BigUmp56

I don't even know where to begin. Like Stan W, I've known Mike since the early days of Internet bulletin boards for umpires. Probably as far back as the late 90's. Mike and I became good friends over the years, and we exchanged ideas about umpiring and our professional lives as well. If I was involved in a critical lift plan that I questioned, all I had to do was give Mike a call and he would advise me on proper rigging techniques and procedures. We all realize how much Mike knew about umpiring baseball. He knew even more about lifting and rigging. Mike and I worked two games together in either '05 or '06. I can't remember for sure, but we flip-flopped on the plate and on the bases. He was a pleasure to work with, and even more of a pleasure to talk to. I'm going to miss him greatly. God bless him and his family. And to the rest of my brothers here.......please take care of yourselves. Tim

Let's throw out what we as umpires all know; that intent was/is not required here to rule OBS. Am I alone in my assessment that Middlebrooks did lift his legs in an intentional, albeit subtle attempt to hinder Craig? Tim

To be honest, Pete, I don't think I would have ejected for the "That's f*^%g bullsnort" comment. He'd have had to drop the "you're f*^%g bullsnort" comment on me. Then again, I walked away from doing mens leagues a number of years ago. Tim

It's pretty simple to me. A batter-runner has to INTENTIONALLY interfere with a thrown ball to be called for interference. This is a judgment call that could go either way (most likely not INT), but it's up to the calling umpire. I go back to an old Bob Pariseau explanation about runner's INT with a thrown ball. If intent wasn't required to have INT, the fielders would simply target the runners. Tim

I don't think he's saying to "guess", Roland. I believe what he's saying is that there WILL be times when an F2 moves late and you're not able to see the entire flight of the ball from the pitcher's hand to the catcher's mitt. You're not guessing if you're experienced enough to know what that pitch did in the nano-second it was out of your sight. Then again, when was the last time a catcher moved and blocked your view of the ball on the tee................... Tim

Which is why I said I'd call the runner safe and if anyone argued, I'd tell them I could call obstruction. I can do that, or call the runner out and let the game take care of itself and then someone gets hit, and then I have to issue warnings, and then I have to write a report. I'm voting for safe. Bravo! This is essentially what I tried to convey two months ago. Rewarding bush-league crap like this will send a game down a path we don't want it to go. It's $h1t umpiring to call a runner out for this. Sometimes you just have to umpire..... Tim

Just a small distinction for anyone who may not understand this. Most of the crew here already know this, but the ball doesn't have to go sharp and direct to the catcher's mitt only. It's a subtle difference, but the correct interpretation and language of the rule is that the ball must go sharp and direct to the catcher's "hands." I've never seen it happen, but it's possible that a batted ball could move sharply and directly to a catcher's throwing hand and be caught, or even bobbled and eventually secured for a foul tip. Tim

Tee would have a fit. It's supposed to be: IIITBTSB Tim

I don't know that I buy the "cross dominance" idea for batters, if you consider how many right handed players there are in MLB who hit left handed. To the original question; I would suggest that you have someone video tape you working a game. I know that I was convinced that I was setting up in the slot the same way for both right handed and left handed batters, but I was all over the place for lefties when I looked at some tape of me working a game. You might be surprised at what you see when you watch yourself on tape. Good luck! Tim

Umpires DO NOT adjust the rules of the game at any level. We enforce the rules, and it's really that simple. When umpires start to make stuff up things go downhill quickly. What's next, a must slide rule? All for the sake of the kiddies safety...... There are people who have taken ownership of the rules for their leagues, and while they may consult umpires at times when they want to change something, they make the rules..........not us! Tim

"Are you arguing balls and strikes?" " I thought so".....................BOOM! Tim

I am about sick of this place already you people are not listen its right in the rules. do you even read what i say? you know what screw good bye. I didn't mean to hurt your feelings. But you're apparently still not understanding what some of us are trying to tell you. The comment to 8.02(d) cannot be taken as a stand alone statement. And I think that's what you're trying to do. You must go back to the beginning of the rule where intent is required. The comment is simply saying that if you see the pitcher INTENTIONALLY throwing at the head, you need to dump him immediately without worrying about issuing a warning first. Tim

