andydufresne

The batted ball hit the ground. R1 returning is a tag play. The PU treated it as an appeal play.

I stopped umpiring (even after 32 years, I didn't "retire"; I just stopped doing it because assigners killed all the allure of self-employment as a sports official) ten years ago, but I used to have a lot of fun with that question. In the 1990s/2000s there was this huge emphasis on shined shoes. Most of my partners were on board. I thought it was silly. At the plate meeting for the second game of doubleheaders, I used to do this: I'd tell the managers, "Before the first game, my partner and I were both here just like we are now. One of us had shined shoes, and one did not. Who had the shined shoes?" Nearly every coach/manager passed on the question. "Who cares?" was the most common response. Some guessed. Nobody got it right because it was a lie. We both always had our shoes shined before game one. My point was that for all the big deal they made of it, nobody really cared, or even noticed.

The bases were loaded on the walk-off hit. At the eight-second mark of the video, presumably R2 has touched 3rd. Anybody know if something unusual happened that might invite an appeal? Is there any other reason U3 would still be standing there?

Please do not use my likeness without express written permission.😉

deleted because it's the same as Jim Murray's catch and carry thread.

MLB rules contain a rebuttal presumption that with runners on base the pitcher is in the set position. The rebuttal is that the P declares he is in the windup prior to pitching to the batter. Lively did not declare, so he was in the set position. He then failed to come to a stop.

I sold the gear and called it a career after the 2015 season, so it's been awhile since my credibility has been on the line. Today I was watching a game and I heard that old refrain I always heard on every whacker where some player, manager or fan disagreed with my call: "Jeez, blue, that wasn't even close!" When I worked, every call was easy and I was either blind or incompetent. So that's the reason for my question: has the game changed at all and now there are some close plays?

I quit after 33 years in 2015. Over the years, when the ADs all went to using assigners to hire officials, and the assigners decided where, when, and even IF you worked, and dictated common game fees for all regardless of ability, it ruined a big part of the allure of officiating as a second job, which was deciding your own schedule and rates. In my latter years, I got lots of calls from TDs, assigners and ADs "desperate" for officials for tonight's games. I would say I would work and told them my fee. They would be aghast: "We don't pay that much." They'd tell me their (ridiculously low) fee and I'd say, "I don't work for that little. Good luck with your search." On a few occasions they called back and agreed to my fee, but you could tell they held grudges over it. I tell that tale because I have been one of those guys who got paid $35 more per game than the other umpires because they agreed to an insultingly low fee when I would not. I'm with the TD on this one: the umpires who agreed to $50 got paid what they agreed to work for. Why were they mad at the TD because other umpires were better negotiators?

Remember that the next time people complain about your strike zone. Not only that, but your statement is an oxymoron.

I almost always let my partner pick. If he didn't care or didn't want to pick, I'd have us each flip a coin simultaneously with the caveat, "If they match (i.e., both heads or both tails) you have first plate. If they don't, I do."

No.

I live in a larger city surrounded for thirty miles in every direction by a bunch of small towns, so the city is the host to men's rec ball covering players from 3000 square miles. One year the league changed the mercy rule from 10 after five to eight after five. Many players drove an hour or more to play and objected to sometimes getting only two at-bats--those at the bottom of the order sometimes only one. They showed their displeasure by agreeing among themselves that if the losing team was down by eight or nine runs after four at-bats, the winning team would deliberately allow them to score enough so that the mercy was not in effect at the end of five. That went on for two years before the league relented and changed it back to ten.

It was actually a well-played game, but it was the worst experience. JUCO game from back in the days of the hybrid trip rule--three free trips for the game, but only one to the same pitcher in the same inning. Last game of regular season. Game decides 4th place; winner advances to conference tournament, loser goes home. Bottom of 7th, V up by 2, one out, R1, R2. V manager put his closer in the game to start the inning, and had made his 2nd free trip earlier in the inning with R2, 0 outs to decide to walk the batter (he wanted a R/R matchup and a double play setup). H manager is entering a PH, and as I am getting the change on my card, V manager says "Hey Andy, I got one free trip left, correct?" I hardly look up as I'm writing and say "Yeah." When I'm done writing I look up and V manager is at the mound. There's nobody in the bullpen warming up. He leaves the mound, but F1 does not. I tell him he has to remove his closer. "What the $%#@ are you talking about? You just got done telling me I had a free trip left!" "You do, but you couldn't use it on him." "#$@%. I'm not taking him out." "Well, we're not resuming until you do." "$#@^*?%$#$@ I got nobody ready." "New guy can have as much time as he needs." "This is some &*%$#?><@$%&@#$*?*&^#$#@.....#$^&^%$@^$%#&%^*&(<?>++" I gave him a lot of rope because nothing had a "you" in front of it. First pitch by new pitcher splits the OFs. Throw comes to plate too late to cut down tying run, and B/R advances to third on the throw. 2nd pitch to next batter bounces away, R3 scores. H7-V6. I am surrounded, and nobody is saying, "Nice game, blue." "YOU &*%$#?><@$%&@#$*?*&^#$#$$%$&*%(&*&^(*@^%$*y)m&^^$&%^#%$@%$#&*^^&*&*&^$$@#^u&$%&^$&^?#$%@$^(%^%^$*&%#&^%$*??<*&^$%##$&^*$@^!!*&^%#*&)*??*^^$&^%#$#^%**)&#$@#$!!$@#%^$^@%^(&*(*)_???<<~~&%$#^$%@#$@&%^(*)^*%(&%)*(_()_*)(^*$#&$%^@#$%^*&(*^%$##%$^%&*^)&()*!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!" Four ejections by me, one each by my partners. If only I had seen him going to the mound I might have stopped him to tell him the ramifications of another trip right then and the whole thing could have been avoided. That REALLY sucked. And it was my own lack of awareness that caused it.

