cookie

"...The foot needs to come down before the hands separate..." That's a literal reading of the rule. However, in actuality, if the movement of the pivot foot precedes or is simultaneous with the throw, I have observed that most umpires do not call the balk.

Celt62: "... I looked at both of my OBR books and I didn't really see an answer to this..." OBR Rule 6.10... (10) Once the game pitcher bats for the Designated Hitter, such move shall terminate the Designated Hitter role for that club for the remainder of the game. The game pitcher may pinch-hit only for the Designated Hitter. (underlining mine) It couldn't be made legal while the team was at bat because the pitcher would be pinch-hitting for someone other than the DH. (A double switch could be made while they are on the defense.) I believe it is as you said "an illegal substitution" which if discovered during play has stiff penalties for both the pitcher and the substituted batter (number 7 batter in this case).

The batted ball deflects off the F1's glove, that's why the ball remains in play (not because "he's part of the playing field" as the announcer says). Plate umpire saw it and immediately waved off the umpire interference signaled by U2 Randazzo. Good immediate observation by the alert plate umpire to prevent a mess from happening.

Clicking the "Enroll" button on Jim Evans' pro course website leads to a blank screen so I presume his pro course is on hold. The other two are as mentioned Wendelstedt or TUS (PBUC's The Umpire School). Both schools have excellent teachers and a high caliber of instruction. However, PBUC has certain mechanics criteria that they're looking for mastery of in their Eval Course in March (which leads to assignments in MiLB). It seems if you're looking to enter MiLB, then you would have a leg up on that knowledge in addition to encountering first hand the instructors who will be evaluating you during the Eval Course. Also, TUS is an all-in-one setting at the Vero Beach Sports Village Complex (Lodging, Food Service, Classroom & Cage/Field mechanics Instruction - so no commuting if you're on the campus) which is great for closeknit umpire interaction and camaraderie. If you're not interested in MiLB assignments, but instead just improving your umpire skills that will no doubt down the road advance you in amatuer baseball umpiring, I think either school would be great. Finally, TUS is a four week course, while Wendlestedt is five. Up in my area, a fellow umpire in his 40's has signed up with the Wendlestedt School (even after I touted TUS to him), obviously not to get into MiLB, but as he told me, "just to improve his skills and advance." One note about TUS, I went there this past Jan/Feb when there were only 35 students (I don't think you'll ever see a full-fledged umpire school with that small number of students again). I believe its enrollment will reach 100 this Jan/Feb 2013.

I'm having a little trouble digesting what I'm reading in these posts, perhaps because it appears that Jacksa/Roder (2008 edit.; p. 28) is taking the view that this is a "no tag", thus safe (am I misinterpreting something?)... "...Ex. 6------Pitcher fails to cover first on a ground ball to the first baseman, who touches first just before the batter-runner.They collide, causing the fielder to drop the ball: no tag. Ex. 1-------Ground ball to the 3rd baseman who throws to the first baseman. The first baseman gloves the ball while touching the base but drops it after a collision with the batter runner and before a transfer to throw: no tag. Ex. 2------Ground ball to the first baseman, toss to the pitcher who gloves the ball, touches first base, but drops the ball a step or two after passing the bag and before showing voluntary release: not tag..." J/R further explains regarding a tag of a person or base: "Such fielder must have complete control of the ball during and after the touch. If the fielder bobbles or drops the ball during or after the touch of the base or runner, and the bobble is due to his lack of control of himself or the ball, or due to incidental contact with a runner, it is not a tag." Is there a more recent interpretation that includes the factor of "time holding the ball" in these plays (WUM, MLUM, etc.)

If the runner comes in standing up, there are two criteria: Did he make contact with the fielder? or Did he alter the play? According to your observation (OP), the fielder did not make a throw "probably because the runner was in the way." In Fed, you have INT, but you're going to have to sell it and explain it to the offensive coach.

