Jump to content

MadMax

Established Member
  • Posts

    4,573
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    260

MadMax last won the day on January 28

MadMax had the most liked content!

About MadMax

  • Birthday 06/13/1975

Profile Information

  • Location
    Everywhere & Anywhere, USA
  • Interests
    Rally racing, Snowboarding (instructor / tech / barnstormer), Soccer (still play it), Hockey (working toward being a linesman), Baseball (umpiring, obviously), Architecture, Restorations

More information about you

  • Your Association Name
    the Vultures
  • Occupation
    Designer / Fabricator
  • Types/Levels of Baseball called
    U18 – NFHS, mNFHS, mOBR; NCAA / NAIA; MiLB -level; Independent Pro / College Summer
  • How did you hear about Umpire-Empire?
    ABUA (umpire.org)

Recent Profile Visitors

36,636 profile views

MadMax's Achievements

4.6k

Reputation

9

Community Answers

  1. While @noumpere’s insight is the most valid and applicable, I think it warrants pointing out that you, too, noticed something untoward that could have happened. And in the context of a scrimmage, it shouldn’t (officially) escalate; or, more to the point, any escalation shouldn’t require an Official (big O) ruling / adjudication / penalty, et.al. However, this was a college scrimmage, and in a college game (actual sanctioned game), that sort of “forced or initiated contact” is just the spark 🧨 to set off a full-blown fight. And, if the act itself doesn’t spark it off, it’s often the tense engagement or ill tidings that rapidly boil up if the act isn’t called / addressed / penalized. TPTB steering College baseball are hyper-aware of how tribal and tense college baseball has become, and while they don’t want competition squelched out (notably by us, the umpires), they want us to not only be aware of it, but cognizant of it. If alarm bells 🔔 and warning lights 🚨 were lighting up your board, which it sounds like it did, then good on ya.
  2. As always, context. Context is key. Then you mentioned “intrasquad”, which makes it all (relatively) friendly-fire. Permit me this aside – I wish that each of you serious about umpiring would get or take the opportunity to work a MLB/MiLB spring training intrasquad “game”. Our responsibilities (as umpires) are pared down to the core fundamentals – Bs & Ks, Fair-Foul, Catch-No Catch, Safe-Out. The rest of the game basically calls itself. Obviously, you call stuff that is… blatantly obvious (and in that, you don’t have to showboat or sell the call). But these guys aren’t trying to take each other out, and they’re not trying to cheat (yet). Even on those pitching sessions that we work solo on (no baserunners, or no outfielders needed), check swing appeals are (comically) appealed to either hitting or pitching coaches, and it becomes kangaroo court. So we PUs are encouraged not to “grab” those swings. You can much more easily focus on tracking the pitch. So within the context of a scrimmage, especially an intrasquad one, there shouldn’t be any cause of conflict-needing-officiating. There shouldn’t be any malicious contact, there shouldn’t be any yelling matches, and there shouldn’t be any ejections. As such, if anything tends that way, it’s best to reserve from over-officiating, and letting the coach coach. It is perfectly acceptable and most effective – in this context – to tell the coach, “During the regular season (or, an actual game), that would likely be a malicious contact call.” I once was conducting a scrimmage (solo) for a D-1 school wherein the catcher for the maroon team (starters) was at bat, with R1 stealing, and swung thru and stepped out over the plate. Easy, easy BI call. Gold (reserves) catcher’s throw goes into CF. So I called INT (BI), sent the R1 back, and explained that the batter would be Out. Coach elected to keep the batter up there, requested that I explain to maroon catcher (batter) what it is I saw to judge BI, and we continue the at-bat. I think you handled the play, situation, and aftermath fine… for the context. Perhaps you might have framed it to “in an actual game” instead of “another umpire might/would”.
