Texas Manny

TW just retrofitted my Wilson Platinum which was bought brand new a few weeks ago and it was all Velcro and they are on their way back to me. I'll have them on Friday with pics and thoughts. Why would TW not refit? Call Sheila and ask her.

When and where did this "wiping" signal come from? The signals between HW and JE are not different from the Joe Brinkman signals of 1989. IMHO, wiping is very unprofessional, too noticeable and not a true baseball style signal. Not meant to offend anyone. It's just not my cup of tea. I won't do it.

From the Wendelstedt Umpire School Comprehensive Manual for the Two-Umpire System, Infield Fly, pg. 151,153 With runners on first and second, or first, second, and third bases, and less than two outs, there is a possibility of an infield fly. Before each new batter during with the possibility in effect, both umpires should signal to one another the infield fly signal. At umpire school, the signal is placing an open right hand, with fingers and thumb together, across the left side of the chest. This indicates that should the remaining conditions of a fly ball (not an attempted bunt or line drive) becoming fair, and that cold have been caught with ordinary effort by an infielder, take place, the infield fly rule will be enforced. Either umpire may initiate the call of infield fly, however, the umpire responsible for initiating the call should also be the umpire responsible for the catch/no catch decision. If an umpire does not have the initial calling responsibilities, but is 100% certain that all of the criteria have been met and his partner does not recognize the situation, he may initiate the call of infield fly. If, though, he believes that his partner recognizes the situation, but is choosing not to call the infield fly, he should not overrule that judgment decision. (HW has another full page of Infield fly situations, inside and outside the U of the diamond. If you have questions on this, please ask.) Visual: Right hand over left breast or Visual: Right hand, closed fist, with index finger extended pointing up toward sky, brushed against right side of face mask for HP, and right side of cap bill of BU. Mechanic: PU and BU, right arm extended upwards, with closed fist, index finger extended, pointing up in the air, saying "Infield Fly!" If near the foul lines, same mechanic, saying "Infield Fly if Fair!" (End of Wendelstedt) From the Jim Evans Maximizing The Two-Umpire System, Communication and Signaling, Infield Fly, Signals Between Partners, 12.10, Infield Fly Signals, and section 12.21, Infield Fly, pg. 267 12.10 Infield Fly Signals: With runners on first and second or bases loaded with less than two outs, the possibility of an infield fly situation exists. Umpires should alert each other to this fact prior to each batter as long as the situation exists. Either umpire may initiate this reminder signal and his partner should acknowledge it by returning the same signal. There are two conventional signals for the infield fly rule: 1. Placing the right arm across the chest with your right hand over your heart; or 2. Touching the bill of your cap with the index finger of your right hand. For consistency, both umpires should use the same signal. 12.21 Infield Fly Communications: Either umpire may initiate the infield fly signal. The signal shall not be given until the ball has reached its highest point, the apex, and started down. Once either umpire has signaled it, the other umpire shall duplicate (echo) his partner's signal. The umpire's job is to alert the runners to the situation and let them know that, regardless whether the fly ball is caught or not, the batter has been declared out and the force has been removed. The proper terminology for declaring an infield fly is "Infield Fly! Batter's out!" This is accompanied by pointing skyward with the index finger of the right hand. If the ball is near the foul line, the plate umpire shall initiate the signal and declare, "Infield fly, if fair!" The base umpire would then echo the plate umpire's signal, "Infield fly, if fair!" It is not necessary to add "...the batter's out!" Too many words, too much communication, could be confusing for the runners. When the ball is not caught after the umpire has initially signaled the infield fly, the umpire shall emphatically shout, "The batter's out! He's still out!" while aggressively signalling out. This further alerts the runners that they are not required to run. When the infield fly rule is in effect, umpires should be especially alert to the positioning of the infielders. Their positioning rather than the location of the pop-up will be the deciding factor defining ordinary effort. (End of Jim Evans) (Please note the difference between Wendelstedt and Jim Evans) Just passing along what the manuals say. No offense meant to those whose signals may be a hair different, but offered as a basis for fundamental training.