2012 Babe Ruth Rule Book (p. 19) "CONTACT RULE (ALL DIVISIONS) - If a runner attempting to reach home pate intentionally and maliciously runs into a defensive player in the area of home plate, he will be called out on the play and ejected from the game. The objective of this is to penalize the offensive team for deliberate, unwarranted, unsportsmanlike action by the runner for the obvious purpose of crashing the defensive fielder, rather than trying to reach home plate. Obviously, this is an umpire's judgement call."

Thanks, John, for the for the clarification...

UmpJM: NCAA - Live ball, play the bounce. (NCAA 8-5k) Thanks for the NCAA code clarification. I wasn't sure about that one...

NCAA 9.2.d states: If the pitcher is not in contact with the pitching rubber, the pitcher may go to the mouth while in the dirt area; however, the pitcher must wipe off the fingers before pitching. What does "before pitching" mean? When F1 contacts the rubber or when F1 places his wet fingers on the ball? Certainly, it's not F1's commitment to delivery of a pitch. Do you wait until F1 contacts the rubber before you call the infraction (similar to FED)? Therefore, F1 could place his wet fingers on the ball before engaging the rubber and still not technically be in jeopardy of having a ball called on him. I'm not quite sure how to interpret "...must wipe off before pitching." What is the practice in NCAA?

Haid D'Salaami: "I meant the awards of bases will be different. if the batter is past 1st them the BR will end up at 3rd.. so yeah it does matter where the runners will end up. " In your situation, BR to 3rd ONLY if R1 had reached 2nd before the throw. However, if R1 (very slow runner) hadn't reached 2nd (implied in OP) at TOT and BR had already acquired 1st before TOT (very, very fast runner), then we would have 2 runners between 1st and 2nd at TOT. Lead runner gets the award to 3rd and BR only goes to 2nd. That would be the same result as TOP (though the award is based on TOT).

Pardon me if this has been discussed, but which error is it? Page 149. Three man mechanics. R1R3 U1 goes out. It states that if the ball is down, PU rotates to 3rd for any play on R1. The new mechanics they taught at the national meetings and want implemented is that with R1R3, PU is to stay put at home regardless is someone goes out or not. If a BU goes out, the remaining BU has plays at all of the bases. On page 153 with R1R3 and U3 going out, they correctly have U1 having all plays on the bases. When I contacted the appropriate person at the NCAA for clarification, I received an email stating that since this is new to everyone, we should go by the book. I have a hard time going with that since, not only were we instructed at length, with all other correspondence confirming the new mechaincs, no directive stating to go by the book has been given nationally. Maybe I'm the only one that actually read the changes in the CCA and found the discrepency. Thanks for the heads up on this. I'm currently reading the 2012 CCA 3-man, and I assumed the opposite. Since the base umpire went out, it reverts to the 2-man which would have the PU rotating to 3rd on an R1 & R3 situation. I'm signed up for a 3-Man week long clinic in two weeks and I'm certainly going to be asking about this...

Haid: "...I think the why (way?) it is written in the PBUC maunal says it perfect.." This is the way the PBUC Manual says it perfectly word for word on pages 69 -70: "7.5 BATTED BALL STRIKING THE RUNNER The concept of the runner being in jeopardy after the ball goes past an infielder and strikes him in a situation where another fielder still has a chance to make a play on the ball applies ONLY when the ball PASSES the first infielder without being touched or deflected by him. This concept DOES NOT APPLY if the ball is touched or deflected by the infielder, even though another infielder has a chance to make a play on the ball. In other words, after a ball has been touched (deflected) by any infielder (including the pitcher), if the ball then strikes a runner (unintentionally on the part of the runner), the ball is alive and in play even if another fielder may be in a position to field the ball. (See Official Baseball Rules 5.09(f) and 7.09(k).) The reasoning for the above concept is that a runner cannot be expected to avoid a deflected ball while he is running and should not, therefore, be in jeopardy of being called out for being struck by such a deflected ball. Of course, a runner may still be guilty of intentional interference even after an infielder deflects the ball if he (the runner) deliberately deflects it or allows it to strike him when he could have reasonably avoided it. The fact that a ball has been deflected by an infielder should not be taken as a license for a runner to intentionally interfere. (See Official Baseball Rule 7.09(f) and (g).) After a batted ball has been touched (deflected) by an infielder, if the ball then strikes a runner (unintentionally on the part of the runner), it is alive and in play despite the fact that another fielder may be in position to field the ball. This is not the case if a fielder is making a play on the ball. Specifically, if a batted ball is deflected by an infielder and another infielder has a play on the ball, the runner must must avoid the fielder. If the runner interferes with the fielder making a play - even though the ball has been touched by another fielder - the runner is declared out. Under the rules, the fielder making a play on a batted ball takes priority..." As UmpJM has already said, this is the rule in all three codes, so it's hard to understand why NCAA would have the runner out unless they want students to read interference with the fielder into the play (which clearly doesn't come across in the original question).

