Appeal on Possible Checked Swing/Dropped 3rd Strike

[umpire_scott]

Let me be clear, I never go to my partner on a check swing that I call a strike. But I have had PU do this when the catcher asked them to. I, of course, have always signaled strike. I also go to my BU immediately with an emphatic "did he go" on any questionable check swings. But not all PU's do this. So when I'm on the bases if the PU comes to me, and it's for help on a call that he had confidently and emphatically made I'm going to think long and hard about overturning the call because it will make him look bad. That's all I'm saying. This is never an issue when I'm the PU, because I don't generally put myself in those situations.

[Jocko]

As I said earlier I would consider the circumstances.

These are the only circumstances you should consider: Is it a valid appeal, and if so, do you judge the batter made an attempt.

It's really not that difficult. If they ask, go. If the batter has an opportunity to become a runner, go without them asking.

Who are you telling to "go". If who asks?

"Go" as in go to your partner for the check swing appeal. If the defensive team asks or if the batter could become a runner, go to him on your own.

You really are doing this wrong, and digging your heels in just makes you look worse. The PU CANNOT go to the BU after he calls a swinging strike and appeal. You said that you will rarely do it, but you fail to realize that you CAN'T do it.

"No, he didn't go", is the mechanic, just like Matt told you earlier. When the defensive team asks, you still have to go to your partner and he still should give you whatever he has.

I don't understand why some people on here pussyfoot around check swings. I have NEVER felt embarrassed or thrown under the bus when a partner on the bases gets a strike on a check swing. The worst thing that could happen is another strike, and that just means you're closer to drinking beer.

: That's what I'm talking about!

[umpire_scott]

Scott, what area of Missouri are you in?

St. Louis County.

[JaxRolo]

As I said earlier I would consider the circumstances.

These are the only circumstances you should consider: Is it a valid appeal, and if so, do you judge the batter made an attempt.

It's really not that difficult. If they ask, go. If the batter has an opportunity to become a runner, go without them asking.

Who are you telling to "go". If who asks?

"Go" as in go to your partner for the check swing appeal. If the defensive team asks or if the batter could become a runner, go to him on your own.

You really are doing this wrong, and digging your heels in just makes you look worse. The PU CANNOT go to the BU after he calls a swinging strike and appeal. You said that you will rarely do it, but you fail to realize that you CAN'T do it.

"No, he didn't go", is the mechanic, just like Matt told you earlier. When the defensive team asks, you still have to go to your partner and he still should give you whatever he has.

I don't understand why some people on here pussyfoot around check swings. I have NEVER felt embarrassed or thrown under the bus when a partner on the bases gets a strike on a check swing. The worst thing that could happen is another strike, and that just means you're closer to drinking beer.

Amen! As a plate Umpire I am always confident and emphatic about my calls. I have never been embarrased by a BU overturing my BALL call to a strike. I say thank you and glad its another strike on the batter.

[umpire_scott]

Jaxrolo,

So let's say you emphatically and confidently say "no he didn't". You know that he held up. The catcher asks you to ask you to appeal to your partner.

a) Do you go to your partner or do you tell the catcher that you saw it fine and made the call?

B) If you felt that you saw it fine, but decide to just go to your partner to pacify the catcher, and your partner signals strike, how do you feel?

I've worked with guys that I could tell were miffed that I overturned their call. So I'm more careful now about making my partner look bad in those situations. I mean we are talking about a check swing here. It's not black and white. It's a judgement call. They get it wrong all the time in MLB. So for me to change a judgement call like that, the circumstances will come into consideration.

[MPLSMatt]

This whole conversation is shocking to me on so many levels.

People who would feel "thrown under the bus" because a base ump overturns a check swing really need to lose the ego. The rule book calls for it, so we do it. We are not infallable, sometimes we miss it, especially from our angle behind the plate. This play occurs roughly once a game in MLB games. I think all of this acting infallable bullsh*t is every bit as bad as coaches complaining about rules that they don't understand. If you can't handle an overturned strike, you need to get over yourself (this was proverbial, not directed at anyone specifically).

