TheLovejoy

It's actually really funny you mention this. We had a discussion just this year about the differences in coaches/levels of play, and who we need to hold accountable to know the rule. Then, help accordingly. In not so certain terms it was something like, 'The programs that pay their coaches full time, enforce the CI and move on. Let them bring it up. Your 16u, or 14u junior league games, enforce it, and help educate the coach on the options.' At the level where the coaches are basically still volunteer dad coaches, help them. But once the coaches are paid by the programs to just coach, they need to know what's going on. What we get are some High School soph/frosh teams who are just surviving because some mom volunteered to help coach so they could have a team. Then, some American Legion program where the head coach makes 60k a year. They are not expected to know the game the same way.

I do personally think most of these could be left up to state associations to adopt or not depending on what works where they are. For example, South Dakota, Wyoming, and Montana don't have sanctioned High School Baseball. South Dakota has had High School Club baseball, but it's not sanctioned and is just a preseason to the American Legion season. American Legion is the much more popular baseball. It uses mostly OBR, with a few things that they haven't adopted, (expanded runners lane, bigger bases, coaches mound visits). They do already have delayed dead ball balks. So when the High School season starts, we have many more people that get confused as to what happens when a balk occurs and a pitch is thrown or it's on a pickoff than not. (Yes, it's simple to all of us/you that have worked a ton of games. But, the boomer whose been doing American Legion for 20 years, watches the MLB on tv 7 nights a week, and now has some High School games, it's harder to grasp.) I just think that so long as states aren't playing high school games against each other, most of these liberal rules can be left up to state associations.

Unrelated: American Legion FTL!! We're right in the middle of American Legion country here. High school baseball isn't nearly as popular. While the rest of the country finishes their high school season and moves on to the more casual, "mess around/not serious/travel" summer ball, we're just getting into the heat of things where American Legion is the only baseball that really matters. It's a dying breed. Related: We aggressively train our umpires to go out on nearly any fly ball where the center fielder moves in, back, or toward right field, or when the right fielder moves at all. We do this for several reasons: 1. With nobody on base, what does it hurt? (As long as your plate umpire can move a little.) 2. We train for three-man mechanics, where we always go out with nobody on. Since we work three-man crews for all in-state sanctioned games and all postseason games, it's good to build that habit. 3. We have a couple of white billboards beyond the fence, a flashy scoreboard, and other background distractions that can make the ball difficult to pick up from a distance. I'm definitely not blaming your homie, but on a deep ball to right-center, I'd absolutely go out on it. He's going to be 150+ feet closer to that ball than you are. As Scuba said, from the field, when we have a ball that could potentially leave the park, we try to get a feel for where the ball is so we can glance at the touch, then get as many eyes on the ball as possible. Then, when the offensive coach comes out, we can get together and be confident in what we collectively saw. Likewise, when the defensive team says, "He didn't touch first base," our response is: "I did not have him missing first base." Not, "He touched first," or, "He didn't miss first." We intentionally say, "I did not have him missing first base," (or "I did not have him leaving the base early," etc.). You're not saying it didn't happen. You're simply saying you did not have it that way.

The trick with this is that he can lift his leg, and the leg can be coming straight down, or even at a slightly downward angle toward home (probably very little or he'd fall toward home, but nonetheless toward home), and then at the bottom swing it back behind the rubber and then you'd have him stepping toward the base, and it would be ok.

So these are tough angles to call, but I'm going to give my thoughts just because me and some of my seniors discussed this a couple weeks ago: Also, you're more experienced than I, so I'm not saying anything you don't know. Just trying to give my thoughts on what I look for directly. In any ruleset, if the leg begins lowering any direction besides toward 2nd base, it's a balk. So, even if it's going 'straight down' after he lifts his leg, it's a balk. That would be him 'gaining ground' toward somewhere other than 2nd base. So in your sentence, I'd agree. I just worded it differently. If it lowers before gaining ground toward 2nd, he's actually gaining ground toward somewhere other than 2nd. To me it looks like the kid in the black is probably ok, and I wouldn't balk it. The kid in the red, it looks like he's coming down first, then swings it back. I'd balk that.

I don't know why I'm commenting, because your point is spot on and as somebody who does multiple leagues I couldn't agree more. Just for clarification I guess- that American Legion does follow OBR, but they do indeed have a fake tag clause. It's one of the additional rules. American Legion specifically is a F'in dinosaur.... They used to play 9 innings, no run rule, no re-entry, courtesy runners, a bunch of old boomers that had a hard on for being as much like the MLB as possible..... The game has changed homies....nobody wants to be there for 4 hours any longer. Adapt or die....and American Legion is working on dying.

