MadMax

Right?! Lookatthatwillya! Ya know what he's got over us, Stu? People. He's got people workin' for him.

Just a reminder, guys... @DerekGDS and I came up with this system of "Cores & Socks" because: The anecdotal direction (or advisement) of "change your mask pads yearly" has next-to-no technical basis. Far more often than not, the innards of mask pads – the cores – are intact and will continue to perform adequately for (multiple) years. Surely, the skins / casings – the socks (in our current lingo) – take all the abuse that would intrinsically "age" or render the mask pads no longer effective. The sweat, the grime, the dirt, the tobacco juice, the UV rays, the heat, the cold, etc. The materials (the foams, et. al.) used on mask pads and on chest protectors & shinguards are all largely the same... so why are mask pads advised to be changed yearly, but not the other units? Surely, then, it can't be a temporal (time) thing... it must be an "exposure" thing... If anything ages Core material more rapidly, it's exposure to detergents and all those activities involved with cleaning. So if mask pads need to be cleaned to be "effectively presentable", then the best method is to separate the outer casing from the core. So we did exactly that. The casings – the socks – can be separated from the cores, and washed repeatedly, or replaced outright, without affecting the cores. If the anecdotal direction is based on time, then surely you want to use your mask pads as often as possible. So a set of pads just sitting on a (spare) mask frame are "aging out", too, right? Without you even using them? So, with our method, you can have multiple socks, in a variety of fabrics and colors (or readiness of cleanliness), then encase your one set of cores and optimize / maximize the use of them. Additionally, manufacturers currently have to factor in that traditional mask pads may sit in storage / warehouse for prolonged periods of time, simply because they're in a color or fabric type of little appeal to the market (pink? black leather?). As such, the "engineering effort" on the core structures and materials hits the lowest common denominator... which is where we get the typical sofa cushions on your face. With our method, the cores can be the best-engineered pieces on the market, optimized to be put into immediate use (instead of sitting on a shelf or in a warehouse somewhere), and effective for a prolonged span of time, with the latitude to change colors / fabric with ease. Am I going to spend $50-$65 on a set of "special edition" pads to use on a game on a special event (Mother's Day, Memorial Day, Father's Day, Canada Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Veteran's Day, etc.)? When I already have a set of pads in black? Probably not. Would I spend $20-$25 if it meant using (all) my existing gear, and looking completely dapper for the event game? Oh heck yes. I'm especially looking forward to not having 5 masks anymore! Just 2, with two sets of cores... and anywhere between 6-8 different sets of socks. 😎 So! That's the story... go out there, use this system, it was made with you – all of yoU – in mind. Other colors are coming, and I'm sure Derek has a cavalcade of fabrics on his list...

Leave it to ol' Hick'ory to have the behind-the-blue-curtain details. "Behind the Blue Curtain"... I think there's a Podcast Title right there... 🤔

I’ve seen this mythical CP in person. It’s been reconditioned, but it is legit. However, since it is one of the rare, coveted orange units, it’s like an albino lion; so different, its usefulness is called into question. It takes an established umpire to wear it and eschew or withstand the quizzical looks and derision from colleagues and “evaluators”. I would argue, too, from a strictly technical standpoint, there’s better CPs than a Riddell Power. You, @CM51, have worn one of ‘em. Yeah, it’ll sell… it’ll just take awhile. Maybe at Christmas or next spring.

No, not at all. I would / am not (be) calling this a Balk either. However, as I said, I've been adjacent to fellow umpires who have called this before. I saw this as an ideal case-play or visual example so as to defeat / neutralize their "rationale" or justification. In my experience, working with and around so many different umpires, in so many different and far-flung environments, I have found that describing such events as Balks are ineffective; instead, showing what constitutes a Balk is far more effective.

Ain't just softball. It "affects" both bat-sports. Iowa didn't hold their HS playoffs... until the very end of July into August.