Also, any coach that uses an overturned swing as guage for how good an ump in is going to be a RAT all game anyway.

[JaxRolo]

Jaxrolo,

So let's say you emphatically and confidently say "no he didn't". You know that he held up. The catcher asks you to ask you to appeal to your partner.

a) Do you go to your partner or do you tell the catcher that you saw it fine and made the call?

B) If you felt that you saw it fine, but decide to just go to your partner to pacify the catcher, and your partner signals strike, how do you feel?

I've worked with guys that I could tell were miffed that I overturned their call. So I'm more careful now about making my partner look bad in those situations. I mean we are talking about a check swing here. It's not black and white. It's a judgement call. They get it wrong all the time in MLB. So for me to change a judgement call like that, the circumstances will come into consideration.

Like I said I really do not care if my partner changes my call. I may be 100% sure "he didn't go" but maybe he saw something I didn't see.

The fact is the PU is not the one that looks bad when BU changes a call. BU is the one that is going to have to answer to the coach.

[umpire_scott]

This whole conversation is shocking to me on so many levels.

People who would feel "thrown under the bus" because a base ump overturns a check swing really need to lose the ego. The rule book calls for it, so we do it. We are not infallable, sometimes we miss it, especially from our angle behind the plate. This play occurs roughly once a game in MLB games. I think all of this acting infallable bullsh*t is every bit as bad as coaches complaining about rules that they don't understand. If you can't handle an overturned strike, you need to get over yourself (this was proverbial, not directed at anyone specifically).

Also, any coach that uses an overturned swing as guage for how good an ump in is going to be a RAT all game anyway.

The play that happens roughly once a game in MLB games is a simple umpire appeal. In many of these cases I have no idea if an emphatic verbal was made by the plate umpire. So these are two different situations in my opinion.

[JaxRolo]

This whole conversation is shocking to me on so many levels.

People who would feel "thrown under the bus" because a base ump overturns a check swing really need to lose the ego. The rule book calls for it, so we do it. We are not infallable, sometimes we miss it, especially from our angle behind the plate. This play occurs roughly once a game in MLB games. I think all of this acting infallable bullsh*t is every bit as bad as coaches complaining about rules that they don't understand. If you can't handle an overturned strike, you need to get over yourself (this was proverbial, not directed at anyone specifically).

Also, any coach that uses an overturned swing as guage for how good an ump in is going to be a RAT all game anyway.

The play that happens roughly once a game in MLB games is a simple umpire appeal. In many of these cases I have no idea if an emphatic verbal was made by the plate umpire. So these are two different situations in my opinion.

What's your point? :question1:

[umpire_scott]

Jaxrolo,

So let's say you emphatically and confidently say "no he didn't". You know that he held up. The catcher asks you to ask you to appeal to your partner.

a) Do you go to your partner or do you tell the catcher that you saw it fine and made the call?

B) If you felt that you saw it fine, but decide to just go to your partner to pacify the catcher, and your partner signals strike, how do you feel?

I've worked with guys that I could tell were miffed that I overturned their call. So I'm more careful now about making my partner look bad in those situations. I mean we are talking about a check swing here. It's not black and white. It's a judgement call. They get it wrong all the time in MLB. So for me to change a judgement call like that, the circumstances will come into consideration.

Like I said I really do not care if my partner changes my call. I may be 100% sure "he didn't go" but maybe he saw something I didn't see.

The fact is the PU is not the one that looks bad when BU changes a call. BU is the one that is going to have to answer to the coach.

To be honest I don't really care either. But I know umpires that do, and thus I have considered that when making this decision. Like I said it's a judgement call anyway. I see BU's blow this call in MLB all the time. It happens so fast that unless it's really obvious it's a very difficult call to make. So when I'm on the bases when I see a check swing I make a mental note in my head of whether I "thought" he went or not. Oftentimes I'm more sure than others. If my PU comes to me right away with "did he go" I give him my call with no consideration to whether he saw it or not. If he yells "no he didn't, ball", then a few seconds later at the request of the catcher asks me "did he go?", I'm going to consider the circumstances a little bit before making my call. If it's an umpire I've never worked with before I'm probably just going to give the no swing signal. Clearly if it's a game changing call or really obvious then I'm going to get the call right.

