ElkOil

I was using a Wilson Shock 2.0 HSM and decided to buy a new Force 3 Defender HSM and used it for the first time yesterday. I'm a bit disappointed. First, the pad that runs front-to-back across the top of my head has a ridge on it that prevents it from sitting nicely, so the helmet teeters. In addition, this ridge wore my head raw after the first couple of innings. Second, instead of feeling like a helmet is on my head, it feels more like a mask is being pulled onto my face because the chin pad is too tight and it forces my jaw rearward. I played around with the straps a lot, but either the whole thing is too loose, or it jacks my jaw. Maybe after a little while the pads will break in, but for now, it's a whole lot less comfortable than my Wilson. Any suggestions? @MadMax?

Undeniable. But the umpire is not the appropriate person to make it so.

So... you're not sending him a Christmas card this year?

THANK you for explaining that. I was wondering why they all had the same title.

Who was it who told another member, "you don't live in the real world. It must be sublime"?

Gotcha covered.

You ask two -- what I presume -- are distinctly separate questions. One, you asked if this move was a balk, and the other you asked what the call should be after describing the hesitation until the coach brought it up. You have plenty of answers on the balk call based on the mechanics you described from the pitcher. To your other question -- what the call should be -- it should be what the umpire thought it was. Sometimes balks happen extremely quickly and the umpire has to judge whether or not the move was legal. This can take a few seconds until it's replayed a few times in the mind of the umpire, especially if the balk isn't your plain vanilla type. Sometimes the umpire thinks, "Hey, was that a balk?" and then someone says something, and his thought process gets solidified and he calls the balk. It never looks good when it appears that an umpire's call is based on the complaints of a coach. But things like this have that appearance. There's no harm in calling a balk late since the umpire will place runners wherever they should be. It may not look all that great, but it happens at every level of ball... even MLB.

Any runner has the opportunity to correct a baserunning mistake. If a mistake was made in missing 3B, the runner may return after re-touching home provided a following run hasn't legally scored. NO RUNNER can unscore after legally scoring, so if he touched all bases but thought he missed 3B and returns to 3B, he would be ruled safe on appeal and the run would stand.

Why did you post your question if you're going to argue the answers? Because yes, it's tough luck for the runner. And since the first baseman caught the ball and stepped on the bag prior to the runner reaching the base, he was out in any case. There was no possibility of him being safe since the ball got there before he did and the putout properly made. Reverse your question by asking what possibility was there that the batter-runner would have been safe given that the throw beat him? Was he robbed of a single because he couldn't plant his foot? What if he ran faster? If he could scamper down the line better, I bet he'd have been safe. If the fielder bobbled the ball, he'd have been safe. You can spin your wheels with these "he would have been safe if..." scenarios all day long, but they don't change anything. The BR was out.

Oh, I know. I think it's misdirected, though. I've seen it in other fields I've been in. When I was a career EMT, I was amazed how others EMTs put non-EMTs down for not knowing medical stuff. When I had an IT career, so many help desk people had no patience for customers who called asking for help because they had trouble with "obvious" issues. And the same is true in umpiring. Once some guys learn stuff, they automatically hold everyone else to the same standard for some reason. If there are any psychologists among us, I'd be interested in a professional opinion as to why this is. I'm sure the phenomenon has a name. Well, I can think of some names for it, but I meant something sophisticated and classy-sounding.

"We" don't. Perhaps you and others do. I do not blame coaches for not knowing the rules. It's not their job -- that's mine and yours and every other umpire's job. Coaches should coach and if they don't understand a call we make, they should listen with an open mind... but they don't. And since they never have, I'm not going to get worked up about now, a hundred and seventy something years later. What I can't get my head around is how so many umpires never seem to learn this simple lesson: Coaches do not and will not know the rules like we do. They do not and will not listen with an interest in learning something new. Perhaps you think it's sad. Personally, I think it's funny because it's one part of the game that has never changed and is as natural as a rainy day.

Ain't that the truth. For some reason this year, I've been assigned mostly Men's games. The 18 year old division has some excellent pitching and I get spoiled because it's so easy to call their games.

Men's league and varsity HS mostly. Bad teams and younger players, pitchers who lack control... they get a bigger zone. Everyone has their own zone, I suppose, and this has served me well so far.

No, mine is not that wide. Yes, I can make adjustments for the level of ball, but unless the pitching is atrocious, it's never batter's box to batter's box. And when I umpire men's league, if the pitchers are collegiate or former AAA, they get a zone as defined in the book.

That's your strike zone, huh? What happens when the catcher comes to bat? Do you ring him up on a pitch in the batter's box, then spend all of the next half inning chatting with him about it? That must be quite the conversation.

It was a night game.

Those look like a pair of worn out old bowling shoes. Your feet are too important to put on a tired pair of shoes. If you invest good money into anything, put it into a good pair of new kicks. They're worth the money.

It's a common misunderstanding of many umpires to believe that by upholding the rules and correctly managing a game, they are creating sh**storms. But such cannot be further from the truth. The player who flipped the bat is the problem and by not doing the proper thing, the umpire would be compounding that problem. Handling this situation correctly is why you are paid to be on that field. Doing anything but is shirking your duties. There will be strong reactions by players, coaches and fans to you properly executing your duties. These require your fortitude and unfaltering dedication to your job and craft as an umpire. These will test your resolve and perhaps have you questioning your desire to continue as an umpire. These may have you second guessing yourself. These situations are unsavory, to be sure, but they are a time-honored part of the game. Umpires have been doing it since baseball was invented. People won't be happy with you, but your integrity demands you do the right thing, regardless of how difficult it is, particularly when it's in response to a safety issue like a thrown bat.

Treat it the same as you would an in-game scenario. Since you can't eject him, ignore him. What he said is of no consequence.

I'm just happy he'd berate people for it. After all, that's what coaching baseball is all about: Teach kids to play a game, have fun, get some exercise, instill the important life lessons of good sportsmanship... then tear into an umpire if something doesn't go your way.

The OP asked if "the umpire and/or scorekeeper recognizes..." and my response was directed to that and your statement that @Richvee mentioned. Your suggested reaction (solution?) that the umpire should be berated won't help the situation in the slightest.

Of course I disagree with it. A coach of Ives' ilk will berate the umpire, but here's a little nugget he doesn't know: BOO rules -- like a missed base, not tagging up and the like -- are designed to ensure the coaches keep their heads in the game. Umpires are not to initiate action and have to wait until a coach brings it to their attention. In addition, there are game tactics at play regarding when a coach says something to the umpire about BOO, so it would be senseless to give the umpire any responsibility for calling attention to it or acting upon it. It keeps the coaches coaching and apparently some of the coaches take issue with that.

I always enjoyed "Mother pus bucket."

When someone asks you if you're a god, you say yes.