^^^ This. Study the 'wedge' on tag plays. There are 2 wedges on every tag play. Let's see what is known, everywhere, and relate it to that: First, think of yourself getting to 3rd base line extended on a ball coming from the outfield to the plate. You're off the catchers hip, tracking with him, catching the 'back half' of the wedge. The OTHER wedge on this play, is nearly exactly opposite of where you are tracking this play from. It would be up the 3rd base line just a bit. Now, obviously we don't want to be there with a ball coming in from the outfield, but that's the other side of the wedge. It's the 2nd most ideal position. Inside the 'cutout' inside the line just a bit, so you don't get straightlined by the runner. Now flip everything about that play at home plate, and put it at 2nd base. The first, most idea position for U2, is in a 4 man crew, OUTSIDE of the infield, tracking the steal of a runner at 2nd base by essentially being at 2nd baseline extended (I just made that up), the line from 1st to 2nd extended, working off the fielders hip (the one taking the throw from the catcher on a steal). However, in a 2 man, you don't get the luxury of being there. So you take the inside of that B position, to catch the other half of that wedge. If you're in the Deep C, (relate this to a play at the plate), you'd be somewhere like, 6-10 feet up the first base line. Well, that doesn't make any f'ing sense..... So, why on earth would we want to be in Deep C on a steal at 2nd? Flip everything you know about plate positions on plays at the plate, mirror it, apply it to 2nd base, and you'll see it.

Max, and others, will be give you infinitely more valuable information and steps, but I'll let you know what I did. I grabbed a heat gun, 4 woodworking clamps, 4 lashing straps, a bucket of iced water, and a cup. These pics are just examples of how I had it set up once heated. Remove all of the padding for anything that you're going to heat. I started by heating up all of the shoulder pauldrons, on both sides, top, bottom, inside, out, and edges. Somebody mentioned earlier that it's easier to under-heat it, and have to do it again than to over-heat it and have melted plastic. Just slow circular motion all over all of the shoulder pieces. Then I took the clamps and straps and basically bent the plastic to the shape I wanted it, on all of the shoulder pieces, then set the chest protector up in the driveway, laying chest up. The first time I did this, the shoulders didn't hold form very well. The 2nd time I did this, I used the iced water and cup to pour iced water all over the shoulders, inside and out. The 2nd time it's held the shape very well. The limited edition CP seems to be much more 'stiff' padding, so the padding worked the shoulders a little more flat. Like, it presses back on the shaping once you re-install the padding. The OG CP is much more flexible and the shoulders haven't moved at all.

Here's my conundrum tho..... As an avid suit wearer, and semi-fashion police....I can't wear white shoes, unless I wear a white belt, (white accessories to accent the colors). And a white belt is no good. So, I can't just rock the white shoes in good conscience.

Here's my conundrum tho..... As an avid suit wearer, and semi-fashion police....I can't wear white shoes, unless I wear a white belt, (white accessories to accent the colors). And a white belt is no good. So, I can't just rock the white shoes in good conscience.

You're just asking, right?-with no hidden negative connotations? Because.....if somebody gives me the ok to rock the White SSK Plate Shoes.... I will be the first in the USofA to show up with them.... I wish I was joking.

I want to hear how this goes, the process, the results. I'm the most intrigued on this. The Rawlings padding has been thin enough, and it's 'clean/smooth' enough that any padding that I've stuck to the inside of it for sizing, has stuck and stayed without any problems at all.

Yes. Absolutely does. I think I'll keep my sizing foam in the back, and the D30 in the front where the impact comes from.

I wasn't thinking of doubling it up to supplement it. I was thinking more of put it in the front, so it does it's job the way it's supposed to as it. As a secondary function, it would help size the fit just a bit, instead of me needing that 1/8th inch sweat liner. I was more looking at it from a, "is this going to hurt the D30 role it's designed for by place it over the already existing 'thin' Rawlings pad?" There was a very specific mouthguard back in the day, Protec Dent, or something like that, that required the hard teeth background to perform it's action. It had perforated holes in the guard to disperse impact across your jaw. The mouthguard was extremely hard compared to other football mouthguards, the big soft rubber ones, but when a ball would impact it, it spread the impact across a wider area and would keep your teeth in tact. But if the backing surface of it was too soft, it wouldn't perform correctly, and was MORE dangerous than wearing nearly nothing as a guard at all. Now, understanding that you didn't invent D30, and you don't want to make any official claims...you also know infinitely more about it than most of us, and that opinion is valued.

