SH0102

I agree...and again, to each their own. I have not had many ejections in many years of umpiring, so I am far from an expert, but I just don't understand the putting it on us. Saying "what do I have to do" is basically saying it's on you (umpire) when the exact opposite is true. I would rather say "what are you going to tell your kid to make sure he doesn't get ejected" if you really want to go that route. Perhaps I am spoiled by the super simplistic NCAA route....warn and eject, warning should include "if you continue, you will be ejected". There is zero room for misinterpretation and if someone gets tossed after that, no one can say anything about the umpire. I just don't understand the staring, threatening, "care to repeat that" stuff....had enough? Warn them. They don't stop, goodbye. Simple

Some jacka** cost that parents 5 year old his college scholarship, so it’s completely understandable.

Fair enough, thank you

Not making excuses, but truthfully, with the shortage of umpires everywhere, you should be thankful a 9u umpire even Knows what obstruction is

I guess this is why hypotheticals don't work...they just get ignored... I am not arguing good game management...I respect Maven's knowledge tremendously and agree that it likely helped prevent an issue that otherwise may have happened. But he did that pretty quickly after that ball was hit....what if it hit the top of the wall? Now you have an issue where you just told the batter to run where he otherwise would have admired...and now he is further along the base paths than he would have been... I am not arguing, just asking for clarification on would that be an issue (for assignors, evaluators, defensive HC, etc) or not if that hypothetical played out

I get that completely, and respect the information. Can you address the ramifications of what might have happened if, for example, the ball hit the fence and batter barely slid in safely to second? I guess I’m just torn on this being borderline “coaching” unless the ball was absolutely tattooed and there was no chance it wouldn’t be a home run

I feel like I’m gonna get hammered for this opinion, but can anyone point to a book or case where we are taught to do this? Im not usually one to take a known situation and turn it into a “what if hypothetical, but I’m going to here. What if that hit had caromed off the wall and not gone over? By yelling at the BR to go, he actually potentially disadvantaged the defense as perhaps the batter would have had to stay at first, or been thrown out at second. Wouldnt that have been a better discussion after the fact? (After he crossed home)

This is a fantastic question, and I think the answer lies at the personal level. meaning, why are you doing those games, what can you do within them to improve yourself, and more importantly, how able are you to adjust back and forth? First, I think it is fun to SPARINGLY “go back to your roots”. What’s wrong with being the best umpire those 13u rec kids have ever had? It can be fun to see kids playing for the love of the game again, rather than chasing a scholarship or draft position where one bad call has destroyed their lives (if you listen to fans and coaches). I have a friend who is in this exact boat…he is newer to college but had college postseason (conference tourney) and now doesn’t want to do HS tournaments in summer…I get it, but I also told him that those games are a chance to work on things without the stress of the game, bc the game is slower than you’re used to. So you could take those tips you got during college and put them into action, and as you said, more “weird” rules come into play when you go down a level. And as for the strike zone, this was my biggest worry, as I was umpiring with my son (doing 13u and below) while also doing college, but I had zero issues. For me, I have a pretty good understanding (through many years of reps and focus) of the strike zone and plate. I can be on a 13u game, track a pitch, know it’s on the chalk, and decide it’s a strike. It actually can improve your timing, bc it forces you to track and decide after every pitch, something you SHOULD be doing anyways, but umpires are not when they are “too quick”. I would just tell myself where the pitch is, decide if it was close enough to call it, and then say ball or strike.

Honest question...when Type II Obstruction occurs, at what point do you, personally, render the decision as to what base the runner is protected to? Do you let it play out and then decide? Ie, if the runner had been thrown out at home by a split second, would you then decide he should get home? Or do you decide at the time of the infraction? My thinking is that if everything played out "as it should", meaning the ball was fielded cleanly, throws were clean, the timing of the out matters. But if he was thrown out by a step at home, but the ball was bobbled around, or took 2 relay throws, or the throw home was a 13-hopper, the timing on the out doesn't equate to automatically gifted home. I guess I am just curious as to when people personally decide what base to protect them to.