[umpire_scott]

This whole conversation is shocking to me on so many levels.

People who would feel "thrown under the bus" because a base ump overturns a check swing really need to lose the ego. The rule book calls for it, so we do it. We are not infallable, sometimes we miss it, especially from our angle behind the plate. This play occurs roughly once a game in MLB games. I think all of this acting infallable bullsh*t is every bit as bad as coaches complaining about rules that they don't understand. If you can't handle an overturned strike, you need to get over yourself (this was proverbial, not directed at anyone specifically).

Also, any coach that uses an overturned swing as guage for how good an ump in is going to be a RAT all game anyway.

The play that happens roughly once a game in MLB games is a simple umpire appeal. In many of these cases I have no idea if an emphatic verbal was made by the plate umpire. So these are two different situations in my opinion.

What's your point?

People seem to be inferring that I seldom overturn any check swing appeals and that I would get offended if anyone ever overturned mine. My point is that these situations are different. So to say it happens once a game in MLB is incorrect. The one that happens once a game in MLB is completely irrelevant to my point.

[zm1283]

Jaxrolo,

So let's say you emphatically and confidently say "no he didn't". You know that he held up. The catcher asks you to ask you to appeal to your partner.

a) Do you go to your partner or do you tell the catcher that you saw it fine and made the call?

B) If you felt that you saw it fine, but decide to just go to your partner to pacify the catcher, and your partner signals strike, how do you feel?

I've worked with guys that I could tell were miffed that I overturned their call. So I'm more careful now about making my partner look bad in those situations. I mean we are talking about a check swing here. It's not black and white. It's a judgement call. They get it wrong all the time in MLB. So for me to change a judgement call like that, the circumstances will come into consideration.

You have to go to your partner if they ask. Except for FED (Which I will still ask any time they ask), you HAVE to ask your partner even if you "Saw it fine". What your partner rules is up to him, but why would you or anyone else be upset if he changes it to a strike? I don't want to work with guys who take it personally when I get a strike on a check swing. My point is that you shouldn't care if they were miffed that you overturned their call. Tough sh*t for them I guess.

The circumstances should never come into consideration, and that is not how it is taught by the guys at the highest levels. You're going to have to trust me on this one.

To be honest I don't really care either. But I know umpires that do, and thus I have considered that when making this decision. Like I said it's a judgement call anyway. I see BU's blow this call in MLB all the time. It happens so fast that unless it's really obvious it's a very difficult call to make. So when I'm on the bases when I see a check swing I make a mental note in my head of whether I "thought" he went or not. Oftentimes I'm more sure than others. If my PU comes to me right away with "did he go" I give him my call with no consideration to whether he saw it or not. If he yells "no he didn't, ball", then a few seconds later at the request of the catcher asks me "did he go?", I'm going to consider the circumstances a little bit before making my call. If it's an umpire I've never worked with before I'm probably just going to give the no swing signal. Clearly if it's a game changing call or really obvious then I'm going to get the call right.

You should try to get it right every time, and quit worrying about saving face for you or your partner. You are overthinking this and making it much more difficult than it really is. I'm not sure who taught you this but it's wrong.

[zm1283]

This whole conversation is shocking to me on so many levels.

People who would feel "thrown under the bus" because a base ump overturns a check swing really need to lose the ego. The rule book calls for it, so we do it. We are not infallable, sometimes we miss it, especially from our angle behind the plate. This play occurs roughly once a game in MLB games. I think all of this acting infallable bullsh*t is every bit as bad as coaches complaining about rules that they don't understand. If you can't handle an overturned strike, you need to get over yourself (this was proverbial, not directed at anyone specifically).

