StatsUmp

Perhaps late to the party. Absent governing body guidance (as in @Jay R.'s post), a single instance of this in a game may likely depend the temperature of the game and its participants up to that point. The act could easily be ignored as the I in the IAWE protocol or lead to a discrete "Hey, we don't do that in high school," sort of comment to acknowledge the behavior and hopefully nip in in the bud. If it starts happening regularly during the game, this might rise to the prolonged portion of the the Three Ps and lead to a warning. Is it possible this was a state-specific point of emphasis for you? My state occasionally issues its own POEs for issues not covered by the current year's NFHS POEs.

Even if I don't know you personally, I consider you a darn good umpire by virtue of your working D3/Juco games. From what I've read here, one has to be beyond good to qualify for and stay at that level. Empirically, sportsmanship - especially from fans - seems to be on the decline more in recent years. I also officiate basketball and I've had to remove a fan from basketball games 2 of the last 3 seasons: one for directing profanity to me repeatedly during a dead ball and one for a (verbal) personal attack during a dead ball. This spring, I had a game where the pitching for both teams wasn't particularly strong with both pitchers all over the place and struggling to throw strikes with any sort of consistency. Between that and the fact it was one of my first games of the season, I struggled with setting a good strike zone and I knew it. The fact there was such strong reaction to borderline pitches without regard to the correctness of the ball/strike calls was surprising - as if those reacting felt I was deliberately trying to screw over the pitchers when it was nothing more than the combination of early season rust, an off night for me, and the pitchers struggling just as much. I also blame social media. Because I have sports-related hobbies, the social media algorithm has suggested I might like clips of people complaining about umpire calls - most of which turn out to be correct with the partisan/rabid fans not knowing the rules or disliking them being applied properly against their child athletes. The comments are much worse, sadly. I've actually started to click the "I don't like this" links because I'm getting tired of seeing that crap being normalized. I honestly wonder if this was something that the failed rule proposal for this year wanted to address - the one that would have allowed baseball umpires to restrict to the dugout for more offenses, namely those where the only existing options are ignore, warn, or eject. Appropriate use of restriction to the dugout for the rest of the game would be a useful tool. If a team only has nine and a player gets restricted for inappropriate behavior, oh well; they now have to finish shorthanded with an out for the empty slot. If they have subs available, they now have to burn a sub sooner than anticipated. We as umpires can only hope restrictions in those scenarios would be enough of an attention-getter to deter the bad behavior prompting the restrictions.

I had a game where I called INT on a runner who chose to run in front of F5 and subsequently hindered F5's ability to throw to first. The offensive HC starts insisting, "There was no contact!" I inform him contact isn't necessary for INT. After the game, I learn the head coach is a registered with the state as an umpire - making me wonder if he was trying to test my rules knowledge or if he truly believes contact is required despite having a copy of the rule book that states otherwise. 🤔

This is good to know at any point in the season. I once had a game where my partner as PU had an argument with the visiting 1BC. Later, partner told me he had ejected the 1BC in a prior game. Had I known that before the game, perhaps I could have deescalated the situation myself with the 1BC and stopped the argument before it could happen. On the flip side, I recently had a game with a coach whose behavior didn't cross the line but still got on my radar. It would be all but certain this would be discussed with my partner should I have this team again so we can both can be aware of it and be prepared to nip any issues in the bud in the current game. I might even emphasize that we don't want to go looking for trouble because every game is a fresh start, but we should be prepared if and when trouble arrives. I'd think it's good to go into game knowing a coach's tendencies or rules knowledge so that a coach taking full advantage of the player/DH rule or executing specific plays in certain scenarios - whether on offense of defense - doesn't take any one by surprise. We might not necessarily need to do anything different for a post-season game, but the key is to take the time to have a meaningful pregame discussion and add anything that might be required by the governing association - especially if there is at least one crew member new to the post-season.

This has been my experience as well. What I do its probably similar to what others have already shared: I'll point to the right instead of using the hammer for an U3K - verbalizing "Strike 3!" for a called third - followed by a safe signal to show I saw the uncaught ball. If by some chance the catcher has sharp enough reflexes to scoop the ball up and tag the B-R before I can give the safe signal, I may skip that part and go straight to calling the out on the tag. Timing is everything, especially with atypical plays.

What am I missing here? Someone can get (administratively) ejected for simply batting out of order? 🤔 Most of these make me wish, "Why?" was an acceptable response.

In Michigan pitchers who didn't max out their pitch count in game one can pitch in both games of a doubleheader, the MHSAA FAQ states: I saw this happen last year in a freshman doubleheader (two five inning games by league rule). F1 pitched the entire first game and had pitches remaining. He started the nightcap and pitched until he maxed out his daily count.