They lose 2 - 0. Missing 1st base is the worst base to miss because it then becomes treated the same as if he had grounded out to 2nd base in terms of runs scoring (assuming it happened with 2 outs) You nailed the reason...batter never safely reached 1st base, 3rd out was made on batter before he safely reached 1st, therefore no runs score.

I understand what the strike zone means...my point was that I believe UmpireAuditor uses the total distance off the plate, not the total distance "outside". If that pitch missed the strike zone by 5.5", then it would have been 8.5" off the edge of the plate, and watching the overhead replay (looking down on the plate), there is no way that was 8.5". 8.5" would have almost the entirety of the baseball in the batters box, maybe just touching the far edge of the chalk line (far edge meaning furthest from plate). That pitch was nowhere close to that. I think the ball was 5.5" from the edge of the plate, which would make it 2.5 inches "outside"

Umpire nailed it in my opinion

I think UA is wrong. The first 3” of the channel is a strike, so a pitch that missed 3” outside would be entirely over the chalk, a pitch 5.5” outside would be almost entirely inside the chalk… This pitch was not. I think they measure and say the ball was 5.5” off the plate, but the first 3” are in the zone, so it was actually a 2.5” miss

Ask PU where you can buy a bat with a hand attached to it (sarcasm before anyone jumps down my throat)

Thoughts from reading your post…(in your order) 1) One ejection every nine games does seem extreme…a lot of us do 9 games in 2 days during the summer, so an ejection every other day is a lot. The thing that stands out to me is you should *theoretically* have more warnings than ejections. There are acts that skip over the warning step, but those should not be happening often, and if they do, you should be quitting that league and work for a different assignor or league 2) What was the offense coach and parents gasping about? Seems pretty straight forward 3) I rarely stoop to their level but with his smart ass comment about playing another inning, I might have said “you mean the kids get to play another inning, I’m sure that makes them happy” 4) Demonstrations are an absolute no-no. For many, it’s an act that skips the warning , I myself would have at least warned him and said “go back now or you’re ejected”, do not let it continue, they are belittling you in front of everyone 5) Under what grounds did you call the game? I’m sorry it was hot but that should have zero factor in your calling a game. Was his team losing and by not sending kid out, they essentially forfeited? Some leagues have penalties for forfeiting…you might have asked, “coach, are you forfeiting the game?” When he chose not to send his kids out. Was F2 the only one who didn’t come out? 6) thrown bat is a team Warning, not individual; and next offender is ejected, though most leagues have and prefer an out over an ejection. Don’t warn for “drop it”…can you imagine a basketball ref having to penalize every time said “miss it” when someone took a shot? If they verbally interfere (“I got it!!” Or “mine mine!), then kill it and call batter out. If it’s unsportsmanlike, team warning, but “drop it” is neither. now, if they “drop it you pansy ass”, that’s unsportsmanlike

I have never disparaged anyone, I would not expect every umpire to handle stuff exactly like I do. But saying "what was that" or "care to repeat that" is baiting the coach, plain and simple. And that's fine...some people clearly have had success with it. But I could give two s*** about "gaining respect" from an 8u coach, or any coach in travel/youth ball. If you don't respect the umpires from the get-go, you will likely be writing your ticket to the parking lot as soon as something doesn't go your way. My job is to enforce the rules and keep the game moving. No 8u coach (or any youth coach) is going to belittle me. If it's bad enough to address, you likely will get one official warning and then you will be gone if it continues. I don't need to "earn my respect", and I don't need to bait a coach into repeating himself. As I said before, if it was bad enough that I would eject him for repeating it, then it was bad enough to eject or warn to begin with. You heard it, address it. Don't become the aggressor... How many times in MS and HS did you hear say someone say "you wanna say that to my face"? That's essentially what you're doing here...they are still in the wrong, but you're being the one inviting the fight. To each their own, but I would rather "earn respect" by taking control of the situation. If you don't want to warn yet... "Coach, that's enough, I am not listening to any more about balls and strikes". Or, "coach, this is your official warning. Anything further from you and you will force me to eject you". Then, "you're gone". Simple, and no one can accuse the umpire of being the aggressor in the situation, ever.