You see where I put that bike sweat liner in the front?- That bike D30 that was linked, has it's own sticky stuff attached that just peels, and boom, it sticks. After seeing this, I've thought about just using that D30 to the front of the mask instead of the little pad strip that I use. Now, I understand, like you said, it would be a disservice to double it up with the default Rawlings pad. But, this seems like a super easy 'fix/addition' to the pleather Rawlings pad in the front. Add the D30 to it to give it better up front protection, and a little bit of sizing detail. Eh? (I'm just trying to clarify that I don't want you to send me to padding purgatory for doubling it up)

I won't lie, I'm an UmpLife harness snob, and they've all been fitted around the Rawlings Skully. (Then, since I'm a nerd, I have a backup Rawlings skully, then, another backup to that backup), and an extra harness. However, that's all nothingness. I just mean the UmpLife harness is long enough for anything I've done with it. I think there is a big anti cut-and-burn group in here somewhere.

You said it wasn't directed at me, and I'm going to believe you.... haha...because I really don't care why or why not they do or do not take it all off as one. I was simply replying to a two page thread of people clamoring about umpires who take off the entire thing, why, why not, because their hair is nice, because they don't know what they are doing, or whatever the reason might actually be that you (nor I) care about at all. I think part of the reason is as you say, some keep their mask too tight (I actually think this is the biggest inadvertent reason), some find it easier, some are lazy, some just don't want to; I don't have any room to care any less. So yes, I do agree with you 100%.

Disclaimer….there are a lot of opinions and personal feel here 😊 All Star Cobalt: The short brim fits with every mask on the market, so you don’t get the “direct bridge from mask to skull” effect. (If you’re not sure what I’m talking about, there’s an article floating around somewhere that talks about bill length being one of the biggest overlooked safety factors with skull caps.) The shell itself feels DURABLE. Solid. Not flimsy at all. Unfortunately, that also makes it super heavy. I think it’s around 16 ounces or so — several ounces heavier than the Easton, which I already thought was too heavy. “Oh but I’m tough and it doesn’t bother me.” Ok, I’m not. Try a lighter one and you’ll know what I’m talking about after 4 tournament games in 100* heat. Ventilation…..what ventilation? It doesn’t vent at all. It’s hot, and heavy. The padding is probably the best stock padding on any of these. Between this and the Easton, they’re the most comfortable internally. However, it does not hold the skull cap in place very well. The shape is almost like a cone — it just gradually opens outward from the top until the bottom edge. Some of the others have more of a long flat section so they sit on your head more like a cylinder, if that makes sense. This one moves around the most for me. I personally think this one looks stupid, and you can’t convince me it’s SO much safer than the others that I need to look like a dingus wearing it. Did I mention it’s hot and heavy? Jadekylin Skull Cap: This one looks the most like a regular hat, but the bill is WAY too long for probably any mask. Again, no scientific evidence here — just my experience with the All Star MAG and GD Mirage. If it’s too long for the GD Mirage, it’s probably too long for most others. The padding is pretty stiff, but not terrible if you get the right size. I’d wear this one if I had to wear a hardhat in the field for some reason. Rawlings Coolflo: These tend to fit “longer,” but not wider. Specifically with the All Star MAG- I originally thought the bill length was fine with the All Star MAG because I had taken several foul balls and never noticed the mask pushing back into the bill. Then I took one last year that literally left a line on my forehead where the skull cap got driven into my head. After that, I swapped back to the Easton for the rest of the season. One interesting thing: if you order different sizes, the actual shell size is exactly the same. The only difference is the amount/thickness of the padding inside. A Large measures the same inside length and width as a Small — the Large just has thinner padding. I assume this is probably indicative of other brands to save cost on mass producing many skull caps at once, but this is the only one that I actually measured before selling the others. To help the fit issue, I bought a set of Easton replacement batting helmet pads (NOT the actual Easton skull cap pads — and if anyone finds those, let me know because I’d LOVE them). I used one of the long oval pads in the back of the Rawlings to push my head slightly farther forward. I tried putting extra padding in the front for additional forehead protection, but it pushed the skull cap too far off my face and made the mask feel like it was floating out in front of me. Moving the padding to the back fixed that. I also hated the pleather pad feel on my forehead, so I added some bike helmet sweat-strip pads to the front. That helped with sweat dripping into my eyes and got rid of the pleather feeling on my forehead. This skull cap is actually lighter than both the All Star and the Easton, so I was eager to go back to it once I got the GD Mirage. It’s what I currently use. EvoShield: First problem: the bill was WAY too long. I actually had one of our maintenance guys mill it down a bit just to see if I could make myself like it…nope. I also hated the gloss finish, so this thing was fighting an uphill battle from the start. That said, I do think it was the lightest overall. If they made this in matte and shortened/shaped the bill a bit, I actually think it could be a decent skully. But that was never going to happen for me. The padding was similar to the Jadekylin — if you order the wrong size, you’re basically screwed. There isn’t a lot of forgiveness in the fit. If you’re within about a quarter hat size, you’re probably okay. But if it’s too tight, it’s REALLY too tight. Easton: I wore this one for a few years before switching to the Rawlings. The shorter bill worked well with the All Star MAG. The inside padding has a nice moisture-wicking layer around it and is SUPER comfortable. Very soft padding. Unlike the All Star though, this one actually stays in place well because the padding has more “give” and wraps your head better. Honestly, I’d love to somehow transplant this padding setup into the Rawlings shell. The two issues that eventually pushed me away from it were pretty significant: It’s heavy. Slightly lighter than the All Star, but still heavy. It’s HOT. It vents better than the All Star, but nowhere near as well as the Rawlings or some of the lighter options. A non-issue-issue….the forehead is raised higher than I’d like it to be, so I feel like it makes me look like a Brachiosaurus, or something. Personally, with the addition of the little padding, I like the Rawlings much more than any of the other options.

