BigUmp56

1) Counting faster doesn't make time go faster. 12 seconds is 12 seconds. 2) In LL it's 20 seconds. 3) It is only in effect with no runners on base. Don't make things up. Quit whining, coach. The clock starts when he gets the ball and the batter is in the box. I don't wear a watch and I don't carry a stop watch, so the clock tics as fast as I decide it does. Since I don't work the small diamond I'll have to take your word that it's 20 seconds, but I don't think that's correct for juniors and seniors. I'll have to check. And you must have missed the provision in 8.05(h) that gives me the ability to call a balk every time he unnecessarily delays the game with runners on. Tim.

When their hands go up you call "time". You then run out and take a look and see if the ball is really stuck or see if it's gone under the fence. Tim.

What are you going to do when the pitcher begins to rub the ball between his hands with a batting glove on, Big? I'll tell you what I'm going to do the next time I run into a coach like Rich Ives that tells me it's the pitcher's perogative to take the glove off to rub up the ball. I'm going to start the clock on his time to deliver the pitch to the batter, and it'll be a tightly wound clock. Tic-Tock, pitcher....................nine.............ten............eleven..........twelve...............BALL!! Tim.

I try to make a determination on where the pitch will end up as the ball is coming out of the pitcher's hand. I'm right a lot. That's probably why my lifetime average in college was a resounding .205. Tim.

disagree. YMMV. The first time you have a smart fielder convince you to kill it without taking a look , then reach down and pick the ball up as it lays just rolled up against the fence, ivy, bush, or whatever, you might change your mind. It's our job to take a look. Not doing so is poor umpiring, and I know you're not a poor umpire, Johnny. Tim.

All because FED umpires are too dumb to possibly understand that a runner cannot legally occupy a base that is still legally occupied by a preceding runner....... Tim.

R3 is called out and R1 is returned to 2nd base. If, in a run-down between third base and home plate, the succeeding runner has advanced and is standing on third base when the runner in a run-down is called out for offensive interference, the umpire shall send the runner standing on third base back to second base. This same principle applies if there is a run-down between second and third base and succeeding runner has reached second (the reasoning is that no runner shall advance on an interference play and a runner is considered to occupy a base until he legally has reached the next succeeding base). Tim.

If he steps out during the pitch I'm going to wait and see where the pitch ends up in the zone. If it's in the area code of the plate I'm getting a strike and telling the batter not to step out again after the pitcher has begun his motion to pitch. But if I see F1 try to hesitate and misfire the ball because of the batter's movement, I'm calling time and re-setting them. Tim.

Your posts would benefit from additional punctuation. I am not going to take this abuse i already told you guys i had some issues. If i get more of the same crap here i will stop posting here and will not bother every coming bck. Relax. No one is abusing you! You should see the crap these guys put me through! Shut up and go get your gear on for the tee ball championship you worked so hard to get, Roland! Tim.

This is the second or third time you've posted about getting together with your partner on the half inning. This practice should be avoided. The crew has responsibilities on the switch, and they're not getting done when you're huddling to discuss mechanics and game management issues. Tim.

The problem I see with it is losing the ability to get a good "lean and look" on a PF/ST. And in two man you're in a bad spot to take the BR to second if the ball is misplayed at first. Tim.

Over the years I've watched several MLB and quite a few amateur umpires go TSF and make the call at first from the knee. I'm wondering what you'll see from the knee that you wont see from HOK in making this call. Is there any real advantage to it? Tim.

YES YES YES! I believe that the only thing to do when you kick a call is to own up to it. A manager may not like hearing you say that you kicked it, but he can respect it..........usually. Tim.

Tim, you're entitled to your opinion, of course, and I don't want to belabor the point. But let me just add a couple brief notes for your consideration. 1. I agree that the initial step was to 1B. But as you know, the "step directly to the base" requirement prohibits any movement toward the plate. This guy's movement to the plate was NOT slight: he almost fell over because so much of his momentum was moving to the plate, and he had to reset his foot immediately to stop that momentum. Are you discounting the movement to the plate and hanging your hat on the "distance and direction" of the foot alone? 2. The note in 8.05 provides a criterion for judging borderline cases: where F1's intent is to deceive, you should rule in favor of a balk (note for newer umpires: judging intent is required only for BORDERLINE CASES). If you regard this as a borderline case, you should consider intent. F1 clearly did deceive the runner, who took off. Thoughts? No, I agree with you that it was a step balk for his initial movement toward home. I have to admit that I don't see it as a big of a movement as you do. I do think the free foot passing the back edge would have been an easier call to sell. Tim.