You asked a lot of fair questions but I think you’re over analyzing it. If you do not deem the flare high enough to warrant IFF, then runner is not protected and your application was correct. However, I’d caution you to consider the purpose of IFF. It isn’t to gift the defense a free out, it’s to protect the offense from a cheap double play since the runners have to stay put. A ball right on the bag with runners staying is a recipe for a TRIPLE play if the fielders can throw and catch decently, so I would err on the side of IFF on that ball 98% of the time (not on bunts and obviously not on line drive) Now, what if it is IFF? Then as you looked up, batter is out, runner is not out for being hit. Since the runner is protected on the base in an IFF situation, he can not intentionally interfere, but otherwise is absconded from INT bc the batter is going to be out anyways. If the ball is over foul ground, IFF does not apply (hence why we say “infield fly if fair”), so R3 can be guilty of interference if he interferes unintentionally. That said, a ball that hits 1” foul, the runner can not be expected to know it won’t be fair and move, and could still be doubled up, so if he’s trying to stay on base but not int, I’m not getting him unless it’s intentional, or he does something dumb, like shift from one side of base to other trying to get out of way and hits/trips F5. Hope this helps

Umm…no…I said repeatedly either warn or eject. We are supposed to be in control, the most Professional person on the field. If you want to bait them into an ejection instead of just doing it, more power, I’ll just warn them and say we’re done discussing balls and strikes, and if does it again (prolonged), eject

If they said something that warrants an ejection, why would you go and tell them to say it again? Why not just say you’re not tolerating that and warn them or eject them? I get what you’re saying about re-thinking behavior, but if you’re gonna eject them for repeating what they said, why would you invite them to? That is literally the definition of baiting. Would they repeat it if you didn’t tell them to? If it’s ejection worthy on a repeat, it’s ejection worthy when they first said it, but without you telling them to repeat, they’re the bad guy in everyone’s eyes. A neutral observer sees an umpire say for all to hear “want to repeat that?” Makes you the aggressor

Literally all three strikes were well within the K zone. Getting really tired of these guys crying about pitches that are actually strikes

I’ve noticed MLB umpires set up in the middle ALOT. is this just bc the pitchers are so good you can’t judge as well in the slot? If a catcher is way in, I stay in slot or set up high to look over him, and if I miss the pitch (based on their reaction), I just tell him, “I did my best to track that pitch, but you were so far in, I might have missed it”

Everyone is allowed to their opinions and comfort zones of course, but I see zero reason for it. I guess if you actually didn’t hear them? If you did, it’s either bad enough to address or it isn’t. If it is, just warn them or eject them. What’s the point of baiting them? You can do the stare, or the “wave the hand”, without verbally baiting the coach for all to hear

5 years? Try 5 hours. Coaches and parents like this are why youth sports ad a whole are crap now, why no one wants to be an umpire, and why kids burn out on sports. I don’t want to in any way come across as defending this a-hole, but for future learning, the one thing you need to take out of your repertoire is the “care to repeat that”? If you said that on the street, everyone knows you’re challenging the person, daring them, provoking them. Never be that guy as an umpire. If it’s bad enough to address it, you can warn or eject, don’t do anything else. You come across as the aggressor when you go to them and elicit their comment from them. Don’t give any fuel to their fire, and it should be obvious to everyone the coach is the aggressor and improper one

A lineup must have nine entries (some codes allow ten). If you start with 8, yes, the 9th spot is an out

Except that if an umpire(s) make a call that disadvantages a team, and then changes it, they have to rectify that disadvantage. If they said “out” and “out”, the defense leaves the field while R2 keeps running, that is a disadvantage. Basically the talk should be, “batter is out”…okay, we are changing our call that R3 was not out. What would have happened if we hadn’t called a double play?” The answer SOUNDS LIKE R3 scores, and R2 only scored bc defense left the field. So I’d have R3 counting, R2 at third, and I’m assuming R1 went to second. Now, if R2 was already scoring or nearing it when umps declared third out incorrectly, I’m okay with that run counting too. But you can not ignore the fact that the umps screwed up. Yes, catcher did, but umps have to correct situation when their mistake changes what would have happened