That wasn't cheating--it was a perfectly legal tax avoidance strategy.

I taught a lot of pitchers how to come to a complete stop with runners on third using that philosophy.

One thing to know: expenses from self-employment are deductible only if you are operating with the intent to make a profit. https://www.irs.gov/instructions/i1040sc Expenses for sporadic or hobby income are generally not deductible. That's something to keep in mind before announcing to the world that "I don't umpire for the money." If you want to deduct your expenses legally, you'd darned well better be doing it for the money.

That's ironic coming from people in a profession dedicated to integrity. All income is reportable (not necessarily taxable, but reportable). If you are honest on your tax returns, there is no reason to care whether you get 1099s. The people you work for have an incentive in order to avoid the paperwork, but the only reason for an individual to want to avoid a 1099 is if (s)he is trying to engage in tax evasion (not avoidance, which is legal, but evasion, which is not). And oh, boy, how I will never forget practically being strung up in the parking lot for making these same comments at an association meeting a couple of decades ago.

Not necessarily for everyone, though. One year I got injured the 2nd day of the season and missed the rest of it. Not before, however, I had amassed a ton of expenses in pre-season training, buying uniforms, travel to regional rules conference, etc. I took a Schedule C loss that offset the income from my full-time job.

Ah, memories. Decades ago when I was a bench-warmer in HS, I was the official scorer. One of my teammates made all-state in part because the head coach was always changing my errors to hits. He was a good player, but holy cow, he must have got an additional 10 hits on roughly 100 ABs (we didn't play as many games then as teams do now). That's the difference between .350 and .450. Because he was a left-handed hitter and fast, the HC just assumed on any errant throw or bobble that allowed him to reach base, "he would have beat it anyway." I'd read the line scores in the local paper and see the two teams with a combined three errors when I witnessed ten--easily.

If you're teaching him to umpire, you're no friend.

I've been self-isolating for years and my family always called me anti-social. Now, everybody's doing it. Continuing to do what's unpopular even in the shadow of unrelenting ridicule and criticism is the sign of a real leader. It's a pity there's so few of us.

I guess I'll have to keep an eye on this. 3.1.4.F (c) and 3.1.4.J (b) are irreconcilable. How they plan to have the DH play a defensive position other than the one he is DHing for and remain the DH for that position is too much for me to comprehend. I think they're being too clever by half based on what I've read here. Who bats where F9 was hitting? It can't be F1; he's locked into the 3 hole where Sanders is hitting.

I was all set to weigh in with a perspective that hasn't been represented in this thread. But then I realized anyone who had to look up "cis-gendered" to find out what it meant is probably so out of touch with today's culture that nobody cares what he thinks about this topic.

I agree with everything else you said, but not with the part I quoted above. I see that happen quite often: R1 only and not stealing, nobody on base, bases loaded.....I see it a lot. What I'm seeing a lot of now that I never saw until about five years ago is catchers stepping not directly toward second base when throwing, but into the batter's box instead. You can tell it's being taught because you're right--they aren't stupid, and they know they will get a BI call nearly every time even if they are the one to initiate the contact.

I don't think he needs to lose his job any more than an umpire who errs needs to lose his job. What he needs to do is stop pontificating about things (like, e.g., RLI) he doesn't understand. I get where a lot of these guys are coming from. I've weighed in at length on how far over the edge I think the NCAA has gone in the interps of BI and FPSR. What I've never (I hope) done is have my disdain for the rule cause me to criticize the guy who properly applies and enforces it. "I hate the rule" is a hundred and ten degrees from "That's a HORRIBLE call. He sucks!"