I would hope that everyone involved would care about the umpires. I've been involved with LL for many years, and have worked with some outstanding and not so outstanding umpires, all of which were volunteers. The problem that I've seen in the CR, is that too often it's the not so outstanding guys (and gals) that get the regional and WS assignments. Like the idiot I mentioned earlier that ejected an entire outfield during a tournament game. He was an instructor at CR and has done WS at two levels. He shouldn't have been allowed to work beyond district. But he was connected somehow, and that's all he needed. Tim

Your mask should always be pulled with your left hand. Of course, trained umpires are the only ones who notice this. At least we're the only ones who notice it until a PU bangs out a kid at the plate with his right hand (which is the hand that makes the signal), and either throws his mask and hits the runner in the head, or gets too close and smacks the runner with it. Then, everyone notices and understands why we do things certain ways. Tim

All I will tell you is this, and take it as you will. If you were to eject a pitcher for control issues in any league I've been involved in, from LL to college games, you'd have your schedule pulled by the assignor. There is little tolerance in this area for officials making things up on their own, and hiding behind "safety" as their justification. The rules makers at the youth levels have put specific rules in place to cover what they consider to be safety rules for THEIR league. Please remember that it's not your league, and they're not your rules. You're there to adjudicate the rules of the game as they're written. If they wanted umpires to have the ability to toss pitchers who are having control issues, they would have written something into the rules specific to that situation. Tim.

There's a big difference to me between being stressed out and being mad at the world. If I'm stressed out, I feel much the same as our brother Jocko feels about working a game or two. It can help me tune out the problems for a bit and allows me to re-establish a clearer focus on what's really important. So, I'd say there's not a chance I'd turn back an assignment based on me just being stressed. That said, when I have those days when I'm mad at the world, it's best for everyone that I find a quiet place to be ALONE. There was a time in my life when I'd get mad and go into a bar just begging for someone to push my buttons. But after being thrown into a few jail cells, and embarrassing the Hell out of my wife and family, I learned to not go looking for trouble when I get that way. I HAVE turned back assignments in the past for situations when I get like that. It's better for me to upset an assignor for a little bit than it would be for me to be banned from a league or conference because I knocked an idiot coach on his arse. Tim

GD patent leather plate shoes...... Tim

Amen to that. Eject early and eject often so you won't have many ejections later. Tim

Elbeco shirts........... I win! Tim

Why am I not surprised......... Tim

This is the original article as found in the ABUA archives. http://www.umpire.org/writers/lucy.html Tim

Back in the day when I was coaching my eldest son's baseball team at 10U, we had runners stealing home all of the time off of pitchers not paying attention. I wonder what he was wanting you to get help for on this play. Certainly not the judgment call on the tag of R3...............I hope..... Tim

I get that, John. I'd just like to see a little more clarity in the rule. Possibly adding all of the conditions that would meet the criterion of an uncaught third strike under a new definition of "uncaught third strike". That might eliminate the confusion surrounding "dropped third strike" as well. But then again, it's not the only ruling that I'd like to see a little clarity added to. Tim

A bounced pitch for strike 3 (tipped = caught strike; not touched = uncaught third strike, batter can try for first (depending on situation) This contradiction has always intrigued me. In order to have a "caught" strike, the pitch must be handled "in flight". That means the pitch cannot have bounced first. But the in the definition of a foul tip, the rule says that any foul tip that is caught is a strike. To me, these two when put together imply that a foul tip after a bounced pitch cannot be a caught strike. Tim.

Umpires new to mens leagues, and even college ball, need to learn the difference between the following when it comes to good game management, "That's a bullSH*# call." -and- "You're a bullSH*# umpire." Number one can be dealt with without having to eject. A nice long glare at the player usually sends the message that you heard him and he's now on a short rope. You can issue a "knock it off warning", if you've been around long enough that they know you're a no nonsense umpire. But as Matt said, it's an advanced technique that I wouldn'tI recommend to younger, newer umpires. Number two is a no brainer at any level. Tim.