MadMax

Gen-X’ers remember this one: 🎵 “Five Eight Eight, Two Three Hundred, Empiiiiiire.” 🎵 If you live in Wisconsin: “David Gruber… One Call, That’s All.” (Big grin) 😁 @gerry, the particular type of bat-sport matters: Baseball ⚾️? Out. Softball 🥎? Not out, unless intentional.

Whoever inherits #6 better be a good one, goldammit.

Sure. If this was a squibber or “angry hornet” 🐝, chewing up the line, neither fair nor foul yet, and the fielder – F1 or F3 typically – approaches the ball to try and touch / play / field it fair, with the BR converging on him/her, and the BR interferes, then by all means, that’s INT. That’s not what happened, even in my mistakenly perceived / constructed scenario. Instead of it directly off the bat, I saw it chopped straight down and then arcing high in the air. If you’ll notice, the BR takes off for 1B directly, and F5 clips her from behind, with the ball perceivably over foul territory, by that point. And you’re saying we should call the BR out for that?? By that logic, what keeps a bold F1 from running through a BR on a bunt attempt which is propelled foul, albeit slowly? Extending that logic further, if we have a bunt or chopper up the line, against a drawn in infield, and the F3 lets the ball go by him, in foul territory, but the BR runs right into him, are we awarding 1B on OBS? The batted ball isn’t technically foul yet, until it passes the bag on the foul side, or is touched in foul territory… right? That is the principle, is it not? Can we really award OBS on a foul ball?

… unless the batted ball was already foul (or, in foul territory). It looks like the ball had already bounded, and was in its descent definitely foul of the line. And, with how heavy that grass is, it likely would never have gone back fair. EDIT: Now that I’m able to see this on a larger (than a postage stamp) view, and slow it down, she (Batter) popped it up. Thus, it is INT like @noumpere concluded.

OBA? Surely, you mean OBR... Yes. The Pat Venditte Rule (ambidextrous pitcher) stipulates the pitcher must declare which arm he'll be pitching with, and he is "locked" to using it for the duration of the at-bat, unless the batter is substituted for. No need to. The Batter simply cannot switch sides during the pitch, generally interpreted as the pitcher begins his delivery. With the OBR action clock (rules), the clock runs regardless of which box the batter enters... or switches to... provided he is in the box, alert to the pitcher, with 8 seconds remaining. While he could request time (in OBR with clock, he's allowed (proper spelling) 1 "Free" Time request), but he doesn't have to.

Not substantiated by rulebook citation or terminology. This was called by a (plate) umpire who falls into one of three categories... either: A) An elder (in terms of years of experience) umpire, who has never progressed, and has become calloused in his rulebook knowledge, interpretation, and application... B) A "younger" (again, in terms of years of experience) umpire, who has not really done "enough" games or gained enough experience to interpret balks "correctly", and whose training has been largely text-based (devoid of illustration / visual examples)... C) An umpire who has been over-influenced or directed to "get more __________s" (in this case, balks) by a coordinator / assigner / mentor / "evaluator" who treats such calls as merit badges, or some kind of Pokemon cards to collect.

Yes, it’s contextual. A simple “Time out” / reset for rhythm, or related to displeasure with a strike call fetches a (rather) expedient resumption of the clock. A ball up-&-in that forces the batter from his box, or if the Batter fouls one off his foot, let’s say, it’s understood to delay the resumption of the clock accordingly. Again, contextual, but for the most part, if the catcher just arrives out at the mound, and then a coach emerges from the dugout, we (umpires, with timekeepers directed by umpires) reset the clock to 30, and (re)start it according to our ruleset. We also charge 1 visit, not 2 (NCAA differentiates player visit from coach visit). Yup. Wave at the box, and if it’s a like-like / same-spot substitution, just point at the position. If it’s an outfielder, point “up and over” towards the outfield spot. If it’s a double-switch, and 2 (or more) players departed, and 2 (or more) entered the lineup in spots different than their field positions, then wave to the pressbox, give a “hitting” signal, the number of fingers indicating batting spot/slot in the lineup, and then point at the player on defense. Repeat until all subs are completed. If ending the DH, and he (or his sub) is now in the field, perform the batting signal, indicate the DHs spot in the batting order, and then do a discreet “kill” slash. Then, point at the player on defense.

