Verbal Interference by a coach

[hckyosgood30]

I had this play just a few weeks ago and I would love all of your imput. This is a Fall ball 18aU classic. I happen to know both of these coaches very well and know that one of them likes to pull every trick in the book to get run across. I'm the BU 1 out runners on 1st and 3rd. The coach calls "dead man running" play. In which as soon as the pitcher comes set the R2 takes off from first. Hoping for either a balk, or a run down. Well the pitcher does everything right, so no balk. Now R1 is in a rundown. R2 starts to sneak his way towards home, the catcher seeing this tells F4 to check the runner. F4 does so while keeping the run down in play. So pretty much the play is broken and R1 is screwed. Right before he gets tagged about 10 feet from first base the HC yells "Go Now!" and R2 makes a fake 2 step break and then stops and heads back to 3rd. Doing this made F4 not tag R1 and swing around to look at R2. While R1 scampers back into 1st base. Seeing this my partner calls time, announces verbal interference on the HC. And states that R1 is out. This brings out a S**t storm which we took care of. I thought it was a brilliant call, and a great read of the situation on a crafty coach. Anyone else have anything differently or was this a case of over umpiring?

Enjoy

[Umpire in Chief]

I have nothing. In this case there is no intent to interfere and it seems he is attempting to direct his team.

If the coach yells something while the pitcher is in his delivery resulting in a balk, then I've got something.

[tjthresh]

Agree with UIC. The coach is just coaching.

[hckyosgood30]

The point my partner made, was that the coach Yelled so loud it got everyone in the park to turn and look at him. Then after that much expression R2 still strolls back to 3rd???? That was the odd part about it. I'm not sure since I had the run down.

[JaxRolo]

I also have to agree with UIC. Nothing.

Sounds like the coach was coaching even if he did it loudly! Maybe he was trying to confuse the defense but in this case you can't just assume that. Its not like he was telling F4 what to do he was telling his own player what to do.

[Chance]

I have nothing in this situation no matter how loud the coach yells. Might say it was a HTBT situation but going by what the coach said he was simply directing his runners.

[TX-UIC]

ditto... nothing

[jim knight]

I have nothing as well....

[yawetag]

Add me to the "nothing" group.

[mstaylor]

We have no way to tell whether he is trying to screw up the defense or his runner just didn't do what he was supposed to do, leave it alone. Now if he is yelling for the F4 to throw to third or home, different story.

[Mr Umpire]

I would have nothing.

He isn't attempting to coach the other team or use a "reserved" word to invoke a response such as "Time". This doesn't fall under any of that.

He told his runner to go and his runner didn't listen. That's it. Was he telling his runner several times(who knows). Was he excited in the moment and wanted to make sure his runner could hear him over everyone else(who knows). He was coaching his player and not the other. Your partner grabbed the wrong end on this one. He may know the coach's intent but it's hard to prove it given the circumstances.

[1dumbquestion]

zip, zero, nada

[detailshp]

I got nothing,.

[HokieUmp]

Right before he gets tagged about 10 feet from first base the HC yells "Go Now!" and R2 makes a fake 2 step break and then stops and heads back to 3rd. Doing this made F4 not tag R1 and swing around to look at R2. While R1 scampers back into 1st base. Seeing this my partner calls time, announces verbal interference on the HC. And states that R1 is out. This brings out a S**t storm which we took care of. I thought it was a brilliant call, and a great read of the situation on a crafty coach. Anyone else have anything differently or was this a case of over umpiring?

That's definitely over-umpiring. While I'm glad you handled the s--tstorm, it was one entirely of your own making, and not really a 'brilliant' call at all.

I mean, under that incredibly wide definition of verbal interference, most every baserunner could get called out. Coaches are yelling instructions at their players on every play, and the defense hears that, too.

....And I've now read the other comments, where we talk about intent. So what? If they've got some "If A, then B" play chart that says "when a play breaks down, I'll yell run, and you just don't run," well, good for them. Did it confuse the defense? I suppose. Here's my counter: what are they doing listening to the basecoaches? If they don't hear their F2, calling out from his position "Going!" or some other, what do they care what the coach is saying?

The end of that stick is just so sh---y, it's not even funny.

[Dragon29]

I agree w/all who say they got nuthin' on this play. I'll go a step further - To me, it sounds like the OP's partner was inserting his own brand of morality into the game. He didn't like what the OM did, (maybe he thought it was bush) so he penalized him. As hard as it is (especially for newer guys) to keep their own feelings of what's fair and what's not out of the game, it's a must. Tell your partner to officiate using the rule book, not his heart.