Y-yeeeeesssss? Nope, I’m good. I mean, it’s venerable that Cuzzi used it for so long, and a fitting thing to do to place it in the BBHoF, but it’s just an old catcher’s mask. 🤷🏼‍♂️ It’s just as beat up as some of these ol’ hubcaps and lampshades that get “donated” to new umpires…

I’m the one that commissioned @Velho to post this play. When I saw it during the Condensed Game replay, I’ll admit, I was befuddled. F1 is clearly in the windup, and actually turns and takes that drop-step towards 1B, then delivers the pitch. In all my travels, I have encountered colleagues who have called it a Balk (immediately, mind you), citing that “step (move) towards 1B”. Then, in post-games, or in class/clinics, they defend it, typically centering on what F1 can/cannot do with a R1. Obviously, 4 Professional Umpires didn’t call it; if they had, it would have been delayed (understandably), but… McNeil took that as Strike 3, and struck out (and the strikeout stood). So, was this a (missed) Balk? Anyone going to defend it as a Balk? If this goes unjustified, then at the very least, I requested Velho to post it for posterity… we can refer back to it here if we have someone down the road claim “it’s a Balk” when F1 pitches from the windup, and we can actually show it with video.

That’s not it. It’s a Catch-22… catchers also make tremendously good, effective Managers / Head Coaches. That’s not to say that ex-Pitchers or ex-field players aren’t or can’t be excellent coaches themselves. Quite the contrary, they do tremendously well as role-specific coaches (hitting, pitching, etc). But, when it comes to the guy that coordinates and manages it all, a catcher is usually the guy that makes it all tick. So once a catcher (or any player, really) hits that fork in the road, where the playing days ends, and there’s a path towards and into coaching, or towards and into umpiring, what factors go into the decision? Money (the payoff), obviously. Another is one’s own interpersonal or relational disposition (dealing with others is not everyone’s forté). Another is one’s location relative to need/demand. In my own case, while I’ve got an excellent coach’s (trainer/instructor/developer) disposition (or so I’ve been told; it must be from being the son of a coach and a special Ed teacher), I didn’t pursue baseball-related coaching because I lacked the credentials (excellent as a positional catcher, woeful as a batter), and my location – in wintery Wisconsin – didn’t present a viable need. I got into umpiring “late”, and my skillset and career only took the dramatic upswing it did because I was blessed with the latitude to… well… change my latitude. Not every prospective umpire seedling has that latitude, or may ever see it. We have to do more – a great deal more – to find these prospective umpires where they are.

Nope. Pick any hill ya like, I’m staking my banner on this one. Keeping base shoes clean and polished is meritless, and any perseveration on it does not make or demonstrate you as a “better umpire”. You wanna show off your polished, bougie shoes? Go work on a “better field”. How do you get onto a better field? Develop the skills to work “better games” on “better fields”. Polishing yer puppies ain’t going to get ya there. Working more games (frequency) and becoming more resolute and definitive in your movements, positioning, and calling (consistency) is what gets you there. I’d rather see a “kid” have a good, comfortable, durable set of shoes that will serve him across the 4 games we’re going to have today, rather than sinking time and money into spiffing up a pair of “premium umpire” shoes, and foldin’ on me (as a mentor/trainer/developer) because his feet were too sore, too hot, or he didn’t have the “right shoes for the conditions”. Quit whining about mesh shoes. The industry not only doesn’t care about us, but they’ve already identified us as a dwindling market. Wanna change things? Grow a larger market (ie. present more umpires). Now, to go and order a headstone 🪦 for my here hill. Edit: And the same can be said for belts, belt buckles, or any other frivolities we keep parading out as meritorious “must-haves”. 🙄 🤨