not on my test.. and not in the book.. runner is out.. it's simple.. Haid D'Salaami, Here is a quote straight out of the 2012 PBUC Manual (OBR based) that serves as the basic rules interpretation guide for those students moving up in Pro ball. I don't know why NCAA would have anything different here: Play 3: Runner on first base, one out. Runner is running on the next pitch. The batter hits a ground ball back toward the pitcher. The pitcher deflects the ball in the direction of the second baseman who definitely has a chance to make a play on it. However, the ball strikes the runner before it reaches the second baseman. Ruling 3: Runner from first is not out; the ball remains live and in play (assuming no intentional interference by the runner)... Again, I don't know why NCAA would have it any differently...

I do not claim to know how PBUC staff will ultimately evaluate those at the PBUC Eval Course, but I'm sure they are going to be looking squarely (and fairly) at those who will best fit the PBUC criteria and rank them accordingly as they do with their MiLB umpires. All of upper-level instructors at the school are also the evaluators of the MiLB umpires (thru Double A) and will probably rank the Eval Course umpires accordingly in rank 1 thru last based upon how well the students perform the "PBUC way." This certainly gives the graduates of The Umpire School a leg up having spent 4 weeks at it. Also, I will add that about 60% to 70% of The Umpire School invitees have done 1 or 2 stints at the other two schools in previous years. In addition, I believe there will be other invitees who are coming directly from last year's Eval Course, so there might be as many as 50 to 60 umpires undergoing evaluation there.

BT Blue: "Lets also say that all of Jim Kirk's posts from when he was down in Vero were most informative and the fact that he and his fabulous company work with and support TUS definitely carry some weight in my mind." In my haste, I forgot to mention another fantastic part of the PBUC Umpire School experience: the presence of Jim Kirk himself and his Ump.Attire store. Jim's Ump.Attire is the sole supplier of umpire equipment/apparel to the school. He had set up a storefront in the main lobby of the school building and provided information on all aspects of the latest umpire equipment (and which he was given classtime to inform us all about, too). Students could always be seen gathering around his storefront flooding him with questions about the equipment which he answered directly and impartially with no intention of forcing sales upon them. I was looking for new pads for my 3009X Wilson facemask, and I wanted exact matches to my pads. He provided information about how the ones currently available (and being sold as compatible) were not fitting exactly because of factory production mix-ups. He had sent his all back to the distributor and was waiting a shipment of the properly fitting pads. He pointed out a generic set of pads for my facemask, but took no offense when I said I didn't want those. I told him I was also interested in the new TEAM Wendy pads, and he had no qualms about directing me to Honigs. However, I did purchase a new set of NB (all black) base shoes that I saved for my Field Evaluation Final on the 4th. I also got the current 2012 CCA Umpires Manual from him, and all of this included a 15% discount for students attending the school. Jim was more than just a Ump.Attire salesman at the school. He could also be seen sitting in at times during our classroom instruction, having lunch at a table with several students talking baseball or whatever, out at the backfields observing our practice drills (during which one time when he joined in - a big RIP took place!), and forever taking pictures documenting the 2012 student experience at the school - many of which he has placed on the Ump.Attire Facebook page. He was regarded as part of the staff and mingled in freely among all of us.

