Verbalizing <acronym title='Dropped third strike'>D3K</acronym>

[ukce1861]

Pops,

Sometimes it's difficult to tell whether or not the catcher cleanly caught the ball - if you don't believe me, ask Doug Eddings.

Of course whether or not he actually caught it is not that important; what matters is whether the PU JUDGES he caught it. Use all the info available: what you see, what you hear, the catcher's immediate reaction, maybe your partner has some help for you - then make your best call based on the available info. And let everybody know.

If it's the least bit ambiguous, I use both a physical and a verbal mechanic. I feel the verbal is important because the two players with the most immediate need to know what you judged - the batter and catcher - can't see you.

JM

Exactly my opinion on this. Let's face it, there will be times where F2 DID catch it, but you judged otherwise. By verbalizing, you are giving both the batter and catcher equal information with which to act upon. The smart F2s will always tag to be sure, but the Angels/White Sox game (Eddings) shows that not verbalizing can lead to disaster. I believe that game actually led Evans to change the mechanic to include a verbal.

So let's say that you can't tell if F2 caught it or not. And let's say that you're working solo at a youth ball game. For the past 4 innings you've verbalized the D3K, but now you can't do that because you're unsure about the catch. So will this non-verbal moment come back to bite you? Before I start calling it that way, I want some more opinions about this situation.

Well, if you're a guy that verbalizes it, you need to verbalize it. Maybe you're different than me, but there are times I'm not sure what the right call is. I've still got to make a call. You may not be 100% sure whether or not the catcher caught it, but you have to make a decision. Whatever that decision ends up being, just let them know...

[johnnyg08]

That is a good point, if you verbalize, you must be sure to verbalize every single time.

[UmpJM]

Pops,

I concur with UKC. Even If you're NOT "sure", you still have to make a call.

Decide and then let everyone know what you decided.

JM

[MidAmUmp]

Had 3 <acronym title='Dropped third strike'>D3K</acronym>'s in a LL junior game tonight. <acronym title='Head coach'>HC</acronym> came over between innings and told me I shouldn't be verbalizing "no catch" on <acronym title='Dropped third strike'>D3K</acronym>. He told me hes an umpire and has been to a clinic and they never said anything about that.

Am I wrong to yell "no catch" on <acronym title='Dropped third strike'>D3K</acronym>'s while signalling safe mechanics?

The coach should probably attend a better clinic or quit giving out advice. We teach it at the Mid-American Umpire Clinic - shameless plug.

Signal safe and say, "No catch!" As with everything else, there's no need to vocalize the obvious ones (ball to the backstop, etc.).

Look at it this way: You are ruling on a catch/no catch. You need to use voice & mechanic as you would on any other trouble ball.

[ukce1861]

The coach should probably attend a better clinic or quit giving out advice. We teach it at the Mid-American Umpire Clinic - shameless plug.

Signal safe and say, "No catch!" As with everything else, there's no need to vocalize the obvious ones (ball to the backstop, etc.).

Look at it this way: You are ruling on a catch/no catch. You need to use voice & mechanic as you would on any other trouble ball.

So what do you say to the argument about "No Catch" sounds like "Catch"? I've been told the same thing about balls to the outfield - not to say, "No Catch" because it can be confusing.

[UmpJM]

UKC,

I've developed the habit of saying, "NO catch!" or "That's a CATCH!", as the case may be.

Seems to work just fine.

JM

[MidAmUmp]

The coach should probably attend a better clinic or quit giving out advice. We teach it at the Mid-American Umpire Clinic - shameless plug.

Signal safe and say, "No catch!" As with everything else, there's no need to vocalize the obvious ones (ball to the backstop, etc.).

Look at it this way: You are ruling on a catch/no catch. You need to use voice & mechanic as you would on any other trouble ball.

So what do you say to the argument about "No Catch" sounds like "Catch"? I've been told the same thing about balls to the outfield - not to say, "No Catch" because it can be confusing.

First, Anunciate (and I'm not trying to be a smart ass). And continue to repeat yourself if necessary. If there is a diving catch on the warning track I'm going to scream "No catch!" 5-6 times and start sprinting towards the play.

You're in the catcher & batter's ears. They can seem to hear everything else.

Second, I would say, "Did you not see me signaling safe?"