Also, any coach that uses an overturned swing as guage for how good an ump in is going to be a RAT all game anyway.

The play that happens roughly once a game in MLB games is a simple umpire appeal. In many of these cases I have no idea if an emphatic verbal was made by the plate umpire. So these are two different situations in my opinion.

What's your point?

People seem to be inferring that I seldom overturn any check swing appeals and that I would get offended if anyone ever overturned mine. My point is that these situations are different. So to say it happens once a game in MLB is incorrect. The one that happens once a game in MLB is completely irrelevant to my point.

I don't know what others are inferring. The only thing I'm inferring is that you won't get a strike as BU if the PU says "No, he didn't go". Well obviously the PU didn't think he went, so that's why they're asking you for your help.

[MPLSMatt]

I'm just saying, when we tell a coach he can't argue balls and strikes (or judgement calls in general) we are saying "I might not get them all be right, but I'm being as fair and honest as I can be and call them to the best of my ability." By doing what you prescribed earlier, IMHO, an umpire isn't living up to his side of the bargain.

[JaxRolo]

If PU is going to have his feelings hurt because I changed his call to a strike then I don't think we need to be on the same field together.

[UMP45]

Scott, Just for SH*#s and giggles, how do YOU judge a batter has not checked his swing (this ought to be good!)? :stir

[umpire_scott]

Scott, Just for SH*#s and giggles, how do YOU judge a batter has not checked his swing (this ought to be good!)?

Ask a question respectfully and I'll answer it. Try playing inane comedian and I ignore it.

[JaxRolo]

This will be my last post on this subject. Getting really boring.

Scott,

I'm sure you are a good umpire but don't you think that you being pretty much the only one with that opinion and everyone else on the other side that maybe you are doing it wrong?

I'm out!!!

[umpire_scott]

It does seem that way. Scrounge at least acknowledged that he understood what I was saying. Sometimes when I seem to be "digging my heels in" it's because I'm looking for that recognition of understanding. I'm not looking to change minds or for people to agree with me.

I don't know if it's a right or wrong situation as much as it's a "consider your partner" situation. Maybe I'm too sensitive to my partner's feelings on this. If most umpires think the way this board does then that would be the case for sure.

[Replacematt]

One thing that I didn't see addressed directly--

BU in B or C can get a strike. We don't appeal to pacify, we appeal because it's a good idea.

[dddunn3d]

Something I read in this thread set the wheels to turning again.

Of course, the rules (OBR, not Fed) require the PU to check with his partner on a check-swing if the PU calls it a ball and the defense appeals, but not when the PU calls a strike. Specifically:

Rule 9.02c Comment:

"The manager or the catcher may request the plate umpire to ask his partner for help on a half swing

when the plate umpire calls the pitch a ball, but not when the pitch is called a strike.... Appeals on a half swing may be made only on the call of ball and when asked to appeal, the home plate umpire must refer to a base umpire for his judgment on the half swing."

What should you, as the BU, do when you have a less-than-competent PU ask for your opinion on a check-swing that he has already ruled as a strike? Just reiterate the strike call? Or call time, confer quietly with the PU telling him that a strike call on a check-swing is not appealable so that he can both inform the defense of that rule, and learn it for himself?

And another thing: "I'm going to consider the circumstances a little bit before making my call. If it's an umpire I've never worked with before I'm probably just going to give the no swing signal. Clearly if it's a game changing call or really obvious then I'm going to get the call right."

WTF?

I don't care a whit about the circumstances, or if my partner is unknown to me, or if it's a game-changing call. (BTW-- Aren't they all game-changing calls?)

I call what I see, period.

I've ended more than a few games on a check-swing appeal that I ruled the third strike.

[UmpTTS43]

What should you, as the BU, do when you have a less-than-competent PU ask for your opinion on a check-swing that he has already ruled as a strike? Just reiterate the strike call? Or call time, confer quietly with the PU telling him that a strike call on a check-swing is not appealable so that he can both inform the defense of that rule, and learn it for himself?

Simply and loudly state "Check swings strikes are not appealable."