Ha! I’m gettin’ a kick out of this (first) comment on U-A’s YT review on this shoe… So… First, Ump-Attire has little influence upon how a global manufacturer designs and produces a shoe, much less “tell them to stop making” their products a certain way you Peter Public don’t like. Second, didn’t your hear (or notice)? New Balance is out of the umpire shoe market. Sure, I’m speaking in superlatives, but since Nike took over the contract, forcing New Balance out, no one makes “umpire shoes” any more. There’s just no market for it, especially when any of the “base shoes” that Pro umpires wear are predominantly Jordans or Mizunos (now). New Balance has to look elsewhere to really make splashes in the market, and you know where their shoes can really be appreciated by officials? Lacrosse. Third, as far as keeping them clean for baseball (or softball, to be fair) umpiring? It doesn’t really matter any more. No one cares. We keep this overhyped value on these arbitrary details, and for what? In any case, I have these shoes, and really dig ‘em. I have 2 pairs of them! I don’t use them for officiating, since 1 pair is Voltage Yellow, and the other is Electric Blue, but I did seek out, try out, and ultimately purchase a pair of Brooks Glycerin 22s, and I love them. So many colleagues were going with Hokas, I wanted to try something different. They’re enormously comfortable.

And this translates into umpires as well. Ex-pitchers have the “worst” (or, least-effective) strike zones, while ex-catchers have the “best” strike zones. Ahem… 16 years as a catcher, TYVM. I’m ambivalent to a/the challenge system, but am all in favor of it as long as it’s demonstrably installed “correctly”. Cuz ya know what doesn’t matter a heap of beans on ABS or Challenge accuracy? Timing.

The best one. It’s even in umpire black! Let’s talk sometime! I had one of the last Cherokees ever produced out of the Toledo, OH plant, a grey 2001 4-door. I _loved_ that rig. I finally had to trade it in on the first of my 3 successive MINI Countryman ALL4s, primarily because I was starting to experience transmission issues, and the gas mileage was taking chunks out of my paychecks.

Uhm... no. I think you're misspeaking, specifically in regards to how the state of South Carolina adjudicates baseball in regards to these sort of plays. Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but NCAA/NAIA/NJCAA games played within South Carolina (eg. Clemson, U of South Carolina, Coastal Carolina, Wofford, The Citadel, etc.) wholly and comprehensively use their respective NCAA/NAIA/NJCAA rulesets, with no exceptions or exemptions made. I don't know if any Independent Pro or MiLB clubs are in South Carolina (I believe Columbia, IIRC), but I'm sure they don't have any exemptions made in OBR that they use. The complication comes from, then, the amateur levels (non-collegiate), wherein umpires are given the (latitude? responsibility? investiture?) to preemptively call (a) Runner(s) Out for such things as missed base touches or improper tag-ups, while the ball is Live, regardless of an impending appeal or not. Of course, within NFHS, the ball need not be Live to conduct an appeal (which is, IMEO, a much more effective process for amateurs). The conflict stems from amateurs playing under NFHS (and -based derivatives) or OBR (and such derivatives and modifications, eg. Cal Ripken or American Legion or USSSA).

Because no one (of the “major” brand manufacturers) cares about us. To the point, you can thank Nike for causing this… or, even more to the point, UnderArmour for backing out of the deal that would have made them the overall MLB supplier. If we really want to go down an off-field rabbit hole, we can get into Private Equity and corporate buyouts… but… that is way outside this forum. Anyway, with Nike replacing Majestic as overall supplier, that forced New Balance out as an officially -endorsed footwear supplier, a position they had occupied exclusively since ca. 2014 (2013?) when Reebok’s parent Adidas pulled Reebok out of baseball. New Balance dramatically reduced their model lineup and variety in relation to that, and it coincided with the Pandemic & precipitating supply-chain issues. At the same time, Nike identified that their Jordan subsidiary was “getting more play” and creating more SM recognition than any turf shoes they had. Sure, there were guys who wore (and favored) black turf shoes that were used for lacrosse, football, and some for baseball (Trout’s line of shoes), but the bolder the colors, the more fervor (ie. sales and SM bursts) they generated. Even if football officials – with more widespread use on turf – requested black, when’s the last time you saw a football official wearing mid-top shoes?? Pro baseball umpires were more “invested” in Jordans, so there was no pressing need of Nike to make any bonafide shoe designs – turf, grass or otherwise – in (conservative) black. Then, too, what to do regarding plate shoes? I’ve been privy to other enterprising guys reaching out to Nike with design proposals for plate shoes, and each one has been dismissed. Nike has no prerogative to produce – from scratch – a line of plate shoes. So, somehow, Mizuno USA was approached and a deal was brokered to allow Mizuno USA to be a “secondary supplier” for footwear for MLBUs. Within that, Mizuno USA is beholden to its parent Mizuno JP, and only has so many turf models it can work with, most often sharing with for-players models. And while Mizuno has solid presence in soccer, field hockey, baseball (and softball), these are all sports that have little need for a mid-top model offering.