[Umpire in Chief]

I agree w/all who say they got nuthin' on this play. I'll go a step further - To me, it sounds like the OP's partner was inserting his own brand of morality into the game. He didn't like what the OM did, (maybe he thought it was bush) so he penalized him. As hard as it is (especially for newer guys) to keep their own feelings of what's fair and what's not out of the game, it's a must. Tell your partner to officiate using the rule book, not his heart.

Nice post. I wanted to add that many guys, myself included, have espoused the view of "Screw he who screwed up." While I still hold this true, it only applies when there is an applicable rule violation. There are times when teams do legal things which may bother us to no end, but we have no basis to make any rulings.

[NFUA_44]

If you have to stretch the rule or Interp. then your most likely stretching the situation. You would have to dig deep and hard in OBR to justify some form of "verbal Int.". One of the primary focuses I try to put through each year when working with the newer guys is to get to a point where you let the game call itself. Proper use of voice, well trained eyes, being in and adjusting to the best possible position, are all things that develop over time on the field. I always return to some of the most important lessons Vets passed onto me back in the day. In this case, if your doing your job, letting the game take care of itself, and then being there when a critical decision needs to be made, you will command a greater amount of understanding and respect for the decisions that you make.

Stretching things in order to administer the game according to what you think is right or wrong will take you down a road that is loaded with trouble, and I can't imagine a scenario where you or your partner come out ahead of the game.

[Umpire in Chief]

I agree w/all who say they got nuthin' on this play. I'll go a step further - To me, it sounds like the OP's partner was inserting his own brand of morality into the game. He didn't like what the OM did, (maybe he thought it was bush) so he penalized him. As hard as it is (especially for newer guys) to keep their own feelings of what's fair and what's not out of the game, it's a must. Tell your partner to officiate using the rule book, not his heart.

I was thinking about this and think this probably happens more often than we'd like to think. There are a number of umpires who have been put in their position without sufficient training and they make a call based on their heart and what they feel is right. It's not necessarily their fault all the time.

[amarillo]

Not unlike the play in football where the qb announces there is something wrong with the ball and then when the defense is lulled the qb then runs down the sideline for the easy touchdown. While a strong statement to the moral and ethical decay of our society it is not outside the rules of the game. It is not our job to be the morals/scrupples/ethics police.

[NFUA_44]

I agree w/all who say they got nuthin' on this play. I'll go a step further - To me, it sounds like the OP's partner was inserting his own brand of morality into the game. He didn't like what the OM did, (maybe he thought it was bush) so he penalized him. As hard as it is (especially for newer guys) to keep their own feelings of what's fair and what's not out of the game, it's a must. Tell your partner to officiate using the rule book, not his heart.

I was thinking about this and think this probably happens more often than we'd like to think. There are a number of umpires who have been put in their position without sufficient training and they make a call based on their heart and what they feel is right. It's not necessarily their fault all the time.

This is very true Warren, I would say very true for the great majority of us at some point in our careers, especially early on, and even more so if you don't have the opportunity to work with solid veterans. Lacking the experience and/or training your mind calls out the "need" to try and set some perceived injustice wrong, after all we are there to officiate the game! That said, I stress in the biggest possible manner out there that less is always more, especially if your not sure, or something doesn't feel right. It's going to be easier to tell a coach that "I got nothing", than trying to stretch rules to cover a "funky" situation. The bright side, is you'll probably wind up getting input from old dogs, digging through your library for an answer, or popping onto a forum to get more answers. I know I have usually come out the better for it in the past, and the major headaches went away, when I just let the game roll on, and called what needed to be called.

[LMSANS]

Not unlike the play in football where the qb announces there is something wrong with the ball and then when the defense is lulled the qb then runs down the sideline for the easy touchdown. While a strong statement to the moral and ethical decay of our society it is not outside the rules of the game. It is not our job to be the morals/scrupples/ethics police.

Actually, the play you describe is "outside the rules" of Fed football. It has to do with simulating a snap, deception that a snap is not imminent. There are several variations of this play and they are all illegal. The signal used might be USC, but the rule interp is more specific.

[Umpire in Chief]

I remember Dan Marino later (with his blazing speed) in his Career getting a TD this way.

[LMSANS]

I remember Dan Marino later (with his blazing speed) in his Career getting a TD this way.

Actually I believe he indicated he was going to down the ball to stop the clock. He took a legal snap and scored (I thought it was a pass). The problem with the described play is usually the snap, then you can get them for USC.

[Umpire in Chief]

That was it he faked taking a knee and then went in.

[Majordave]

Is this a Football Ref's Forum now? Just sayin'! (grin)