OSU/OU - stealing home (video)

[bam]

@MidAmUmp - I didn't say you personally criticized me.  I was making the point that there are some that umpire by the book, and some that umpire with the book.  

 

Now, when to choose between the two is one of the biggest failings of amateur umpires (like me) and what separates us from the D1/MiLB/MLB guys.  

[MidAmUmp]

@MidAmUmp  I agree that in a pressure packed situation, actually seeing and processing everything is very difficult on a play like this.  Look at the play where obstruction was not called by U1 in the MLB game a couple of days ago.  One would think an MLB umpire would see that, but he didn't.

 

I know that common sense and fair play may indicate that on a wild pitch and the batter not making any attempt to swing that a no call may be the best choice.  However, on this play, F2 was out in front before F1 even released the pitch.  Seems to me that everything that happens after shouldn't really matter.  I know things happen so fast, especially at the D1 level compared to the levels I am calling, so again I am not criticizing - just keeping to the point of the thread which is to learn.

 

I know that if the OC came out to argue that the batter should be awarded first, he would have a legitimate beef.  I also know that if the pitch was caught and the runner tagged, then the defense gained a major advantage that the rules specifically try to prevent.

 

I like the big picture view that you provide in your insightful posts.  As a newer (been umpiring 5 years) umpire, it's something I need to always seek to understand better.

The offensive coach isn't going to argue that his batter should be awarded first.  His focus is only going to be on the runner/play at the plate.  They don't know that rule...If he does, I want him on my crew!!!

 

As for the pitch being caught/runner tagged out - see what I posted above.  Someone gained an advantage and the rule should be enforced.

[mstaylor]

@MidAmUmp

 

 I don't think it should never be called.

 

 

I realize that but on another board many years ago that was a position by some pretty big, big dogs. 

[MidAmUmp]

I would put the emphasis on many years ago. Philosophies have changed.

[basejester]

Yeah...you go ahead and call that.  Let me know how that works out for you.  Again, common sense and fair play...

 

I have no problem posting videos and having discussions about them but are you seriously advocating calling this???????

This post rustles my jimmies.  The post you're responding to didn't deserve mockery.

Is your position:

• Balk shouldn't be called because you will have a SH*#storm.
• It's really hard to make this call, so while it should be called, we shouldn't criticize anyone for not making it.
• It's a bad rule, so you will not enforce it.
• The rule wasn't violated.

[AmackNH]

 

Yeah...you go ahead and call that.  Let me know how that works out for you.  Again, common sense and fair play...

 

I have no problem posting videos and having discussions about them but are you seriously advocating calling this???????

This post rustles my jimmies.  The post you're responding to didn't deserve mockery.

Is your position:

• Balk shouldn't be called because you will have a SH*#storm.
• It's really hard to make this call, so while it should be called, we shouldn't criticize anyone for not making it.
• It's a bad rule, so you will not enforce it.
• The rule wasn't violated.

 

Far be it for me to lighten the tension of this thread but thats a fantastic turn of phrase right there 

[scrounge]

 

Yeah...you go ahead and call that.  Let me know how that works out for you.  Again, common sense and fair play...

 

I have no problem posting videos and having discussions about them but are you seriously advocating calling this???????

This post rustles my jimmies.  The post you're responding to didn't deserve mockery.

Is your position:

• Balk shouldn't be called because you will have a SH*#storm.
• It's really hard to make this call, so while it should be called, we shouldn't criticize anyone for not making it.
• It's a bad rule, so you will not enforce it.
• The rule wasn't violated.

 

 

That seems like a grossly oversimplistic summation of MidAmUmp's excellent post above, in which it appears to me that all those questions are answered in full context with detailed explanations. I'm not saying I agree 100% with everything he said, but the points were clear to me.

[AmackNH]

 

 

Yeah...you go ahead and call that.  Let me know how that works out for you.  Again, common sense and fair play...

 

I have no problem posting videos and having discussions about them but are you seriously advocating calling this???????

This post rustles my jimmies.  The post you're responding to didn't deserve mockery.

Is your position:

• Balk shouldn't be called because you will have a SH*#storm.
• It's really hard to make this call, so while it should be called, we shouldn't criticize anyone for not making it.
• It's a bad rule, so you will not enforce it.
• The rule wasn't violated.

 

 

That seems like a grossly oversimplistic summation of MidAmUmp's excellent post above, in which it appears to me that all those questions are answered in full context with detailed explanations. I'm not saying I agree 100% with everything he said, but the points were clear to me.

 

Agree

[Umpire in Chief]

But- somebody correct me if I'm wrong - the video does not show if the PU or rest of the crew awarded the batter first so lets not be so quick to jump on them and say they missed a call. We see an apparent rules violation, but we don't get the rest of the story or potential award. 

 

So does anybody actually know if CI/Catchers Balk was actually called or not?

 

Until we know that lets give these guys credit as they are among the elite of the elite in the NCAA D-I world. It would be unfair otherwise.

 

And if they did not, that does not make them a Smitty, just human like the rest of us who would kill to be in their plate shoes.

 

Back under my rock

Good point. Does anybody know with any certainty if a call was made? 

[johnnyg08]

Well, I don't know scoring rules but if there was CI, would that be scored as an error on F2?  

