3 plays

[dumbdumb]

1. Guess who hit a homer in the 4th.

Guess who got drilled to get on base in the 6th.

Guess who goes after the catcher. I do not believe most players are trying to intentionally put the other player in the hospital and end their career with these types of malicious contact that have been going on for years. They are, however, definitely trying to intentionally and maliciously ring his bell and cause him to drop the ball, or sometimes to send a message that they will not be intimidated into going around the catcher to avoid contact, or possibly to send a message for something that happened earlier or in the past (the code).

Isn't it great they do not to have to worry about MC at this level and just let the players take care of things?, or could that be about to change in the future?

http://mlb.mlb.com/m...034151&c_id=mlb

2. Do you go for help and to whom concerning the runner here? Much different here than on a pulled foot. The umpire must have his eyes at 2 separate levels. First there is the swipe tag up high due to the errant throw which causes the umpire to stay with the tag sequence from beginning to end because of the sweeping nature of the tag. In the meantime the runner is passing over the bag while the completion of the tag attempt is being made. By the time the eyes can come back down to the bag, it would be hard to tell if the runner touched the bag or not in many cases. Yes, Tom missed the runner not touching the bag after correctly ruling there was no tag.

This is different to me than the pulled foot play, IMHO, where there is a true throw to first and the only thing the umpire is looking for is the fielder's foot on the bag, and the runner touching the bag and listening for the pop. Either the 1st baseman is on the bag at the time of the pop or he isn't. We never miss the runners foot touching the base or not touching before the pop, so why should we miss the 1st baseman's foot touching or not touching. Now, if you go by site rather than sound to decide all your safe/out calls at first, then yes, the pulled foot would cause problems since you watch the ball all the way into the glove and then have to glance down at the bag again after watching the ball into the glove. That is also why, on those close plays where the foot is on the way down but not touching the bag yet, and the ball pops the glove and the runner is out on the bang-bang play, this type of umpire will always have a safe call, since by the time his eyes readjust downward from the glove, the runner is already on the bag.

http://mlb.mlb.com/v...ent_id=15974165

3. Does everyone see the balk at :56?

How many in your association would even pick up on this and know it is a balk?

How many would call this with the bases loaded?

How many would call this if it meant the game winning run?

How many in your association would see this, know it is a balk, but not call it in this situation.

Would you be penalized in your association with a bad rating for making this call, by some coaches.

Would you be penalized by your peers in the association for not making this call?

How many would just say or have ones in the association who would just say, I didn't see it, just to get out of it.

How many would call this against a possible playoff bound strong team with a coach who carries a lot of weight and will give you a bad rating because of this call, which will mean he looses to a very inferior team, with 2 outs and the worst batter at bat, and his bad rating could knock you out of a playoff assignment or future games with his team.

How many would call this for the strong team about to loose to a weaker team and the strong teams coach will give you a good rating for making this call against the other team, and the weaker teams coach does not carry much weight and will not argue anyway.

And yes, I know that perfectly good umpires may just kts (kick the sh) out of this call and just miss it.

http://espn.go.com/v...clip?id=6671690

MLB one below does not show the balk just the announcers talking about it. The one above came from the espn clip after googling Carrasco balks in winning run. This was on the 17th.

http://mlb.mlb.com/v...781914&c_id=mlb

Maybe this one will work at 1:56-1:57. Pitcher starts to go into set and stops. He knows it too.

http://mlb.mlb.com/v...879974&c_id=mlb

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

[mstaylor]

The last video isn't there. What does the status of the teams have to do with umpiriing?

[Rich Ives]

1. Guess who hit a homer in the 4th.

Guess who got drilled to get on base in the 6th.

Guess who goes after the catcher. I do not believe most players are trying to intentionally put the other player in the hospital and end their career with these types of malicious contact that have been going on for years. They are, however, definitely trying to intentionally and maliciously ring his bell and cause him to drop the ball, or sometimes to send a message that they will not be intimidated into going around the catcher to avoid contact, or possibly to send a message for something that happened earlier or in the past (the code).

Isn't it great they do not to have to worry about MC at this level and just let the players take care of things?, or could that be about to change in the future?

http://mlb.mlb.com/m...034151&c_id=mlb

2. Do you go for help and to whom concerning the runner here? Much different here than on a pulled foot. The umpire must have his eyes at 2 separate levels. First there is the swipe tag up high due to the errant throw which causes the umpire to stay with the tag sequence from beginning to end because of the sweeping nature of the tag. In the meantime the runner is passing over the bag while the completion of the tag attempt is being made. By the time the eyes can come back down to the bag, it would be hard to tell if the runner touched the bag or not in many cases. Yes, Tom missed the runner not touching the bag after correctly ruling there was no tag.

This is different to me than the pulled foot play, IMHO, where there is a true throw to first and the only thing the umpire is looking for is the fielder's foot on the bag, and the runner touching the bag and listening for the pop. Either the 1st baseman is on the bag at the time of the pop or he isn't. We never miss the runners foot touching the base or not touching before the pop, so why should we miss the 1st baseman's foot touching or not touching. Now, if you go by site rather than sound to decide all your safe/out calls at first, then yes, the pulled foot would cause problems since you watch the ball all the way into the glove and then have to glance down at the bag again after watching the ball into the glove. That is also why, on those close plays where the foot is on the way down but not touching the bag yet, and the ball pops the glove and the runner is out on the bang-bang play, this type of umpire will always have a safe call, since by the time his eyes readjust downward from the glove, the runner is already on the bag.

http://mlb.mlb.com/v...ent_id=15974165

3. Does everyone see the balk at :56?

How many in your association would even pick up on this and know it is a balk?

