ElkOil

You are a credit to umpiring and dare I say, the crown jewel of this forum.

He wouldn't generally appeal his own call, but there's nothing stopping him from going to his partner for help if he didn't get a good look at the swing.

Dear Mr. Senor Azul, Once again, you've rocked it with a perfect explanation full of expertise and wisdom. You're a national treasure!

Working quickly isn't by itself illegal. This would be a balk if the pitcher either didn't come set or pitched before the batter was ready (which would be considered a "quick pitch").

I don't profess to know all the answers, which is why I'm fine taking their word for it. It isn't appropriate for umpires to debate the validity of the science since we're neither scientists nor privy to the studies that went into it. Luckily, since NFHS has their rules in place, there's no chance of them adopting your line of thinking and players will be the safer for it. You can stand on the rooftops proclaiming your desire for high schoolers to wear the equipment you espouse, but you're shouting into the wind.

Earlier in this thread I posted five links to the actual science I referenced, so read back through the posts and enjoy. There's more than enough information for you. Regarding collisions, they're illegal now, so I don't see the need for a skull cap to protect against what is now no longer allowed and increasingly rare when you consider the catcher faces thrown and batted balls as a real threat with every single pitch, not to mention follow-through swings and thrown bats. It doesn't add up. Especially not for high school aged kids. If adult players want to take those chances, they know better. But as long as children play this game, I say keep mandating safety measures for them.

Would there be an infraction on the batter for contacting F2? I have a hard time seeing it as catcher obstruction if the batter is out of the box.

You're probably right -- you probably didn't do well. It's okay... none of us do very well when we're first starting out. That's all part of the gig and why we don't begin our careers calling high-level ball. You're going to stink up your share of games but that's exactly the way it should be because that's what's going to motivate you to improve. If you start out thinking you're some hot shot umpire, you're not going to strive to be better. So don't pressure yourself to be perfect or even good at this point. Focus on improving just one or two things every game. Maybe it's stance and timing the next time you're out. Maybe when you're on the bases next it's timing and positioning. Maybe mechanics. Maybe there's rules you want to brush up on. No matter what it is, pick two and work them until you feel confident enough to pick two others and then work those. Take as many games as you possibly can because getting better requires repetition. And having the interest to be active on this forum shows you're interested in learning. Before you know it, your confidence will increase and you'll see how much better you are than you were last month, or last season. It can take years to work your way up, so stay with it. It's worth the work!

The fielder had an opportunity to field the ball before any of the weird stuff happened, so it's all nothing and the ball remains live. Play on.

Talk about needing pace of play rules...

Wha... what fun is that?!

Yes. Professional players are held to a different standard than high school kids.

-1. There is no definitive science to back up your mouth guard comment, and there is actual science to refute your mask comment. Your preference for protective equipment is not rooted in the safety of high school children. It's one thing to want something for yourself, but it's quite another to want it for "future generations." Why would you possibly want kids more exposed and less protected?

There's an abundance of information from credible scientific sources casting doubt on the claim that mouth guards prevent concussions. The schools of thought have swung from one prevailing side to the other over the years. For every study that says one thing, you'll find one that just as definitively says the opposite. Personally, I'm not convinced either way. The jury is still out on this topic.

So what would you have here? When the MC occurs, call time and EJ the runner? Then what? You don't have an out, and you can't put a replacement runner on 3B.

It's going to take a long time to figure all this out. You'll have to try lots of different positions behind the catcher to find what best works for you, so don't sweat it because we all have to go through this learning curve... which can take many seasons. Be patient and give yourself a lot of slack, even if it seems like others aren't. There are some really good suggestions here, so play around with them and try something new until you get it. And whatever you do, KEEP AT IT!! It's tough sometimes to not feel discouraged, but we all have good games and bad games, no matter how experienced we are. This is a good group to lean on, so you're in the right place!

I may be wrong, but the way I would have done it is: - Call OBS - Upon MC, call time - Award home - EJ the runner There is no out to be had here. You can't impose one as a penalty in this scenario.

That's the thing about ignorance. By definition, those who are ignorant don't know it.

Everything but those goats. They're too funny to kick.

Truth. I was calling the game of my life a couple of years ago, then called one high strike. One. The raft of hollering from the stands was unreal. You'd have thought I was kicking puppies.

There's a correlation between how good an umpire is and the amount of crap he takes. Oh, there's still crap to be had, but it decreases as skills and confidence increase.

The reasoning isn't necessarily that we should all use numbers. The reasoning was for umpires who are trained at the high-level schools -- who may aspire to the upper echelons -- the training should instill a uniformity. Umpires will invariably develop their own style, but the point was that the mechanics are fundamentally similar so that anyone can understand when a strike is called, regardless of the stylistic differences between umpires. Personally, I don't call strikes by number. I'll give the count every now and then during an at-bat. I believe it is incumbent on the players and coaches to know the count, and if they don't, they can ask. I don't care if the fans know the count.

Agreed. I was being facetious.

So we should umpire by consensus? Ask for a show of hands who thought it hit the batter and who thought it hit the bat? Oh, no. Wait. You said -- and I quote -- "everyone in the park knows..."

Heh, heh... "Foul" territory.