From the Wendelstedt Umpire School Two-Man Umpire System Manual, Index of Signals and Mechanics, Uncaught Third Strike, pg XXI: Uncaught Third Strike With two outs, or with fine base unoccupied, the batter becomes a runner and may advance to first base if his third strike is uncaught. If he is not allowed to advance, the normal third strike mechanic is all that is necessary. However, if one of the conditions occurs that allow him to advance on the uncaught third strike, the umpire should indicate the third strike by pointing with his right hand and arm out to the side using no voice. This signal prevents confusion that a standard strike mechanic may cause if players believe you are instead calling the batter out. Then, depending on what occurs next, the following shall apply: If the pitch gets away from the catcher a considerable distance where it is obvious to everyone that the ball was not caught, there is no need for any further mechanic or voice. If the pitch is short-hopped by the catcher, use the voice and signal for your no catch mechanic. If the batter begins to advance and a tag attempt is missed, use the voice and signal for your no tag mechanic. If the batter is immediately tagged, use the voice and signal for your out mechanic. Using good timing is essential when utilizing these mechanics in order to avoid confusion. Do not signal "No catch!" or "No tag!" immediately; just to have the catcher apply a tag successfully. Instead of three or four rushed mechanics, allow the play to develop and only make the mechanics necessary. (End of Wendelstedt) From the Jim Evans Maximizing the Two-Umpire System, Communication and Signaling, Uncaught Third Strike, Section 12.26, pg 270: Uncaught Third Strike When a called or swinging third strike is not legally caught by the catcher and the batter is legally entitled to advance, the umpire shall signal the strike and then indicate that the ball was not legally secured before touching the ground. (Visual "Hammer" strike 3!) (Visual "Safe" mechanic, saying "No catch! No catch") (Visual right hand pointing to ground in front of you, saying "Ball hit the ground") Two Considerations When the Plate Umpire Does Not Make an Immediate Call: 1. The plate umpire may take a quick glance at his base umpire. The base umpire shall discreetly display a closed fist indicating that the catcher legally secured the ball and the batter is out; or, he may discreetly point to the ground indicating that the ball was not legally caught before touching the ground. In either case, the base umpire uses no verbal communication. 2. If the plate umpire does not take the quick glance but decides subsequently that he needs help, he shall step out directly toward his partner and ask loudly, "Did he catch it?" The base umpire should respond with an emphatic "Yes, he caught it!" while displaying a closed fist chest high, or "No, he didn't!" Ball hit the ground!" while aggressively pointing to the ground with the index finger of his right hand. Note: It is important that this exchange take place as quickly as possible so that the batter-runner is not deprived of any opportunity to advance if the ball was not legally secured. (End of Jim Evans) (Note the differences between Wendelstedt and Jim Evans) Just passing along what the manuals say. No offense meant to those whose signals/mechanics may be a hair different, but offered as a basis for fundamental training.

I don't understand why y'all are having so much difficulty understanding what I am saying. The problem with IR is that fans and announcers who have no clue about rules, or umpire judgments, and are driving the game into the ground, by destroying the foundation that the umpires judgment cannot be questioned. If the fans and announcers who drive the money aspect, towards the game, can influence the creation of IR, then why is it not plausible for them to bitch and moan about their favorite players getting ejected prior to review, because of their actions, which are ejectionable, then the call is overturned, and they will see it as the umpire being the bad guy? They'll scream for their favorite players back, regardless of their actions. Like I said, nothing should change. If the player, manager, or both, says the magic words or does a Picasso on the field, they're gone! But that's not how the fans will see it, and the fans drive the game because of the money. Fans only bitch about umpires, and have nothing good to say about them. This is a sticky problem that IR will create unless addressed. Believe me. If they do something wrong, before, during, or after the IR process, the offending player or manager has to go. I'm just pointing out the pitfall. It's not happening now because IR is limited to home runs, fair/foul home runs, or spectator interferences. When you start debating umpire "safe" or "out" calls; whether this is obstruction, or that is interference, or is that a balk, or is that not a balk, (surmised because we don't yet know what will come out of the rules committee or IR committee), you're opening pandora's box, that frankly, baseball never was supposed to have. Just like a player's error, an umpires mistake is part of the game. The fans need to stop looking for the perfect game because it's not going to happen. Get the sand out of their mangina's, suck it up, grow up, and enjoy the game the way it is.

Base, He's not justifying the bad behavior. Try to look at the scenario I gave, not from an umpires perspective, but from the fans and announcers perspective that is driving this IR madness. They will never understand why their favorite player was ejected and remained ejected because the umpires got the call wrong and it was reversed. IR may fix one set of problems, but it has the potential, and IMHO, will create a whole new set of problems to resolve. No one is saying that unprofessional behavior from the umpires perspective should be dismissed. Money is driving this IR show, and this conundrum will come up. That's all that's being said.