I favor Brooks Glycerin 22's, use Nike Air Zoom Terra Kiger 7's (trail shoes) on "deep grass / traction needed" fields, and still have New Balance VAADUs just for wet games. I'm on the verge of getting Brooks Cascades (again, trail shoes) and something else from Brooks that are... flatter... so I can wear them without strain on turf. The Brooks Glycerin, like Hokas or New Balance 1### shoes, are so plump and plush, they can create an untrue, double-bounce effect on your legs, potentially causing sprains, strains, and sore joints.

Oo! I stand corrected… Drake’s not wearing a DynaTite… that’s a black @Whosyourcaddy -supplied Icon Ti (which I nicknamed the Boe-Ti … get it?).

Ah, he’s one of those type-of-coaches. These ex-pros (and recently, too) who are part of, or form their own academy/travel-ball team. Occasionally, they’re control-freaks, and have their players (trying to) do(ing) all these complex things in situations so as to exert “pressure” on the opposing team. They count on having local umpires who either kowtow to their having been a pro, or are old (or “way too young”), and they can “outfox”. While I like @Velho’s and @Coach Carl’s interpretation and imposing a penalty reflective of the “crime”, I can also see @Richvee’s point. What if the pitch had been a ball? What if the pitch had hit the batter? With runners aboard, what if the pitch had been wild, and allowed the Runners to advance? The offense should, in no way, benefit from this shenanigan. So, with this being amateur baseball (< college), it’s best practice to call No-Pitch, with the penalty of a strike because the batter left the box during the pitch. Then, just lay into that “coach”. I’m not going to let him even get that far. Whether I’m on PU or BU, I’m going to verbally chastise him, starting with he can’t just “call Time” (coaches request Time; Umpires grant / call Time), he can’t just walk in the field during Live ball, he can’t interrupt a pitch like that… need I keep going? I’m going to throw it all on him, right up front, and there won’t be any “wriggle room” for him to even argue anything. The only reason I wouldn’t outright dump him, is in that environment, he might be the only “coach”, and if dumped, his team likely forfeits; I wouldn’t want to affect his players so drastically due to his attempted antics. It’s bad enough when a coach makes a mistake and leaves his pitcher in longer than (limited) pitch/inning count, and we’ve got to forfeit the game.

I can see how/why you’re reading it this way; instead, I’m reading it from a different way, wherein the (permanent) presence of 18” bases – including 1B – does not disqualify a venue (field) and prohibit (or prevent) a game from commencing. You just know there are strict NFHS Apologists (as umpires) who will take the strict letter-of-the-law to its full degree, and will not let a game start – or worse, will forfeit it – if a double-base isn’t installed / installable at 1B. By including this optional provision, and codifying it, this allows High Schools to use neutral-site, professional or contractual venues without burdening… resources… to accommodate this new HS rule. If we really think about it 🤔, this “covers all the bases”, to employ the pun; a HS could use a college ballfield, and it would have the double-base, whereas a pro ballfield, of each level from inde-pro thru MLB is going to have the 18” bases. As an example, we would have a HS “game of the week” at Chase Field in Phoenix; you better believe they’re not going to put a double-base in just for a HS game. Even the NAIA and JuCos using the 15 MLB/MiLB facilities we have around the valley use the 18” bases.

Thanks for noticing… @DerekGDS and I (and others) have been keeping track of it since Charlie debuted it in late March. @wolfe_man and @concertman1971 and @834k3r have heard from me enough that, “All we need is one, just one MLBU to wear it, and everything will take off from there”, and Derek hauls off and drops on me that Ramos broke camp with it, my heart nearly stopped. Unless my eyes deceive me, I think I spotted Rob Drake using Davis Cores&Socks pads on his Wilson DynaTite mask. I’m especially hopeful of seeing more Davis C&S pads out there, since not only is Team Wendy no longer producing any pads, but Davis cores are available in 3 different levels, and the socks (casings) are devoid of any branding that would have to be otherwise obscured. Of course, if sand-tan or sky blue was in circulation, that’d really draw eyeballs. 👀