How many would call this with the bases loaded?

How many would call this if it meant the game winning run?

How many in your association would see this, know it is a balk, but not call it in this situation.

Would you be penalized in your association with a bad rating for making this call, by some coaches.

Would you be penalized by your peers in the association for not making this call?

How many would just say or have ones in the association who would just say, I didn't see it, just to get out of it.

How many would call this against a possible playoff bound strong team with a coach who carries a lot of weight and will give you a bad rating because of this call, which will mean he looses to a very inferior team, with 2 outs and the worst batter at bat, and his bad rating could knock you out of a playoff assignment or future games with his team.

How many would call this for the strong team about to loose to a weaker team and the strong teams coach will give you a good rating for making this call against the other team, and the weaker teams coach does not carry much weight and will not argue anyway.

And yes, I know that perfectly good umpires may just kts (kick the sh) out of this call and just miss it.

http://espn.go.com/v...clip?id=6671690

1) The players, offense and defense, accept the way the game is played at that level.

2) Stuff happens. Deal with it. BTW, if the runner passed the base without being put out then the miss of the base has to be appealed. The fielder cannot just touch =the base for an out.

3) If you let the relative quality/standings of the teams determine your calls you don't belong on the field

[mjr_2013]

1. Guess who hit a homer in the 4th.

Guess who got drilled to get on base in the 6th.

Guess who goes after the catcher. I do not believe most players are trying to intentionally put the other player in the hospital and end their career with these types of malicious contact that have been going on for years. They are, however, definitely trying to intentionally and maliciously ring his bell and cause him to drop the ball, or sometimes to send a message that they will not be intimidated into going around the catcher to avoid contact, or possibly to send a message for something that happened earlier or in the past (the code).

Isn't it great they do not to have to worry about MC at this level and just let the players take care of things?, or could that be about to change in the future?

http://mlb.mlb.com/m...034151&c_id=mlb

2. Do you go for help and to whom concerning the runner here? Much different here than on a pulled foot. The umpire must have his eyes at 2 separate levels. First there is the swipe tag up high due to the errant throw which causes the umpire to stay with the tag sequence from beginning to end because of the sweeping nature of the tag. In the meantime the runner is passing over the bag while the completion of the tag attempt is being made. By the time the eyes can come back down to the bag, it would be hard to tell if the runner touched the bag or not in many cases. Yes, Tom missed the runner not touching the bag after correctly ruling there was no tag.

This is different to me than the pulled foot play, IMHO, where there is a true throw to first and the only thing the umpire is looking for is the fielder's foot on the bag, and the runner touching the bag and listening for the pop. Either the 1st baseman is on the bag at the time of the pop or he isn't. We never miss the runners foot touching the base or not touching before the pop, so why should we miss the 1st baseman's foot touching or not touching. Now, if you go by site rather than sound to decide all your safe/out calls at first, then yes, the pulled foot would cause problems since you watch the ball all the way into the glove and then have to glance down at the bag again after watching the ball into the glove. That is also why, on those close plays where the foot is on the way down but not touching the bag yet, and the ball pops the glove and the runner is out on the bang-bang play, this type of umpire will always have a safe call, since by the time his eyes readjust downward from the glove, the runner is already on the bag.

http://mlb.mlb.com/v...ent_id=15974165

3. Does everyone see the balk at :56?

How many in your association would even pick up on this and know it is a balk?

How many would call this with the bases loaded?

How many would call this if it meant the game winning run?

How many in your association would see this, know it is a balk, but not call it in this situation.

Would you be penalized in your association with a bad rating for making this call, by some coaches.

Would you be penalized by your peers in the association for not making this call?

How many would just say or have ones in the association who would just say, I didn't see it, just to get out of it.

How many would call this against a possible playoff bound strong team with a coach who carries a lot of weight and will give you a bad rating because of this call, which will mean he looses to a very inferior team, with 2 outs and the worst batter at bat, and his bad rating could knock you out of a playoff assignment or future games with his team.

How many would call this for the strong team about to loose to a weaker team and the strong teams coach will give you a good rating for making this call against the other team, and the weaker teams coach does not carry much weight and will not argue anyway.

And yes, I know that perfectly good umpires may just kts (kick the sh) out of this call and just miss it.

http://espn.go.com/v...clip?id=6671690

MLB one below does not show the balk just the announcers talking about it. The one above came from the espn clip after googling Carrasco balks in winning run. This was on the 17th.

http://mlb.mlb.com/v...781914&c_id=mlb

Maybe this one will work at 1:56-1:57. Pitcher starts to go into set and stops. He knows it too.

http://mlb.mlb.com/v...879974&c_id=mlb

1) It's baseball... I'm sick of people whining about the collisions in MLB.... If a guy wants to risk injury by throwing himself at someone with a bunch of equipment on, then they should do it... Railroading the catcher has caused many runs to be scored that wouldn't have been... These players make millions of dollars, if they want to try it, let em do it.

2) It depends how confident you are... In a 2 man system, no way, because there is no way my PU could have had a better angle... With the 4 man system, if you aren't sure, you can meet with the 2B ump and check.

3a) I saw it. That's an easy one.

3b) Most of our league is Jr. umps who are 14-16, but I'd say 95%

3c) 95%

3d) 95%

3e) 5%... They are too young, and would freeze.

3f) No

3g) No

3h) 0

3i) 0

3j) 0

You shouldn't be on the field if any of those are a yes.