I'm curious why you didn't cover all of this in your pre-game. Basically, it's not the best idea to get together between innings to discuss coverages you should have gone over in your pre-game. Tim.

I've gone back and looked at these again. I agree with Maven that the third one was definitely a step balk. No doubt that he stepped more toward home than first. But in the first one I think he gained enough distance and direction toward first. Distance is defined as simply as not putting the free foot down in the same place, or worse, placing it behind where it started. That didn't happen here, so he gained enough distance by rule. Direction to first is defined as stepping toward the first base side of the 45' mark on the baseline. The overhead view shows to me that he did just that. All that said, I noticed the second time that I watched it that the umpire demonstrated a step balk in the first one, which I think was a little picky. Maybe his body's momentum started him a little toward home, but it looked to me that there was no question that his free foot passed the back edge of the rubber. That balk call would have been much easier to sell. JMO Tim.

This is what keeps me involved on these umpiring forums! It's awesome to read brothers-in-blue talking each other up based on personal experience. There's been way too much "brother" bashing going on over the years on the Internet. And I had a fun experience while working with a law enforcement official too, Pete. We had a guy berate us terribly after being ejected, and as we walked toward the parking lot he decided to follow us and continue his tirade. That is, he followed us right up to the point that my partner walked up to open the door of his patrol car. It was hilarious seeing the look on his face right before he turned tail and took off back toward the fields. Tim.

I think that in both #1 and #3 calls the pitchers were balked for the free foot crossing the back edge of the rubber. It looked to me like there was sufficient distance and direction gained toward first base in both cases. The second one was balked for the slight movement and second re-set, but it was really close to me. Probably not one I'd call in an amateur game, and I don't think it would be called in MLB either. Tim.

You might ask them to read the approved rulings that add clarity to how this should have been called. There's little wiggle room for interpretation in them. Tim.

I think if you were to poll most experienced umpires who work both FED and OBR games you'd hear a prevailing theme about this subject. And that would be that FED wants to "dummy" things down to the lowest common denominator and take quite a bit of judgment away from the umpires. I have no reason why this is, but it's how many of us feel. Tim.

Of course the appeal was admissible! The run should have come off of the board. This is esentially the same play: APPROVED RULING: Two out, Jones on second, Smith on first and batter, Brown, hits home run inside the park. All three runs cross the plate. But Jones missed third base, and on appeal is declared out. Three outs. Smith’s and Brown’s runs are voided. No score on the play. Tim.

I can see both sides of this discussion as having valid points. A little preventive umpiring is in order. "Steve, step off & reset please." Tim.

Do you to school and teach when you're ill? All three of my sons are grown men, but when they were kids playing ball I'd like to think that the adults umpiring their games had sense enough to not work around them when they're sick. This is a sore subject with me. I work in an office and we constantly have morons show up to work as sick as hell. They hack, sneeze, wheeze, cough, and sputter all damned day, refusing to go home or miss a day. All because they cant "afford" to miss. Next thing you know everyone in the office gets sick. It really chaps my butt... So, my answer is no, Scott. I haven't worked games in your condition. I have the courtesy to stay home and nit expose others. Tim.

They think that they can get away with it becasue they do get away with it. Sad but true statement. In this area, youth league coaches tend to beat the heck out of inexperienced umpire's. And even though they're getting their butts handed to them by out of line coaches, they're hesitant to pull the trigger. Tim.

Nothing is worse than an ump who show boats on a third strike call.....As a one time player and then manager, he would be chasing me from the field and afterwards I would lodge a complaint with that umps organization. The above video is without a doubt an extreme and I doubt some of them are schooled and registered umpires. Still, it is no excuse for simply wanting to be the show. These players and especially these batters are human beings. Being called out on a third strike is bad enough, no need to rub salt into the wound by being so demonstrative. It shows a lack of character and a lack of a true understanding of the game from the point of view of the athlete. Guess you have never been a pitcher. There's a big difference between rewarding a pitcher with a firm called third strike mechanic and showing up the batter who just went down in flames. Tim.