Is it, though? The 18” pizza box bases are an optional alternative. Instead, from the read, NJ is going all-in for compliance to the double base rule. My experienced estimate is that this (the inclusion of optional 18” bases) is a bone tossed to the schools / programs / venues / states that support a multitude of baseball levels conjunctively. Arizona high schools, especially those in Phoenix and Tucson, frequently play on fields that are part of or adjacent to OBR (Pro, et. al.) Baseball, which have largely eliminated the standard bases from their supplies. In fact, 3 of our 5 NAIA schools play on MLB/MiLB facilities, and are unable to support the double-first-base. Then back here in Wisconsin, there’s a complex near-&-dear to me that has 5 60-90 ball fields (1 Inde-pro stadium, 4 in a quad), with no less than 5 nearby school districts using their fields for Varsity baseball games. This complex also serves dozens of OBR and NFHS -based tournaments and leagues, as well as Adult Amateur. But again, it’s not only a physical facilities issue, but also a Human Resources / personnel issue. As we’ve discussed before, the kids that are playing OBR on the weekends are the very same kids playing for their high schools on Tuesdays and Fridays… with the same umpires in both environments!! This isn’t an excuse or “free-pass” to remain ignorant, unaware, or uneducated of rules (by umpires), but if a state weighs these costs against the benefits, and finds that the enlarged bases are the best optional compromise, then they should be able to adopt that. … and, finally, it appears NFHS is building that into it; certainly more obvious than the “it shall be navy” clause.

We already do/did in Arizona, where Sub-varsity games have a time limit, we don't keep an action clock (by the umpires), and a few other details. If you're speaking about wholesale rule changes / adaptations, you're not going to see it from NFHS itself. Why? Because the NFHS rules are largely influenced by liability concerns, not "fair, competitive playability". Then, there are a few antiquated "holdout" rules, kept there by (a) committee member(s) who for any number of reasons, personally endorses that rule, and fiercely defends it, ala Charleton Heston, "From my cold, dead hands." The one that comes to mind is the Balks as Live rule, wherein some part of the committee felt – without any concrete or measurable evidence – felt that we amateur umpires could not properly adjudicate a balk. Sub-varsity should actually be conducted like a structured scrimmage, with the latitude to "roll an inning", less stringency on Balks, run a continuous batting order and allow for defensive (non-pitcher) substitutions.

Okay... Good! You (general collective "you") / We have to know this ruling, cold. Implicitly. Backwards and forwards. Why? Watch the video clip again. Yes, the context is young kids playing baseball, and from the size disparity, likely 11U, maybe 12U. Absent the PU missing this (which he obviously did), if the PU doesn't rule on this in a direct, decisive, definitive manner, there will be bedlam. The only way through this is with conviction-of-call, and citing the rule, virtually verbatim. No daddy-coach, local hire, or even small travel/academy coach knows this/these rule(s), and even if they're aware of it, they don't know the particulars.

Oo, I like this perspective. Isn't there a provision or component to INT regarding INT by a "member of the teat at bat", ie. base coaches? With R1, INT by the BC (either) results in Batter being called out, Runners return (paraphrased, IIRC). However, with R3, INT by the BC (3BC specifically?) results in R3 being called Out? Yes? Is that how I remember it? Then again, if I remember correctly, there's a provision for squeeze plays, with BI... that R3 is specifically called Out, and Batter continues, as punishment and prevention for attempting to score R3 again. Yes?

Right, but are we calling the Batter out (and R3 back to 3B)? Or R3 (and Batter continues)?

