "line drive" foul ball caught by a fielder (which would be an out). While there is some judgment and interpretation about what exactly constitutes a "fly" "foul ball" that can be secured and caught by the catcher for an out, my rule of thumb is that the batted ball must rise an appreciable distance above the bat on it's way to the catcher. Clearly if it goes above the batter's head, that's an out every time for me. However, sometimes a ball like that can spin upwards with a lot of English (below the batter's head) and many umpire's will still call that an out. But here the ball went "sharp and direct" to the catcher's body or equipment--that's not a "fly" foul ball that can be secured for an "out." I also confess there may be a more hard and fast rule on that. And if there is, I'm sure somebody like Maven will shortly pipe up and clear me and the Guest up.

I follow you, Maven, and you're not being dense. This is the "Ask the Umpire" section, and the "to whom" is our nice guest, who has asked a very good and legitimate question. He deserves a very good and legitimate answer, and Maven is just helping us frame our own inquiry in order that we give it to him, and possibly learn something ourselves in the process. We clearly don't have a foul tip (batted ball going sharp and direct from the bat to the catcher's body or equipment--and not his hands or glove--and first touched in foul territory--iow, the batted ball doesn't rise any appreciable distance above the bat and is also not a "foul fly ball.") If it's not a "foul tip" after it's secured by the catcher (rebound or not--say he trapped it against his body with his mitt and pulled it out with his other hand--that's a catch, and the ball didn't rebound anywhere). Our guest asks, why isn't that an out? The catcher just caught a foul ball in flight and it's not a foul tip. And if your answer is, "because it wasn't a "fly" foul ball, then how come it's an out when the 3rd baseman catches a line drive in foul territory--that ball went straight as an arrow ("sharp and direct") to the third baseman's mitt? I think it's a great question--and I see Mr. Maven socratically leading the discussion.

I adopt and applaud everything my esteemed collegue, Mr. Grayhawk has stated on the subject. Hustle--It's like being a "tip slut" at a restaurant--you might be slammed, and half your co-workers bailed on the Friday night shift, and people might be getting really slow service despite your hustle, but if they see you busting your ass, breaking a sweat, and panting a bit--they'll usually not yell at you and will acknowledge they know it's not your fault. They'll also usually still leave a nice tip. Pick-offs at 1st--PU has a better angle and distance than the Manager standing in the 3rd base box or in the far dugout--and he's the one going to be arguing that he had a better angle and distance. Pullease!! Make the call in your mind, stick to it, and then announce it, and then stick to it. Pick-offs at 3rd--With a right handed pitcher, these happen so fast, there's no time to even slide step to increase the angle. Don't rush the call or the signalling mechanic unless it's obvious. You can process what you saw while walking out towards the mound a bit, and then when you make the call and announce it, it kinda looks like you hustled out there and are making the call with a little better angle and distance. Besides that, it looks like you hustled. They were all watching the play, not the umpire. Throw-backs to 3rd--Don't tell them not to do it, and likewise don't knee jerk "safe" the play. There's time to get at least a slightly better angle (not distance). I pivot or slide step toward 1st base. Again, no rush, if you need to process, take a couple of brisk steps towards the shortstop. Not calling time when you turn to run back to the plate from the working area or to clean the plate--I believe Grayhawk and others have this one right (unless your association of course says otherwise). I originally had a more veteran umpire tell me that's what he did and announced at the plate talk. Later, some of my online forum mentors straightened me out. How long does it take to signal time before you run back to the plate and to say, "Play!" If you think there's automatic time everytime you clean the plate, how much time are you really saving, instead of calling time! cleaning the plate, and then putting the ball back into play. Couple of seconds? So, my solo game theoretically might last 20 seconds longer than yours? If there's automatic "time!" just when is the ball back in play? Do we have automatic "Play!" after the automatic "Time!" But I confess that I, too, originally thought this sounded like a cool thing to do. Way, way uncool.

I have this sneaking suspicion, Tks, that despite your size 5's, every player, manager, or coach who has ever come after you has walked away from the encounter feeling like they just got their asses whupped by some serious size 13's.

Jackie Robinson West visited the White House and smiled with the Obamas, Al Sharpton gave them an A+ on national television, they bear the name sake of #42, together with Monet Davis they were the media darlings of the Little League World Series, they helped make the Little League World Series one of the most relevant sporting events of 2014, they are an emblematic symbol of hope and success for the inner city, whether the players were from an inner city or not, their coaches were class acts from start to finish, they and Monet Davis will be responsible for pumping millions of future corporate dollars into Little League and the LLWS, the players themselves played and conducted themselves with honor and distinction. They made the nation root and cheer and watch. Lance Armstrong, Barry Bonds, Tiger Woods? Not in a million years. Nothing to see here, Folks, move it along.

BU was clicking his clicker-thingy in B and didn't hear either one of them.

Can't say about NCAA, but under OBR, I believe the answer would be "D." Batter reached 1st on a hit batter, but R-2 did not also advance at least one base. Balk, ball retroactively dead at the moment of the infraction, what happened after the ball became dead is disregarded. "PENALTY: The ball is dead, and each runner shall advance one base without lia- bility to be put out, unless the batter reaches first on a hit, an error, a base on balls, a hit batter, or otherwise, and all other runners advance at least one base, in which case the play proceeds without reference to the balk."

I saw loads of missed bases last season (a few game changers/enders), and not one appeal. Don't know why coaches don't tell the boys on the bench that their job is to confirm every base is touched (to keep them engaged), but they don't. Nevertheless, if I've got a missed 1st base on a home run w/ a proper appeal, there's no way I'm not banging that out. In fact, my mechanics dictate that the BU pivot in from "A" and show that I'm watching every touch. I spend a lot of diligent dedicated time watching base touches. I don't care if it was just the 1st base coach and me who saw it. He was doing his job. I'm going to do mine. The BR didn't do his. Not my problem. I do have one question though. In FED, why couldn't the head coach make a dead ball appeal of the BR missing 1st base as soon as he's touched 2nd? The ball is dead as soon as it goes over the fence. BR rounds 2nd, DM says, "He missed 1st base, we're appealing the missed base." Why isn't that a proper appeal under FED rules? Seems like you'd actually be reducing the amount of post-play discussion, not increasing it. And if BR then retouches 2nd and 1st and goes home, are you saying there hasn't been a valid dead ball appeal of the missed base, so the skipper needs to appeal again? That doesn't seem right. Of course in baseball, a lot of stuff that seems wrong is right.

There can be no effective risk management until the existence of a risk is acknowledged, as well as the threat the risk poses. Not all risks can be eliminated entirely. It is what it is. Many of us are [as a practical matter] forced to change in our vehicles and get geared up in the parking lot. The risk cannot be eliminated. We just need to be aware of the risk and the threat it poses to us and our associations. That's all. I appreciated Tksjewelry's posts on the subject. I saw the issue from an even different perspective. That will help me further at practicing effective risk management. I was once contacted by an employer who had decided to fire a worthless employee who happened to be a member of a protected class (because of either race, religion, sex, sexual orientation, disability, etc.). The employer didn't call for permission. He had already made the business and economic decision to terminate the employee. He just recognized that whenever an employee who belongs to a presumtively protected class is terminated, there is always the risk that employee will sue for unlawful employment discrimination. He just wanted to know if he could do anything else to further minimize and manage that risk. Same kind of deal here. There's a risk. Acknowledge it. Manage it. And then go have fun.