Huh. In our Leagues this summer, we had this exact scenario happen, complete with goofy little dance, but instead of a “freely taken” base, it resulted in an Out… and the inning-ending out at that. I watched it happen. BR never motioned, gestured, or said anything so as to request Time. And the U1 (a Push/Slide was performed) never called or signaled Time, sooooooo… Yup.

The Honig’s we once knew is no more; and, the Honig’s that now is, is going to further… change…

“Appreciated”? Yes, you are quite correct, I will not argue that sentiment. I need to point out, though, that we need to stop (or drastically reduce) the use of “better”. Better than who, or what?? Better how? Who or what are we measuring against? Do we even need to measure?! Set a standard, surely, but keep it as fundamentally sound and stable as possible, and meter (or valuate) it Pass/Fail. Grading on a letter or number scale is worthless. All those secondary, or tertiary traits, or characteristics, or practices – such as clearing bats – are certainly appreciated, but not necessary… or more to my point, are not contributing to or detracting from how proficient an umpire is at the fundamentals of officiating the game.

You’ll have to pick up the slack if ya toss the kid!

I’m with you in this sentiment, and carry extra contempt for fellow umpires who project this haughtiness, like it’s some sort of merit badge. “On my field, on my games, we (don’t) clear bats.” As Dawg said (in this contextual application), do what you want – it doesn’t make you a “better” umpire. Being better at umpiring fundamentals makes you a better umpire, not these trivialities.

Listen, if today’s youth can figure out how to capture and post a stoooopid dance video to TikTok, or a lame busking video (running it thru auto-tune is the lame part) to Instagram, then I’m sure they can figure out how to record and produce the National anthem. Just need motivation, and an absence of meddling adults.

And that was a Force3 Defender-v3. Brand-spanking new. I hope Wilson is quakin’ in their britches (they’re not, but I can hope, can’t I?) about this… golden opportunity to get a Wilson product on a groundbreaking moment, and… crickets 🦗. Huh! 🤔 Thought they were exclusive Umpire suppliers.

I’ve worked 2 softball games – two ✌🏼– in my 17 year career (thus far), and the Lookback Rule, or, my unawareness of it, cost me a chance at a significant relationship. <sigh> 🫩 Danielle, if you’re out there, sorry… … but I still don’t know the Lookback Rule, or how a solo umpire, conditioned to watch the ball (at least where it is), is supposed to see what it is that a Runner violated.

Here’s the key part – you guys earned the right to choose. Thanks 🙏🏼 each & all.

I don’t need to rationalize anything. Bill Miller explained it, on air. He didn’t say, “the Plate Umpire had not put the ball (back) in play”, he said the key element – “the pitcher had not re-engaged the rubber” (paraphrased). Since the OP event, I’ve attended 3 MLB games, and in all 3 games, other than the initial point to start the game, the PU – three different PUs from three different crews – did not point (or vocalize “play”) at any other time. I’ve also surveyed several MiLB and pro umpires (who have access to MLB guys) who disclose that MLB PUs don’t point; instead, the ball is presumed Live when the pitcher engages. So even if an Umpire called/signaled Time, and the ball wasn’t changed out, then upon the pitcher re-engaging, the ball returns to being Live. This is in the p/Professional game (I can’t speak for every independent pro league, and I cannot confirm it with the Pros, only speculate); certainly, in the amateur game, it’s best to direct / require the PU to physically signal the ball Live again.