Well, welcome back Kotter! Hey! Our buddy @wolfe_man can relate! Whichever mask you're after, might I recommend investing in a set of "our" Davis Cores-&-Socks pads? From a technical standpoint, the Force3 Ultimates are demonstrably better than the Douglas PDS's, simply because Force3 employs a Kevlar-skinned EVA (closed cell) foam, while Douglas (stubbornly) uses Qualux upholstery foam. The two are virtually equitable in their hard shell designs, but the Douglas has a better ankle buttress and an additional thigh (above the knee) plate. Metal clips & rings are barbaric and arcane (Douglas), but plastic side-release buckles (Force3) aren't perfect, despite being quieter and corrosion-free. Both the Douglas and Force3s keep their shape much, much better than any of the Wilson units, which suffer not only from the use of cheap open-cell upholstery foam, but also from weakly-molded ABS, which has this stupid habit of flattening out. With that said, Douglas shins are highly valued by the pro and amateur umpires that own them. Davis is working on several new models. Please understand... it's not just "two new ones" – it's an entire new family of chest protectors, all sharing the same DNA, just configured in different ways for different contexts. All DX units consist of shaped and contoured HDPE plates, which are thinner, lighter, just as durable as ABS, and hold their shape better. The DX units join the +POS Cobra and All-Star Cobalt in this. They all feature a very effective flex-style harness, and their fastening hardware is the enigmatic G-hook. The key component, though, that sets the DX family apart from the rest of the market is the pad vest. Instead of using open-cell upholstery foam (Wilson, Douglas, etc.), Davis combines EVA (closed-cell) foam and a now-named crosslink mesomorphic (meaning, it changes shape and thickness in accordance to pressure or impact energy) foam called Covalta. In the DX family, Covalta is employed on the Mk2 and the Kuta. The Enduro received D3O AeroMax, which is a unique, advanced foam that remains pliant and flexible, like silly putty, until struck with an impact energy, wherein it stiffens like plywood. This characteristic allows these foams to occupy a volume one-third that of open-cell foam (the upholstery foam Wilson uses). Then, the decisive characteristic is that both Covalta and D3O are hydrophobic, shedding water / moisture near-instantly. The vaunted Riddell Power never had it so good. Granted, it was the quintessential CP, and achieved legendary status, primarily because it: A) fit really well, B) was rare (a limited quantity were made before Wilson slapped the C&D Injunction on it), and C) was thinner than the Wilson units, despite using open-cell upholstery foam. Again, granted, it was all they had in the 80s and 90s... but that's even more indicting and damning for Wilson, because they haven't updated or modernized their CPs in 30 years, yet still charge us premium prices for them!!! In defense of the All-Star Cobalt, it's a very good CP; in my professional-technical opinion, it's the best rival to the Davis DX family. However, there are features on the Cobalt that are, frankly, downright maddening (SRBs and their placement, extension, ailettes, etc.) that Davis learned to address and remedy. By contrast, the Force3 UnEqual designed and progressed itself into a "design cul-de-sac" (ie. dead end) that it can't extricate out of without starting all over. It's good, and does what it's supposed to and billed to be (ie. lower profile than the Wilson Gold), but its performance shortcomings don't warrant the premium cost. They're being bought because of supply saturation and pervasiveness. Smitty uniform pieces (shirts, jackets, pants) are everywhere. And, every association head / assigner / coordinator who directs or influences his charges to purchase these pieces gets two things very valuable to him: A) a cut of dividends (a kickback), and B) all* of his umpires compliant to his expectations of "uniform code". Smitty pants ain't perfect. Far from. How do I know this? Because many of the colleagues I encounter are pursuing SSKs. Yes, it's that similar "novelty" factor that fuels the Riddell Power's aura, but that's gotta be some aura – or some significant shortcomings on those Smittys – to drive these umpires to seek out and purchase pants that are easily $100+ per unit, and that's not even factoring in tariffs, shipping, and importation! I have the same ones – Pro7131s. Expander waist band, belt tunnel in the back (instead of 2-3 loops), flat fronts... but skinny. Slim. Built for the twentysomething that I certainly am not any longer (but try desperately to cling to). I also have the Davis DCP711s (Base) and DCP721s (Plate). Flat front, super thin, static waistband. The plate pants have not only a saddle-stitched reinforced seat, but reinforced knees that reduce the hang-ups on shinguards. The leg cut, though again, is Slim. Makes ya kinda conscious of being 50 and trying to look like you belong amongst college athletes. So! Like 'em, and they're better than my ol' Smittys, but I'm taking them down to Phoenix to work this Fall and leaving them in my gear cache there. Davis did recently equip me with the brand-new BFXPros, in both Plate and Base, and I can honestly say, these are the best pants I've owned and worn to date. These are in the "NCAA Charcoal" colorway, and I trust they'll be able to endure my use of them up here in the Midwest. They look the most like the ol' best polywools, but are easily the best domestic rival to the SSKs.