PBUC's The Umpire School graduated its inaugural class on Sunday morning (Feb. 5th) with notification to 14 students to return in March for the PBUC Eval Course, And just as I had fully expected, the experience was first rate. "Spags (Darren Spagnardi) and his crew" made certain of that! With their "controlled games" presentation on the field, they were on TOP of all possible mechanics instruction and evaluation - ranging from standard plays to those infrequentently occuring (not 3rd world) plays such as BI, CI, RLV, Balks, & overthrows into DBT requiring correct application of penalties and/or awards. For example, whereas I might have umpired 2 or 3 catcher INT during my games last year, I observed at least 75 to 80 of them during the field instruction (with a couple thrown at me during my reps). Jorge (Bauza) and Dusty (Dellinger), lead rules & mechanics instructors, presented during AM classtime the OBR rule book in a logical, organized manner - doing away with reading the rule book consecutively from Rules 1 thru 9. Each theme/topic from the rule book would eventually make its way into that day's field mechanics which they followed up with after the rulebook instruction. However, I must admit that 3 1/2 hours of class instruction required a few trips to the readily available coffee urn for refill. Two other important themes threaded thier ways thru the school instruction/experience: the integrity of baseball and the conditioning of umpires. Larry (Reveal), lead curricullum instructor, made it clear what umpires are fundamentally about: upholding the integrity of baseball and in no small part through the display of their own integrity on the field. The emphasis on integrity became apparent to all of us students one morning after testing when he made forcefully clear (at the loudest decibal) to everyone in attendance that that integrity had been violated by someone looking at another's test answers! To Larry, umpires are indeed what Washington Post columnist George Will wrote a couple of years ago: "Umpires are baseball's judicial branch" and we had better live up to it.The other component threading its way through the instruction was medical coordinator Mark (Stubby) Stubblefield's constant insistence on umpires' need to be vigilant about their conditioning - those injuries, ailments, etc, that always arise from umpiring, Through instruction at class gatherings and assistance to the students' ailments/injuries, Stubby empasized that PBUC wants to keep you physically in the game, and that can only be done through regular and proper conditioning. All of this - housing, food service, class instruction, fieldwork (including cage practice), and absolutely more (for example, umpire camradery, etc.) - takes place all in one setting: The Vero Beach Sports Village (the former Dodger spring training grounds), and in the Florida weather where we did not have one rainy day throughout the 4 weeks. As for me, completing this pro school 4-week course at age 64 has been satisfying in and of itself as my own personal achievement,,,

Here's a recent write up in the local paper in Vero Beach about PBUC's The Umpire School: http://www.tcpalm.com/news/2012/jan/10/umpire-school-opens-at-sports-village/ Hey, it's working out fine for me. I feel I made the right decision for my objectives...

(h) In the judgment of the umpire, the base coach at third base, or first base, by touching or holding the runner, physically assists him in returning to or leaving third base or first base. Ok, you have a runner coming around third, he misses third. The coach shakes his hand and : A. He says nice hit and he goes home. I have nothing... B. He says nice hit, make sure you touched third, but the runner goes home anyway. I have nothing C. Same thing but the runner goes back and touches third. Depends on how I judge the "handshake;" If the coach grips (clasps) the runner's hand, spins the runner 90 degrees toward him as he tells him to go back and touch the base, and the runner goes back to retouch 3rd, then I have coach's assist. D. Same thing but he starts for home. The coach runs beside him yelling to return. I have no call, letting the coach naively inform the defense of the missed base. Same play except the runner did catch third but the coach thinks he missed: I'd let it go because there is no real assist, here...

