humanbackstop19

I was wondering if anyone had a link or leads to resources on umpire mechanics from the early 1900's, more specific late teens, early 20's. I have the opportunity of a lifetime to work the first ever collegiate game played on the Field of Dreams movie site and my partners and I are going for a time-accurate look, both in style and the way we call the game. Any video links or literature would be helpful. Thanks all!

If protests are allowed at this level or association, go through the proper procedures is you think a rule has been misapplied. In this case (if allowed), you could protest it was not a proper appeal if verbal live-ball appeals are not allowed. Personally, the coach's announcement that R3 left early is an acceptable appeal if verbals are allowed.

No doubt, the man can umpire - better than I ever will. Just saying, this is not how the NCAA wants ejections handled. Walk the other way. Heard it form George Drouches, Randy Bruns, and Billy Haze. A "pro" approach was used. Not for a second am I on the coaches' sides. Ejections were beyond warranted for both. Same thing may very well have happened, just with a different crew member.

Small fish talking here, but the NCAA protocol after an ejection is to immediately go the opposite direction of the offender. This umpire started, but then stuck around and engaged the head coach, who was probably looking for an explanation, which should not have been needed (it was quite obvious). Still, after ejecting the head coach, he turns back towards the coach, which allowed him to be much more accessible to the ensuing contact (automatic 4-game suspension). The NCAA wants umpires to keep heading away from the ejection and pass responsibility of getting the ejected personnel off the field to the next nearest umpire or crew chief. If they do not leave, they are subject to an additional one-game suspension. In this case, I think a different umpire could have dealt with the head coach after the assistant was ejected and played rodeo clown as needed.

I'm an open book a this point. If there was an advantage we could find that was typically not called or had a slap on the wrist penalty, we would use it. I won't throw others under the bus, but I'll accept accountability to the fullest.

OK. So let me elaborate with a little with a confession. I once was a part of the problem that led to this rules change. I was a college hitting coach for 3 seasons (12-14). Our team practiced being hit by pitches (with lite flight balls) and live throws (tennis balls). I coached gaining ground, leaving your elbow high, and getting the free base with the consequence at the time being you were kept in the box if busted. I also coached them to turn their head and face the backstop while gaining ground into the pitch with the idea that it appears in this cases you are protecting yourself. Never did we track the pitch into our bodies. That's how they end up eating a pitch in the teeth. Hitters track pitches into the catcher's mitt. Point is, there are still coaches out there teaching this tactic. Difference is there's now a much harsher punishment for it. And honestly, I'm still coaching it to HS hitters, cause the reward far outweighs the risk. Looking at this clip, I would give out a "GREAT JOB" to this hitter if I was occupying the coach's box.

In judging the hitter's movements gaining ground into the pitch, there was an interpretation on how to judge the intent of the hitter. Two main questions were to be asked on this type of pitch. 1) Was the hitter protecting himself from an unavoidable HPB situation? 2) Was the hitter initiating a movement naturally associated with his swing (stride with legs or hands)? On this particular play, which is reviewable if used in this game, my judgement says NO to both of the above. The hitter did not "freeze" he gained ground into the pitch and looked down to watch it hit him. That leaves the hitter in violation of the rule.

The thing to remember about golf shoes is that they are constructed for linear forward movement. That said, they have walking, with traction, in mind much more than the rigors of running, which takes a much higher impact on the arches and achilles at foot strike and the roll through, which pressures the achilles more. They also are not great for lateral movements. In 2 and 3-person umpiring, we're doing a lot of changing directions, pivoting, etc. With that, I look for the modern turf shoes, which have become ever more popular the past 5 years or so. They are built more like cleats, but try and stay lightweight and cushioned. New Balance shows this by offering mid heights on their last 2 versions to support stability and lateral movements.

Very true. In real-time you would need to kill it.

First play - "In my judgement" the C was illegally blocking the plate with his back leg BEFORE he made any motion to field the throw coming in from RF. It never moves as he fields the throw. With that, I think you do have OBS here, but ignore it as the run scored anyways.

If you go the Oakley route, which is my recommendation, go to a retailer and try as many frames AND lens styles for those frames as possible. I like the wrap-around lenses for XLJ and Radar Path frames, as they fit my chubby cheeks, ha. And I agree, the Prizm field lenses are outstanding and designed to make the red seams of the ball pop!