Again, contextual. I still espouse – to use your applicable term – no jackets on plates. Am I going to demerit or denigrate a colleague or a trainee for using one? No. I might scoop on some sarcasm, primarily to a colleague – especially one who subscribes to my way of thinking on most other umpiring ‘thangs’. Heck, I’ll peibably buy / supply a long-sleeve umpire shirt for him!! … especially if it gets me out of a sub-optimal plate on a bleary, dreary day. What does this matter?? Better, why does this matter??! Shouldn’t competency, integrity, and dependability matter a helluva lot more than sartorial choice??!! And if that sartorial choice, that “professional appearance” is so f#€ꓘing important, then why isn’t that assigner supplying the uniform items to his charges (umpires)??? I posted about them, but they’re not “mine”. They’re actually available via ThighPro ( @concertman1971 ). And, two of the three models have EVA foam padding in them to protect the forearms, because there are some colleagues of ours who endure despite bruising being hazardous to their health. The emasculating assigner that labels those guys 🐈 for wearing sleeves, or taking other protective measures.

But but BUT, Jonny... It's not just any-ol' "people". To my hashtag, No One Really Cares. Instead, it's Assigners – those who hold all the control and governance over "their" umpires in so far as which games they work, how often (or how rarely), where, and who with... and "Evaluators" – those designated or self-deigned "experts" who impose an arbitrary, ambiguous, inconsistent, and oft-contextually irrelevant "Scale of Value". This is done under the banner of "improving (the) umpires" (whom they evaluate), but more realistically, the feedback they give is vapid, self-serving, and occasionally simply justifies the evaluator's role (or the lecherous fee they might charge). Bottom line – Do (or Wear) What You Need to Do to Do Your Job, "Evaluations" Be D@mn3d.

They’re very likely Bruce Bolts. Bruce Bolt Compression Sleeves Where was Segal working? Cleveland? Navy is in their color palette, and the Clubhouse Manager has these on-hand. Segal opted for these instead of wearing a long-sleeve umpire shirt (which don’t breathe as well as ya think). As you say, simply to protect his skin and promote cooling. Skin that is already getting roasted by the sun’s rays, or is slathered with sunblock, is stunted in its ability to transport heat via sweat to the surface and then allow it to evaporate. Besides that, who’s the only umpire to handle baseballs? Plate umpire – Segal likely doesn’t want to slather his arms with sunblock and have it flow down his arms to his hands – and the baseballs – if he can help it. On a related, but much more sarcastic, sartorial note: “That’s (the wearing of long sleeves under a short-sleeve umpire shirt) a bad look!!! No choice / optimum / playoff assignments for you!” – Any of Several Assigners / Evaluators in Amateur (including college!) Baseball Anywhere in North America I always make a point of this – famously, Gerry Davis was working plate at Wrigley Field, on a 95°+ day, with easily 95% humidity, in sky blue, with a blaze orange cooling towel draped over his neck while calling Bs & Ks!! Every half inning, he’d escape to the tunnel to get refreshed and cooled off, while Will Little administered the official lineup cards from U1. Bright Orange towel. On national television. Is that the “professional look” we fawn and obsess over??? #NoOneReallyCares #TheyDoInMLBWhyCan’tWe?

I have no way of confirming or refuting that, besides just referring to their web-store.

90% chance I know the PU (if you had a name or identifying characteristic). 16% chance it was a Vulture. 0% chance it was me.

You’re now dining at the very table I frequent – Context & Imperatives. If/when an umpire calls Time, at the close of the play, I (as a developer / trainer / etc.) immediately identify the context. I would exhaust you guys with the different scenarios and contexts that we collectively encounter, so to your point – absolute imperatives serve no benefit to anyone. However, what I do not want to see is an umpire – especially a PU – call Time as a crutch to get back to / goto next position, or to perform some frivolous, tertiary-level “duty”… such as (directing to) moving a batting weight, retrieving a loose baseball, being brought spare baseballs, ushering a player back into the dugout… or brushing the plate because some fence-fans are sqwaking about it. Instead, what we should be doing is keeping the ball Live as much as possible, and conjoining tertiary-level duties to instances when the ball becomes Dead. HBP, Foul-ball that takes fielders out of position, Home-Run (over the fence), Runner requests Time to discard equipment, Runner or Fielder requests Time to tie their shoe 🤨… these are perfect instances to then perform one or several of those tertiary duties… Including brush the plate!

You don’t use BCs for that! … … You send check-swing appeals to them!