Post #13: "...it better be pretty agregious. Short of cross body blocking the guy, picking him up and carrying him back to the base, leave it alone..." That's a pretty high threshhold before calling a "coach's assist!" What if the runner had turned back to touch the missed base after having had his hand momentarily clasped by the coach, body spun 90 degrees, and told to go back and touch 3rd base? AND then an alert defensive coach comes running out to argue that he (the 3rd base coach) can't contact the baserunner like that. Do I as the 3rd base umpire tell him: "Well, he didn't cross body block, pick him up, and carry him back to 3rd. There's no real assist here, Coach?" I'm not sure I'd get very far on that one...

Though I believe that both the Wendelstedt and Jim Evans schools are wonderful schools to attend, I think you're mistaken about the PBUC school. I had the opportunity in early December to attend an umpires' clinic in SC and meet several of the PBUC umpires who were there providing expert instruction over the weekend. They will also be the instructors at The Umpire School. I spoke personally about my concerns with Dusty Dellinger - PBUC Field Instructor who provided me with a very reassuring understanding of the mission of the new PBUC school, and that as a "seasoned citizen", I would find a welcoming atmosphere as an older student at the school. Similar assurances were spoken personally to me over the phone in mid-December by Darren Sgagnardi - Field Instructor and Andy Shultz - Administrator. Also, since it is the first year of the school, the number of students enrolled might be significantly less than the other two schools, thus providing for a lot more individual attention. Well, I guess it's all wait and see.. P.S. When I was a kid in LL (years ago), I played on the Dodgers. It's going to be kind of nostalgic to be at the old Dodger spring training grounds.

"(h) In the judgment of the umpire, the base coach at third base, or first base, by touching or holding the runner, physically assists him in returning to or leaving third base or first base." Ok, I've finally read through all of "Coach Call Tonight" (though my situation involves a dead ball). I stand firm in my judgment that if the BR (after hitting his HR) had reversed his course and gone back to touch 3rd, it would have been because of the coach's brief clasping (not just slapping) of the BR's hand with the exchange of words to the effect that the base might not have been touched as BR momentarily stopped & turned his head to listen to his coach. (BR probably felt he had touched the base, so he went on to home.) I would have signaled INT, runner is out on coach's assist. However, since the BR made no attempt to go back to 3rd, disregarding whatever words his coach had momentarily stopped him for, he went on home, and I made no call. AND of course the defense was totally unaware of the missed base (probably thinking it was no more than HR congrats going on between the player and the coach) and therefore made no appeal of the missed base.

dumbdumb, I'm reading the 1984 SI Vault article you mentioned and my eye caught this line: "...Brinkman's Florida school attracted an assortment of candidates. Most were in their early 20s or 30s, though there was also 60-year-old Silvio Morreale of Poughkeepsie, N.Y., who said he'd come south "to fulfill a dream." Coincidentally, Poughkeepsie is only 16 miles away from where I live, so I did a people search for Silvio Morreale, hoping to get in touch with him about his experience. But alas, it was not to be. The information provided stated that he had passed away in 1994 at 71. Also, I didn't catch on right away by what you meant when you wrote "52 and out." Oh, my age age is a decade + more than that. I'm rivaling Silvio (God rest his soul)...

johny08 and dumbdumb, Thanks for the comments and to further clarify: I am already financially and psychologically committed to the new PBUC Umpire School in Vero Beach, Fl Jan8 thru Feb 5th. That's where I'm heading...

OBR , 3-man mechanics, TOP'>TOP'>TOP'>R2, and batter hits HR. As the base umpire at 3rd, I observed the BR missing the touch at 3rd base. BR is now 10-15 feet down the line toward home when the obviously observant 3rd base coach slaps the BR's hand (with a momentary clasp coupled with some words exchanged). After a very brief pause, BR continued on to home. The unaware defense made no appeal of the missed base. I made no call on the assist because the BR made no attempt to return to 3rd. Had he returned to 3rd, then I would have called him out because of coach's assist. This was correct procedure?