[noumpere]

Maybe you guys are not understanding me.

No, we understand you quite well in this thread and in most of the others that you comment on beginning when you asked as a guest a couple of weeks ago.

What does that mean? How can you possibly know what all other posters understand and don't understand? Why don't you speak for yourself and yourself only, since that is really all you are truly able to do. I was not being rude or condescending, not sure why you felt the need to respond this way. This is simply a situation where we disagree, but the responses that were being given never addressed what I was stating, so I wanted to make sure people were clear about what I was saying.

Well Scott your right. I could of used I instead of we in the post. But given that you asked in post 23 and we're now up to post 80 or so and most of the other posts seem to have the same understanding of your point in this thread that I do, I seemed to be right here.

Look, I havent posted much to many of the other boards, but I've been around since the beginning (well, since r.s.o, which was pretty close to the beginning. Dont ask me what my handle was then though, I cant remember).

Those who do best are those who post a question read the answers and consider the opinions given.

Those who dont last are those who ask things that are clearly in the book (especially when they seem to be experienced umpires), post repetitive comments in the same thread defending (or trying to clarify) their opinion even when nearly everyone else tells them they are wrong, and ask the same question again even when given the correct answer.

I hope you will take it as constructive criticism when I tell you that in my opinion (which I recognize doesn't mean much) way to many of your posts fit the second category. And fwiw I got some criticism when I first started to post here and I have been working to adapt to it. I hope oitheres can see that but its a struggle every day.

Finally if the mods dont think this fits here then delete it or send it to scott personally or whatever. Sorry for the interruption

[HokieUmp]

I'm a few days late, and I know there's two more pages of this, so it's probably been addressed, already, but ... Whaaaaaa?

Situation #2: Ball comes in batter checks his swing. PU makes verbal call of "Yes he did" and the strike signal. Or "no he didn't". If the catcher asks him to get help from the BU and I'm the BU I'm going to agree with my PU 99% of the time. For me to take an emphatic "yes he did" and change it to a ball makes my PU look like a moron. Now if I think it's a really bad call I might call time and discuss it with him to see what he saw, and how he would feel about changing the call. But I'm not throwing my partner under the bus like that.

I read this once or twice, but still a little confused here. It sounds like you're saying, from the sentence that starts with "For me to take..." that you thinking there's ANY possible situation where your plate guy would call an strike, and you could overrule it on appeal. Well, there's just no chance of that EVER happening in a real baseball game, played with rules from a baseball rulebook. Ever. EH. VER.

So I hope you're not saying that could happen.

And I'm REALLY hoping you would NEVER call time and 'discuss' eff-all with your PU on a pitch. Ball or strike. You don't care what HE saw. And if I saw you strolling towards me for something like that to discuss my "really bad call," you - and the young men on the field - might possibly hear what some folks call "naughty language." You might even learn a new word or two.

Here's what should happen:

1. Your plate guy calls a strike. You smile inside, knowing you're one pitch closer to the end result.

2. Your plate guy calls a ball. No one checks. Life goes on.

3. Your plate guy calls a ball. Someone asks to check. You give him what you saw.

There's no overruling a strike. There's no discussion. Good lord, man.

[HokieUmp]

Let me also be clear that I'm not telling anyone on here what they should do. I'm simply telling them what I do. You can look at it as something to consider, or look at it as something you disagree with. Not everything is black and white. It's o.k. for people to do things differently and neither party be right or wrong.

Actually, that's not quite right.

I'm still not at the end, but here's the thing: at this point in the thread, you're saying:

1. Checked swing strike calls are appeal-able. They are not.

2. You're also saying there can and should be some kind of conference between umpires on check-swing calls, and it's okay 'unless they got too numerous.' And that it's okay, because for all the coaches know, you could be discussing the count. They are not okay, ever, and why on God's green fields would you have a conference unbidden?

These things are not gray areas. Sometimes, there IS a black-and-white. You are incorrect, sir. As the saying goes, "when it's you against the world, bet on the world."