Umpires in my association didn't receive any guidance nor did the subject come up. With that in mind... If a player did it in a manner described by @UAME, a simple, "Don't do that," or friendly warning may suffice. Conversely, someone doing it in an egregious manner to show up the PU likely deserves nothing less than ejection. This may also be something to pregame with partners to see how they handled any instances of it. If nothing else, pregame it try to be on the same page that day.

I watched the last 2 1/2 innings when I found the game by chance on TV. I didn't realize Porter was mic'd up or loud enough for microphones to pick up his saying, "No," on balls. I'm not sure if broadcasts are phasing it out (I don't catch many sports events on TV these days), but Fox didn't have a strike zone box on the screen. For what little I saw, I thought Porter did a good job, and the scorecard confirms my initial impression. Great last couple of innings some of the fine defensive plays by both teams.

I hope you were able to give him constructive post-game feedback about those mistakes and have him be receptive to it. Good new/young umpires who show potential and the willingness to learn need that feedback to become better, respected, and reliable umpires who want to keep at it.

Saw something on social medial today announcing the changes: NFHS Link / Archive copy. The essentials: Double first base required in 2027. Just one player to player meeting per inning on defense (not sure if this will include F2 asking for time to give signals in an R1/R3 situation). Players can't wear audio or video devices. Looks like the proposals for balks being delayed dead and more options to restrict to the dugout for misconduct were not enacted.

Judging by the sound effects, Francona pressed his luck and stopped on a whammy 👹.

My state adopted a modified version post-COVID requiring coaches to wait at the foul line and not come onto the field to question calls. From experience, reasonable coaches are fine with this protocol as long as they get to express their question or concern with a BU that's approachable and willing to talk with them. When used appropriately, I liken the dugout restriction to a (non-flagrant) technical foul in basketball as an intermediate penalty for conduct that doesn't necessarily warrant immediate ejection but deserves more than just a warning to address it. This proposed change also explains the vaguely-worded survey question asking about restriction to the dugout without any further context or explanation.

I'm trying to figure out what the proposed intermediate penalty is before ejection when restriction to the dugout already exists for certain situations .

Most of the time, they simply ask the umpire for "judgement." The sideline interpreters for one of the clubs in my area have mentioned using "How's that" to a lesser extent. VBBA List of Documented Terms

The biggest difference is that umpires didn't call runners safe or out on the bases unless the involved players couldn't decided on their own and asked for judgment. Given your rule set, the umpire would either call the runner out or either "in" or "not out" instead of safe. A great resource for rules and terminology is the VBBA site. I'd also recommend observing one or more games to learn the period positioning, how the umpire calls the game, and the style of play between the involved clubs. It wouldn't hurt to ask the local club's captain what it would take to learn the rules well enough to eventually umpire. Some clubs play with a relaxed/social approach and others play as competitively as possible - sometimes to the point it seems cutthroat - with the expectation that the game will be umpired accordingly with sharp knowledge of the rules. Even if it's not period accurate, I'd recommend from experience to run down the line on fly balls that could land on or near the line... which might not be marked beyond 1st or 3d base apart from flags serving as that era's foul poles. From one of the umpiring videos I watched on the VBBA site, the presenter said that any 1860's style apparel is acceptable for umpiring. So, that's what I do. I don't recall where I got my hat from, but I've bought my vest, ties, and pocket watch from Historical Emporium. HTH.

Flattering, but no 😃. I keep score for a vintage/19th century base ball club during the summer months and I've also umpired a handful of games. So, I have a working familiarity with the rules of that period.

While I don't know when various rules/mechanics phased out or discouraged the use of "Dead ball," the term used to have a specific purpose long ago. Back in the 1860s, the game was still largely amateur and played in open fields. During the period, a live ball that somehow got handled by someone not involved in the game (such as a spectator) was declared a dead ball. The net result was that any runners allowed to advance by rule could keep running and the defense could not make a play on any of them until the ball was first made live by being returned to the pitcher (§22 in the 1860 Beadles Rules). My best educated guess is that the term still stuck in certain scenarios (ball out of play, etc.) long after the rule was changed/eliminated and any usage today might be a vestige of the old rule.

Years ago, I believe the sport was referred to as Beeper Ball because I vaguely recall the local MLB team having a day where they either recognized area beeper ball players or held an exhibition contest prior to the game. I can't imagine how challenging it must be to keep absolutely quiet during playing action and not applaud/cheer so everyone involved can hear the ball beeping.