Looking for the FPSR on this play in 2-person mechanics with R3/R1 - In reading the roll ball, I'm going to get to the edge of the home plate circle with my toes parallel on the foul line, now facing 2nd base (chest to ball). FPSR is going to be top priority before the touch. From this spot, I can stay on the slide, then, if clean assist for pulled foot/swipe tag and any potential overthrow by swiveling my head. And.....get the touch of home plate with a very quick glance if possible (probably not). It's give a little (the touch), to get a lot more potentially (FPSR, pulled foot, swipe tag, overthrow responsibilities.....).

NCAA : Pop-ups are clean in college as long as there's no rolling action following through, which I don't see here. I've got a legal slide carrying momentum through the baseline extended. Mechanically, I want to be on the first base side making that call, if needed.

The toughest of the highlights is the "Catch to No Catch" ruling. But this is in Appendix E: Getting the Call Right. Great job getting this call right by letter of the rules in place. 9) Changing a call of “catch” to “no catch”: The umpires may conference after a fair batted ball has been hit into the outfield or on any foul ball to determine whether the fielder did or did not make a catch� Note: If the ball is foul, it remains a foul ball. a) The ball is dead� b) The batter is placed at first base� c) Each base runner is advanced one base from the base occupied at the time of the pitch�

It simply means there's more OBS that INT in the video when slowed down and replayed time and time again (if we're running the hypothetical of 2 outs). Officiating goes into the gray area of not rewarding SH*#ty defense for creating the mess in the first place. Still, it's picking boogers watching the benefit of video. I hold my call on this would be a loud, hard, "That's Nothing!"

I respect that judgement. If we're getting anything, I agree it leans more towards OBS than INT, just for the fact of the multiple boots by the defense and they should not be given the benefit of the doubt for any penalty. I have a hard time rewarding bad baseball, which goes both ways on this play.

I've got a big, loud, hard "That's nothing" on this. We don't have OBS initially because the dumfounded runner's actions were not impeded in any way. After the deflection, we're in the area of the catcher's circle and both the BR and C were doing what they were supposed to be doing and nothing was intentional.

There is one big difference in the 2 HPB sequences, which helps the judgement of the intentionality by the hitter. Simply look at the hitters' eyes. In the first HBP on the elbow, the hitter watches the pitch hit him - easy call - he's staying (strike called). In the 2nd HBP though, the batter turns his head away almost towards the backstop. Here, "in my judgement" the batter is protecting himself. That, and the pitch being inside the batters box, he's going to first base. If the batter is in "protective" mode, it's hard to justify they intentionally allowed the pitch to hit them. When they turn their head to the backstop away from the pitch, they are protecting themselves.

This is NOT an eligible play for review initiated by the CC until the the last 2 innings of regulation or extra innings. This play would have to be challenged by the HC at this spot in the game.

As the spring season approaches and games close in on a lot of us (some may already be working), I'm curious to opinions on how many live/cage pitches or live sessions are an adequate number to see as preparation before feeling dialed in and comfortable working a live game. Personally, I try to see 300-400 pitches over the course of 3 to 5 sessions before I'm comfortable going out and calling a college level game, which is exclusively my spring schedule.

At 5'10, I was able to take the removable lower extension off of my Cobalt and still have full coverage of my bottom ribs. I think anyone taller than me would have to keep it on, which makes it a bit more bulky. Still, if protection is your primary concern, the Cobalt rocks in terms of low profile, impact absorption, and heat management in warmer temps.

I had it happen in a Class 4A (largest schools in Iowa) high school game. R3/R1- R1 broke early as P came from stretch to set position to try and entice a play on him. The P froze and the offensive HC yelled at runner to take 2nd base, which he did with ease. After occupying second, the P delivered a pitch, which was popped up in the infield. R2 (now) started retreating back, but was yelled at to get back on second. Defense appealed at first base, which I ruled safe. Defensive HC comes out politely and asks for a second opinion. Asked me to get help on the ruling. Got together with a regular partner of mine and ruled safe on the appeal. Defensive HC came back out, which I told him he couldn't if play stood. He was hot now and yelled he was protesting. I let him come out and reminded him our state does not allow protests. An official verbal warning later he let it go....End story.

I'm looking forward to trying my new plate coat with the Cobalt underneath.

Check Appendix G Sec. 2 (d): The term "shall" should answer the question, but not as directly as most questions on this test.

I'm curious to see what can be used to prevent corrosion on metal buttons/tabs on chest protectors. My All-Star Cobalt after one year has some white build-up on the metal tabs. I treat it with oil/lubricant during the season and before storing away for winter, while keeping it indoors. I've considered covering them with black fingernail polish. Thoughts?