[noumpere]

I am comfortable being on an island for this until my NCAA evaluator or anybody else tells me to do it differently that will help me advance.

I'm not saying I'm right and they're wrong...we'll just agree to disagree.

Of course Harry couldn't possibly be the same as Jimmy on this and vice versa. That would be bad for business. :-)

All HS and College clinics I have attended have included the verbal call when needed.

For example:

The coach should probably attend a better clinic or quit giving out advice. We teach it at the Mid-American Umpire Clinic - shameless plug.

Signal safe and say, "No catch!" As with everything else, there's no need to vocalize the obvious ones (ball to the backstop, etc.).

Look at it this way: You are ruling on a catch/no catch. You need to use voice & mechanic as you would on any other trouble ball.

Right -- its only needed wheni its not obvious if the ball is to the backstop then no need for the verbal call.

So what do you say to the argument about "No Catch" sounds like "Catch"? I've been told the same thing about balls to the outfield - not to say, "No Catch" because it can be confusing.

Just like on flyballs emphasize the no and unemphasize the catch part of the phrase or use the phrase "the balls on the ground"

[24sdad]

Had 3 <acronym title='Dropped third strike'>D3K</acronym>'s in a LL junior game tonight. <acronym title='Head coach'>HC</acronym> came over between innings and told me I shouldn't be verbalizing "no catch" on <acronym title='Dropped third strike'>D3K</acronym>. He told me hes an umpire and has been to a clinic and they never said anything about that.

Am I wrong to yell "no catch" on <acronym title='Dropped third strike'>D3K</acronym>'s while signalling safe mechanics?

The coach should probably attend a better clinic or quit giving out advice. We teach it at the Mid-American Umpire Clinic - shameless plug.

Signal safe and say, "No catch!" As with everything else, there's no need to vocalize the obvious ones (ball to the backstop, etc.).

Look at it this way: You are ruling on a catch/no catch. You need to use voice & mechanic as you would on any other trouble ball.

You are absolutely correct in your reasoning. The reason I do not say "no catch" as opposed to "balls on the ground" is due to "no catch" is too similar to "thats a catch." The two most involved in my call (B/R & F2) will probably not see my safe signal, only hear my verbal call. Again, you are correct in what you teach and that is exactly how I do it (and verbalize it) when not behind the plate where everyone can see me.

For me - physical and verbal mechanic on uncaught third strike...use what works for you, but do use both.

[johnnyg08]

Seems like a solution in search of a problem. If the airbourne batted ball is not caught, (non obvious) then the safe sign should suffice. They'll be watching you, not listening for what you say.

To those who feel they must verbalize....what about a simple..."no?"

[24sdad]

Seems like a solution in search of a problem. If the airbourne batted ball is not caught, (non obvious) then the safe sign should suffice. They'll be watching you, not listening for what you say.

To those who feel they must verbalize....what about a simple..."no?"

Johnny, use what works for you. If I have a trapped ball in the field, I am coming up strong with a safe signal and loudly stating "no catch!" multiple times.

[Welpe]

Seems like a solution in search of a problem. If the airbourne batted ball is not caught, (non obvious) then the safe sign should suffice. They'll be watching you, not listening for what you say.

To those who feel they must verbalize....what about a simple..."no?"

The problem is that neither of the two players that need this information the most are going to be looking at you. This is why I include a verbal call.

[umpcoachfather]

We are taught to call the strike and signal the out. When dropped do nothing - the teams needs to be aware of the situation. But who can argue with Jim E?

[johnnyg08]

Seems like a solution in search of a problem. If the airbourne batted ball is not caught, (non obvious) then the safe sign should suffice. They'll be watching you, not listening for what you say.

To those who feel they must verbalize....what about a simple..."no?"

Johnny, use what works for you. If I have a trapped ball in the field, I am coming up strong with a safe signal and loudly stating "no catch!" multiple times.

I agree. That's why I haven't been saying I'm right and anybody else is wrong. To each his own or what the evaluator wants you to do.

[SanDiegoSteve]

I will respectfully disagree with Jim.

I used to use the "no catch" mechanic until I had two separate instances where I had players stop and look at me because all they heard was "catch" and I promise I was plenty loud.

Since I stopped using a verbal, I have never, never, not even once had a problem.