And one hopes this person is amenable to constructive feedback and tips for improving game management. It's frustrating when a partner receives such feedback but doesn't use it. As for @BlueClue's scenario, without being too repetitive: You didn't eject too quickly. I'm not going to say it was too slow because you ejected once it was clear your partner wasn't going to take care of business when it was desperately needed to keep control. Just because your partner might have weak game management skills, it's not carte blanche for coaches to behave as poorly as they did. You weren't out of line and you definitely weren't too trigger happy here even if your partner thought otherwise. Any coach using profanity during an event I officiate for HS or younger athletes will not do so without consequence. The combination of multiple F-bombs with personal attacks and prolonged arguing in the OP increases the likelihood the coach won't be around for the end of the game. The Thanks comment in response to the coach telling you how he felt about your performance wasn't that out of line, either. As much as I try to ignore those comments, I'll admit to answering as you did on one or two occasions. I'm not ashamed to admit that I would not have been state tournament material in my second year in each of the sports I officiate. Still, you're right that you and your partner are a crew for better or worse and working together and having a partner's back is important. I know I appreciated the partner(s) that had my back in my early years and I try to do the same for my partners - especially the newer ones. I had a partner kick an IFF call and want to send the runners back to their previous base even though they properly advanced when the ball dropped uncaught. I got him to huddle with me and I was able to talk him through the play and the rule. That was enough for to him realize 💡 the runners advanced properly and shouldn't be sent back. This is a good example of what @JonnyCat is talking about.

From what high and middle school coaches have told me, this seems like an issue all over the country. One such coach told me how that city's summer base ball program has seen a 50% participation drop over the years from kids wanting to focus on elite level travel ball, sports other than baseball, or no sports at all. Minimum roster sizes sound like a nice ideal, but it's difficult to make them a hard and fast requirement when many teams legitimately can't attract that particular number of players.

Agreed. I recently had an uncaught infield fly where the R1 and R2 both advanced. Partner, a long time veteran, wanted to send the runners back. Not knowing how he might react, I met with him and reminded him runners can advance at their own risk on an IFF. The light bulb lit up over his head 💡, he said, "You're right," and then announced the runners' advance stood. Thankfully, neither HC complained and we played on. At least make the attempt to get it right. Doing nothing is a good way for crew credibility to drop to zero and make for a rough remainder of the game.

When the camp i wanted to attend was cancelled due to COVID and instead offered virtual sessions, I passed and waited for it to resume in-person instruction simply because I both wanted and needed the field and plate work sessions more than presentations and diagrams. For me, it was far more useful to be shown what do do and be told what I was doing well and what small adjustments might work better for me - stuff that simply cannot be shared and conveyed effectively through a screen. Also, some of the diagrams I've seen have enough lines and arrows to be overwhelming and it's much more practical to have a clinician demonstrate where one should be positioned for a particular play and giving attendees the chance to do it for themselves. This is definitely an issue all over. In my state, anyone who registers with the state association to be an umpire for either sport on the diamond is given little more than the rule book, case book - and perhaps a mechanics manual - and left to otherwise fend for themselves. This is definitely not the way to get rookies off to a good start especially when officials registering here for the first time in football or basketball have to pass an open book mechanics test to ensure they've at least read up on the basic principles in those sports. Pre-COVID, my official's association used to offer a floor mechanic demonstration in basketball for new and newer officials. It's a shame something like this can't be offered for those who can't attend a more-encompassing camp for whatever reasons. However, I understand how lack of interest and low numbers of new officials registering for a sport often drives the decision to offer these sessions. That said, I have encouraged a rookie or two I've done baseball games with to attend the same camp I've attended in the past when they showed an interest in improving and learning more. The flip side is officials are now between a rock and a hard place when there's either no game management or a game manager who doesn't want to address unruly fans. I don't envy any officials finding themselves in that position.

I definitely agree with @grayhawk that it's preferable to hang it up on your own terms. Better to walk away when you can still feel good, and a bit proud, about what you've done over all these years. I'm glad I got the chance to meet/see you at the 2022 and 2023 SEMUC camps, and I wish you the best moving forward. If time and interest permit, I hope you consider @SeeingEyeDog's suggestion of finding ways to remain in the sport outside of umpiring.

Working the bases can definitely be very challenging. Yesterday, I was averaging about one bang-bang play to rule on each inning on the bases. Being in the right spot to have the right angle to make the right call is sometimes easier said than done, but it also feels good when you do it. Like @834k3r, I prefer plate first in a doubleheader because I like to work the plate to be/stay proficient at it, I like to show I'm not a plate dodger, and teams here also seem to throw their better pitchers in game 1. The rule of thumb here for assignments without a specific position seems to be that whomever is listed first gets the plate. However, exceptions can sometimes be made for umpires who already had a game behind the plate for one of the teams, or someone with a significantly longer commute than anyone else assigned to the game.