I'd clean it up, then go to Hobby Lobby and go to the wall plague section and get an appropriate sized plaque. Bring it home, sand it, stain it, shellac it, and then mount the mask on it. Get a little brass tag engraved with whatever your heart desires, and put it up in your man cave.

Thanks for the heads up! I just called customer service at eBags. They are processing the difference and it will be refunded to me! Thank you very much Kanedog! I appreciate you looking out for me(us). Manny

No one knows for sure of course because the wonks are up all night trying to figure all this stuff out, but I sure would hope that the EJ would stand. That's my whole point. It's going to create a situation that the powers to be need to address, otherwise, it will create another firestorm.

Of course ejections would stand. Why are managers and players out there arguing this egregious miss with an available challenge available in the first place? Managers aren't ejected now for being wrong. They're ejected for delaying the game or being unprofessional. The rope should get shorter on arguing judgement calls. You missed the point I was trying to make by omitting the second half of the statements. You can't separate the two, because they are apart of one another. Yes, as of now, the ejections would stand, but what if the call is reversed by IR? If the umpire was proven wrong by the IR, then the manager was right. So now are you going to eject a manager for being right in the first place, even if he crossed a professional line? Players can and will say the wrong things, or physically do the wrong thing, before a manager has time to react, and/or get out there to deal with the umpire. Managers too will say and do the wrong things as well. Remember, under present MLB rules, arguing after an IR can result in an ejection. But with the new system, what happens prior to the IR and the umpires are then proven wrong? IR creates a conundrum that has to be dealt with by MLB and MLB has to establish procedures to deal with this. The scenario I questioned, is not only plausible, but I can almost guarantee you will see it happen. A close play, ejection, then review, overturned, and now what? Believe me, if you cross a professional line you should be ejected, pre or post-IR. But that's not what is going to be accepted by fans and announcers who pay the money, and promote the game. So fans and announcers bee-otch and moan again. It's totally possible.

I would almost have to say that the neighborhood play would need to go away because the umpires are not going to want to have their calls continuously overruled by IR and made to look foolish. We as umpires know what they are doing, but the preponderant public will just scream bloody murder that the umpires have been messing up all along. They'll cry "See, they've been making mistakes worse than we thought, all along!". This to me is the danger of instituting IR into baseball. 95% or more of the game is based on umpire's judgment and if you take that away, you negate the authority of the umpires. The game will no longer have its human element. Tell me, what happens when an umpire makes a call, a player, manager, or both, says the magic words, and are ejected, and then the call is reviewed and overturned? What happens to the ejections? Do they stand? Or are they nullified because the now overturned call and error by the umpire caused the reaction that caused the ejection? Oh, I know that players and managers must be responsible for their own actions, but the preponderant public and the announcers will all scream that if the umpire didn't miss the call, there wouldn't necessarily be the ejections. That's IR for you. I see this one coming because frankly, I don't believe it will be addressed. I've tried to work out accepting IR for fair/foul on home runs, and SI on home runs, but frankly, they too are judgment calls. Just leave the game alone. It's worked well enough for over 100 years without it. Tell the cry baby announcers and fans to go pound sand. I'm tired of political correctness, and when it invades baseball because someones feelings got hurt, that is not good for the game. Grow up. Suck it up, or go home. Jocko is 1000% right. NO INSTANT REPLAY!

I too certainly do not get any delight, pleasure, or glee from anyone's mistakes when they are made. In fact, it annoys me when I see other umpires destructively criticize other umpires for an error they made. It is one thing to constructively criticize, analyze, and discuss professionally what may of gone wrong. It's another to personally attack them for either the call they made, or other people who, in no offending manner, try to decipher what happened, and offer an agreeing viewpoint, or a dissension, based on experience and/or facts, rather than just emotion. We all have something to learn from one another. Use what you can, what works best for you, and leave the rest alone. Just because someone differs doesn't necessarily make them wrong/right. Like another on the board said, in umpiring, there is a lot of "grey" that needs to be turned "black or white". No racial bias intended.

Oh how I would love to own an MG42!

Thank you all for your help. Since I am not concerned about uniforms in this bag, I ordered the original Motherload. I used the provided code and got mine for $142.55. Thanks again. I appreciate the support.