If it is obviously not a catch, I won't verbalize. Just like when a runner is out by three steps. But if is a Doug Eddings, nobody knows the ball status type, I will verbalize. I have found that when saying "no catch," I emphasize the NO and not the catch. "NO! catch, NO! catch," is what I say, not "no CATCH." I have found that emphasizing the NO, while giving an emphatic Safe mechanic several times while saying it, works just great. I have never, never, never, not even once had anyone misunderstand "NO! catch.":)

[johnnyg08]

So that brings me back to my original question. If the "no" is so important (I agree with that), then why don't we simply say "no"?

[SanDiegoSteve]

So that brings me back to my original question. If the "no" is so important (I agree with that), then why don't we simply say "no"?

Because some players and coaches are so damn dumb that they would say, "No what?"

[MidAmUmp]

Because No could mean other things, such as he didn't attempt to swing.

Look, if the catcher and batter can't decipher No Catch, the umpire is either related to Mushmouth on Fat Albert or those players shouldn't be allowed to be around heavy objects.

On a personal note I either say, "yep, that's a catch." - or some derivative of that; or "no catch" while signaling safe. Never had an issue at any level.

[johnnyg08]

Because No could mean other things, such as he didn't attempt to swing.

No, because a properly trained umpire will appeal to his partner first. In the Sitch of a D3K, based on the events that are happening, "no" can only mean one thing...unless you're doing kiddie ball.

Think about it...if everybody who verbalizes states to make sure the emphasis is on the "No" piece, but make sure you say "catch" in a quieter tone (to not confuse them), why not eliminate what could confuse players the most by not stating "catch" at all?

[SanDiegoSteve]

Because No could mean other things, such as he didn't attempt to swing.

No, because a properly trained umpire will appeal to his partner first. In the Sitch of a D3K, based on the events that are happening, "no" can only mean one thing...unless you're doing kiddie ball.

Think about it...if everybody who verbalizes states to make sure the emphasis is on the "No" piece, but make sure you say "catch" in a quieter tone (to not confuse them), why not eliminate what could confuse players the most by not stating "catch" at all?

It isn't that a trained umpire wouldn't ask for help if he were unsure, but the players and coaches don't know the mechanics, and might "think" you meant no swing instead of no catch.

I guess this is just the old school umpire in me, but I like the old mechanic that nobody uses anymore: "Ball! No, he didn't go!"

[MidAmUmp]

Because No could mean other things, such as he didn't attempt to swing.

No, because a properly trained umpire will appeal to his partner first. In the <acronym title='Situation'>Sitch</acronym> of a <acronym title='Dropped third strike'>D3K</acronym>, based on the events that are happening, "no" can only mean one thing...unless you're doing kiddie ball.

Think about it...if everybody who verbalizes states to make sure the emphasis is on the "No" piece, but make sure you say "catch" in a quieter tone (to not confuse them), why not eliminate what could confuse players the most by not stating "catch" at all?

Properly trained umpires are more often than not able to get their own check swings.

I hope you are simply playing devils advocate in all of this and that you are not being serious.

[johnnyg08]

I hope you are simply playing devils advocate in all of this and that you are not being serious.

Yes. As stated before, I don't verbalize until my NCAA evaluator tells me to verbalize. It is simply not necessary. When the dugouts see my "safe" sign, they're telling the runner to run and F2 to throw it. I certainly don't need to add another voice to both dugouts telling the batter and F2 what I've already signaled to the rest of the stadium.

[HokieUmp]

HC came over between innings and told me I shouldn't be verbalizing "no catch" on D3K. He told me hes an umpire and has been to a clinic and they never said anything about that.

Am I wrong to yell "no catch" on D3K's while signalling safe mechanics?

No, you're not wrong.

Invite a coach like that to get back to his position/dugout, so he can stay in the game, and when he works as an umpire, he's welcome to be wrong if he wants.

I'm sure if we got a dollar for all our pooled "coach claims to be an umpire, too" stories, Warren could have his own server farm for the website.

[johnnyg08]

He told me hes an umpire

Ties for most annoying thing a coach can say to me.

[jjskitours]

To each his own, but seems to me "ball's on the ground" eliminates the possible conflict between "Catch" and "No Catch" OR does someone have a problem with "ball's on the ground".