  3. Up for sale is a Force3 Defender V1 Helmet-Mask, in black, with black cage. Clean, intact, and ready to use. Even the V1 is better than most of the other HSMs-for-umpires on the market. The Force3 Mask cinch-bag is included. $100 OBO, with shipping determined by quote-to-ZIPcode. I currently have 2 of these in stock – 1 in AZ, 1 in WI. PM with inquiries.
  4. This one’s a showstopper. Much like its Convertible sibling, the SoftShell is cut and styled sleek and trim. There isn’t all this additional, superfluous material in the shoulders, under the pits, or down the flanks. It doesn’t have this long drooping, drop tail. It’s almost as if, this jacket is not intended for the plate! Instead, it’s styled so well to be the ultimate base jacket, that it could – provided it’s not over-embellished – also go out and blend-in off the field. The only distinguishing mark is the same-color silicone branding mark on the forearm. Otherwise, this looks like any other Marmot, The North Face, Columbia, or LL Bean “urban” softshell jacket, and therein lies its strength. I will continue to advocate for patches to be removable and attachable via magnets and Velcro, instead of embroidery or adhesives, so as to truly make a jacket like this versatile to be used on field in any game, regardless the level or association.
  5. It looks great! Like it’s never been used! … … … probably because it should not ever be used. Oof.
  6. … and it is complicated by restrictions and penalties, instead of latitude… which ya’d think is what a double-base is literally, physically, metaphorically, and figuratively creating. Automatic out?? For this?? What would have been the call had the BR stepped over both bags, without touching either one? Madness.
  7. Whoa, whoa, whoa. … 😳… you got paid??? Well, there goes the narrative that the only way to progress in LL is to volunteer!
  8. Having owned a “General Issue” Majestic convertible – famously / notoriously (eh, @Stk004?) – you’re dead-on correct. From the moment I opened the package, the GDS BX Convertible is the right choice. Thin-yet-tough ripstop fabric allows this thing to be the proper weight for the conditions, yet maintain the ever-important breathability. This alone would utterly trounce the Smitty “trash bag”, but it doesn’t stop there, because it is so well-cut and styled, it’s a very flattering shape. It’s not cavernous through the shoulders, it doesn’t have great flaps of material hanging off the arms, and it doesn’t have this draping tail to it. In fact, because it doesn’t have a bulbous, draping tail, it doesn’t need an elastic gather cord – it simply has two flanking split-zips at the hips. The Majestic was this good, but the Smitty that “copied it” is that… woeful. The GDS BX also has thumb loops on the sleeves, a very sleek collar, and a vertical chest-zipped pocket… like a jacket should, not a horizontally-arranged pocket which is awkward to access. I mean, a vertically-arranged pocket? Chapstick, gum, cough lozenges… those sort of things a BU needs! Those horizontally-arranged pockets are a holdover from putting lineup cards and folded up papers or a kerchief into… and that’s a PU’s domain. When or why would you ever wear a convertible jacket on the Plate?!?! 😲🫨😬🤨 Do note, I said I had a GI Majestic convertible – past tense. Yup, I gave it away to a new umpire, this GDS BX Convertible is that good. Everything the Smitty doesn’t do. And ta think 🤔… college baseball is typically about “the look”. —————— Never fear, I still have an Official Issue Majestic convertible, that did time in The Show, on my rack. I’m mad, not crazy.
  9. MadMax