I will have to disagree that Drake was in perfect position. 5-6 feet back then maybe. But Standing on the base is not perfect. I agree. Usual distance is 10-12 feet from the bag. I don't know why Mr. Drake was so close to the bag, or what his thinking was. Just from viewing the film this can be used as a training instance of not getting so close because the play can explode on you and envelop you.

I just received a phone call from Sheila at TW. Surprisingly, my chest protector and leg guards are finished. They will be shipped to me shortly. I received them far sooner than anticipated. I look forward to receiving them. I will post up pics of the finished goods once received.

I don't think so. Not in this case. On the play at the plate, yes, there is one that definitely shows no tag, and no brush.

I know that you won't agree with me, but yes, I would have called him safe. Here is why: IMHO, this is not a "neighborhood" play. This wasn't a "I'm looking at my watch and waiting" play. Collisions at the plate are part of the game. It is part of the game to block the plate. It is part of the game for the catcher to have to tag the runner. It is part of the game for the runner to try and knock the ball out of the catchers mitt. It is part of the game to try to score. There is no evidence of either a tag, or a brush of the glove against the arm of the runner. The catcher has the responsibility of tagging the runner, even if he is knocked over by the force of an M1 Abrams tank. Yes, I can have sympathy all day long for the catcher for the knock he just took. But he still has a job to do. He didn't do it. Umpire Gerry Davis, who was in excellent position, made his call. I understand why he did it. I take nothing away from him. I feel he missed it, albeit you can argue for the right reasons and I will digress. I will only say that when IR comes into play, those types of calls will no longer exist. The game will have to be played, well, like it is supposed to, and also too strictly I fear. 2014, the real game of baseball has the potential to die. Just two different thoughts. No offense meant to you.

Follow-up to the references given above, from the Wendelstedt Umpire School Comprehensive Manual for the Two-Umpire System, the following are considered time play scenarios: Pg. 117 Runner on Second Pg. 158 Runners on First and Second Pg. 194 Runners on First and Third, Fly ball to the outfield with one out: Catch: Runners tag up: Time play at second. Pg. 195 Runners on First and Third, Fly ball to the outfield with one out: Catch: R3 tags up/R1 returns: Time play at first. Pg. 208 Runners on Second and Third, Fly ball to the outfield with one out: Catch: Runners tag up: Time play at third. Time Play Signal Plate Umpire: With right hand, using the pointing and middle finger, extend to form "V", indicating two. Signal can be given across the left breast, or against the left wrist at the waist line. Time Play Signal Base Umpire: With right hand, using the pointing and middle finger, extend to form "V", indicating two. Signal can be given across the left breast, or against the left wrist at the waist line. Each partner will respond in kind to the others signal. (End of Wendelstedt) Follow-up to the references given above, from the Jim Evans Maximizing the Two-Umpire System, Communication and Signaling, Signals Between Partners, 12.11 Time Play Signal Time plays may occur in a variety of situations. It is not practical to give the time play signal in each conceivable case. Anytime there are two outs and a runner on second, it is recommended that the signal be given. This would include situations in which there is a runner on second only, runners on first and second, runners on second and third, or bases loaded. It is important that the plate umpire stays alert and recognizes that a time play at the plate can occur on a play which started with only one out. Time Play Signal Plate Umpire: The plate umpire initiates the signal by indicating two outs with the index and middle fingers on his right hand extended in front of his chest. He then points to the plate with his right index finger. This is a reminder that he is staying home. The base umpire mirrors the signal. (End of Jim Evans) (Please note the great differences between the two schools of thought) Professional Baseball Umpire Corporation, Manual for the Two-Umpire System, Section 4.9, Pg 42-43, Time plays: (WUS: Wendelstedt Umpire School; JE: Jim Evans) Concurs with WUS and JE in scenarios. Concurs with JE in verbalage and mechanics in scoring a run. Concurs with WUS and JE in verbalage and mechanics in denying a run. Concurs with JE in verbalage and mechanics in scoring "X" number of runs. Concurs with JE in Signals between umpires. (End of PBUC) (Please note the shared principles of PBUC with the two schools of thought) Just passing along what the manuals say. No offense meant to those whose signals may be a hair different, but offered as a basis for fundamental training.

No business name that can be verified No business number that can be verified Just an unknown email address Asking for personal data with no proper identification No name, position title, or contact name All this equates to ----> PHISHING SCAM. If I'm wrong, let them post all that information so we can verify it.

No disrepect, but seems like a phishing expedition to me.

Still stuck in the "Good enough for Government work" mode, ay Senior Chief?