Ok, I've seen all of the talk about umpires pulling the skully off with the mask being for all kinds of different reasons. I believe it's one that hasn't been talked about yet. You see in this picture how far down the back of the skully the all star harness goes? Like, all the way to the bottom of the helmet? When you pull up the front of your mask, that back harness doesn't come disconnected from the skully very easily. It's almost 'grippy'. So it's much easier to remove the entire rig, rather than have to fight with it. The solution, is to shorten the top strap of the harness, so the harness doesn't come all the way to the bottom of the back of the helmet. If it sits up from the bottom roughly an inch or so, when you lift the front of the mask up, 'tilting the chin out', and lifting the top, the harness just flies off the back of the helmet. Source: I have owned all of the skullys on the market, and have messed with them all to figure out exactly how to take it off, because I struggled with it for a long time. I'll post a pic, and create a skully thread with pics this week.

This made me chuckle. After all of this, the reply, "No. 10u minors. No leading off. No stealing. Just educational rec league baseball."

I should have said, 'unnecessary intentional contact'. R2, Short Stop is running the 'wheel' play, and when he peels in front of the runner taking the lead, the runner does a couple jab steps forward to unnecessarily intentionally contact the short stop to try and 'draw a foul'. I see that similar to what the catcher did, and that's what was in my mind when I typed it. I see what you're saying, and I agree 100%.

Essentially ANY intentional contact is illegal in some form or another, right? Whether there is a penalty or not is another story. But 'drawing' the foul is illegal. You can't intentionally make contact. You can have intentional contact on the offense that is not malicious, and the runner is just out. So why would we allow the defense to do the same? I think the 2nd time of going into the batter warrants an ejection (probably, if it was obvious to you).

This be true....however.... If these bots actually ask some decent questions, that start some discussions, are we mad about it? I think this is a decent question that the majority of people, (aside from the dedicated here) won't have an immediate answer for. So, if somebody google searches something similar, it will bring them to this thread, where they'll find a decent conversation, and an explanation.

Tighter pants. I had this issue when I wore them very early this season. Then, my 15 year old wanted to start dabbling in the umpire world (the highest level of giddyness excitement that you can imagine, that was me) So, I went back to my Force 3's, and gave him the DaviShins. Well, he isn't going to work a 'ton' of games since he's also playing High School, so I just wanted one pair of combo pants. His combo pants are obviously a little tigher/form fitting than my Plate pants. He hasn't had this issue at all, one time.

Yes. I misspoke. I meant, he can’t come back into another place as a batter while the DH is on the field or in the lineup. Ive had coaches try to put the DH in the field, then enter this player into an other players spot in the batting order. No go. That’s what I was getting at. Re-enter is for sure the wrong word I was looking for.