    9 strap

    “It” isn’t defined as such. Little League simply defined thumb protectors on their banned list, and this 9-Strap is not a thumb protector. Granted, they’re similar. If we look at their other two objects called out on the cited ban list – choke knobs and choke-up assists – are blatantly installed / applied onto the bat. Then, when LL includes thumb protectors on that list, and devoid any example images, I begin to wonder if there’s ambiguity in terms. That we and LL aren’t thinking of the same things. These confusions of term do exist; just look at “backswing interference” between NFHS and OBR. That LL citation doesn’t prohibit batting gloves, and the 9-Strap is much more akin to a batting glove than a thumb protector – however ambiguously LL is defining it.
  10. MadMax

    9 strap

    But it's not an alteration to the bat. It's a strap worn on the hands very much equal to batting gloves. When you take the bat out of the hands, does this strap come with it (and stay attached to the bat)? No. Then this isn't an alteration / addition / modification to the bat.
  11. MadMax

    9 strap

    Why wouldn't it be allowed? Is it attached to the bat? No. Thus, it doesn't violate any rules regarding modifications to the bat, or an illegal bat. Additionally, there are no rules directly prohibiting batting gloves (or variations therein), or wrist braces, or elbow guards, or any other adjacent equipment or attire. This 9-Strap is analogous to any other batting gloves or, as @beerguy55 said, one of those thumb vibration plugs. Play on and swing away.
  12. Wouldjalookatdat. White midsoles. How dapper. 👌🏼 Suck it softball, and ol’ farts with yer all-black shoes! This ain’t church ⛪️!
  13. A few of you asked what would be my ideal CP. I replied that I was using it – the Schutt-Adams XV (MaXV). Despite the release of the All-Star Cobalt (and my trying it out), the presence of the (USA-made) Douglas on the market, the advanced materials of the Force3 UnEqual, the allure of the rare and exotic +POS Cobra, or a pursuit of a Riddell Power, I genuinely felt protected and satisfied with my venerable MaXV. For one, it was extremely lightweight. For two, it being an original first-batch Schutt XV (the Adams chest plate came from a donated repair unit) it used the magical D3O as its pad jacket, allowing it to be thinner, with no loss of energy absorption, lighter, and most importantly hydrophobic, meaning that it shed moisture near-instantly. Here’s what it looks like on: The low-profile aspect was not without some work, but the resulting fit was exceptional. About 3 years ago, I dramatically improved the fit, but also the behavior of this CP by replacing the wretched, shirt-killing T-hooks with side-release buckles (SRBs), relocated in closer to the centerline alá the Cobalt. No more punching holes in my expensive shirts on chest impacts. The SRBs, however, were blocky and not immune from breaking. As such, I trialed a new product, the G-hook, and immediately became sold on all their fit and functional advantages. Unfortunately, Schutt (and by association Adams, its subsidiary) was forced out of baseball due to a bankruptcy filing and acquisition by a new parent company that streamlined it to focus solely on football. As a consequence, this tremendous CP and all its benefits were lost to the market. I seriously thought I would never use any other CP for the rest of my career. Until now. I present to you the GerryDavis (DavisSports) DX Enduro D3O™️ CP. Directionally-shaped HDPE carapace plates (like the Cobalt and +POS Cobra) and the latest, most advanced formula of D3O result in a CP that is able to deftly absorb high-energy blows, yet still be 5/8ths of an inch thick. That’s it! If it’s not the lowest-profile of the low-profile CPs of the market, and the Champion P2xx tries to dispute that, then I can assure you – the HDPE plates are much stronger than the brittle Champion, and the D3O is dense, pliant, and resilient enough to tank those impacts better than some non-descript closed cell foam. Can you see the difference? I can feel it immediately… Just like its cousin, the DX Enduro has pec-pit (armpit) wings included (I remove mine), and has the ability to attach a hard-plate-infused abdominal extension (not included, but purchasable as an accessory, with cross-model compatibility with the DX family of CPs). And of course, like with any new and future GerryDavis CPs, it uses G-hooks. Look how tremendously sleek and simple that is! … and, I can wear one size of shirt for plate or base work!
  14. Ah, so this isn’t a “college thang”; this is a “high school thang”. Sets the context. Adhesion (ie. “stricter”) of any rule is organic, not technologic. That is to say, it will be the integration by human umpires of the rule’s purpose, protocol, and implementation that will determine “success”, not the presence (or lack thereof) of a technological item. The item is a tool, not the rule. I’m saying this to make us aware of stubborn holdouts in the ranks who choose to be obstacles to the effective adhesion and implementation of a rule. At (all) professional levels, complete adhesion must exist, and the technological tools are provided. At the collegiate level, it gets a little more complex and challenging – they (TPTB) expect complete adhesion, but the technological tools are in flux – some exist, some don’t. This is understandable – it’s college, afterall, and everyone is learning and developing. The only complaint I (and others) have is when technological implementation is mandated, on our dime. In no way, whatsoever, am I questioning the validity of the rule; and, in order to operate as a college umpire, I must demonstrate rule adhesion. I’m questioning the technological implementation in lieu of provided tools. If you ain’t providing the clock, or the RefTimer, then you’re in no position to demand organic and technologic adhesion. If I develop my own technological solution (ie. tool), then why can’t I use it? So that brings us to High School, where it has been demonstrated over time, again and again, the challenge to adhesion of rules isn’t technologic, it’s utterly organic.
  15. … Georgia for one, as the shining example (so far). Why? Check YouTube. That kid and the production team behind him are turning the instruction of non-collegiate amateur baseball umpiring on its ear.
×
×
  • Create New...