 

If an error was charged to F2, maybe that would be the CI?

 

In no way am I offering an opinion one way or another on this play.  I'm reading all of the posts and learning that way.  

[basejester]

That seems like a grossly oversimplistic summation of MidAmUmp's excellent post above, in which it appears to me that all those questions are answered in full context with detailed explanations. I'm not saying I agree 100% with everything he said, but the points were clear to me.

OK, some of those are mutually exclusive, so I wanted to clarify which involved assumptions he was entertaining but disagreed with. If we think nothing is the best call and that's what they called; the mitigating circumstances are irrelevant. The description of how big the game is feels more like an appeal to authority than anything.

I don't personally care whether or not this crew got it right or not.

[24sdad]

I would just always ask that you not be a black and white rule book umpire, let the game call itself, insert yourself in there if/when needed and always enforce rules with common sense and fair play in mind.

To me, this sums up MidAmUmp's entire post and is pretty darn good advice.

[jkumpire]

Wow!

 

Are you kidding me? Where is there interference by F2? If the batter swings you might have a case, but in that play you have nothing, nothing, nothing and nothing. PU shouldn't have given a safe sign, but who hasn't done that? Great thread. 

[dumbdumb]

 

But- somebody correct me if I'm wrong - the video does not show if the PU or rest of the crew awarded the batter first so lets not be so quick to jump on them and say they missed a call. We see an apparent rules violation, but we don't get the rest of the story or potential award. 

 

So does anybody actually know if CI/Catchers Balk was actually called or not?

 

Until we know that lets give these guys credit as they are among the elite of the elite in the NCAA D-I world. It would be unfair otherwise.

 

And if they did not, that does not make them a Smitty, just human like the rest of us who would kill to be in their plate shoes.

 

Back under my rock

Good point. Does anybody know with any certainty if a call was made? 

 

Here is the play by play for the 8th inning.

 

 Green doubled to right center, and advanced to third on a fielding error by cf (2-1 BKB). Rea line out to ss (1-0 B). Stover struck out swinging (3-2 BBKKBS). Evans J., to p. for Garza, Jr. Green stole home, unearned. Saxon flied out to cf (1-2 KKBF). 1 run, 1 hit, 1 error, 0 LOB.

 

There was no passed ball nor WP under the team fielding stats nor under the pitching stats.

 

Just a ball to the backstop and a run scored.

[SoCal Lurker]

At the risk of sounding snide, is the moral of the story for batters that if the catcher moves in front of you on a steal of home, take a swing at him?

 

(I have trouble concluding the catcher didn't gain an advantage by getting the ball before it crossed the plate -- he went after it that way because he thought it would give him an advantage to get to the ball sooner and be in a better position to make the tag when he got the ball.  But being a lurking, non-umpire, I'm not going to opine on whether that should mean the CI/Balk call should be made.  Seems to me that anytime we talk about book call versus common sense, we ineherently open a can of worms and have a problem that cannot have a crisp answer.)

[grayhawk]

IMO, it is indisputable that the correct call, according to the rule book, is CI and a balk.  Just as a refresher, from UIC's post on page 1:

 

For reference: NCAA

8-2 The batter becomes a base runner:

8-2-e: If any defensive player interferes with the batter’s swing or prevents the individual from striking at a pitched ball;

8-2-e-2-Exception: If there is catcher’s interference on a squeeze play, the batter is awarded first base, the run scores and all other runners advance one base on the balk created by the interference

 

There is a reason that they included the part that UIC bolded and underlined.  If they intended CI to only be called when a batter swings, they would have stopped at the first part of 8-2-e.

 

F2 DID, in fact, prevent the batter from striking at the ball.

 

The question that MidAm has done a great job of addressing is this:  Is CI and a balk the right call?

[Richvee]

@MidAmUmp Thanks for post #21. Great post and great info. Words for me to learn by. The advice and knowledge I gained from that one post is much appreciated.   

[Jimurray]

 

@MidAmUmp  I agree that in a pressure packed situation, actually seeing and processing everything is very difficult on a play like this.  Look at the play where obstruction was not called by U1 in the MLB game a couple of days ago.  One would think an MLB umpire would see that, but he didn't.

 

I know that common sense and fair play may indicate that on a wild pitch and the batter not making any attempt to swing that a no call may be the best choice.  However, on this play, F2 was out in front before F1 even released the pitch.  Seems to me that everything that happens after shouldn't really matter.  I know things happen so fast, especially at the D1 level compared to the levels I am calling, so again I am not criticizing - just keeping to the point of the thread which is to learn.

 

I know that if the OC came out to argue that the batter should be awarded first, he would have a legitimate beef.  I also know that if the pitch was caught and the runner tagged, then the defense gained a major advantage that the rules specifically try to prevent.

 

I like the big picture view that you provide in your insightful posts.  As a newer (been umpiring 5 years) umpire, it's something I need to always seek to understand better.

The offensive coach isn't going to argue that his batter should be awarded first.  His focus is only going to be on the runner/play at the plate.  They don't know that rule...If he does, I want him on my crew!!!

 

As for the pitch being caught/runner tagged out - see what I posted above.  Someone gained an advantage and the rule should be enforced.

 

 

What you posted above before this post was that you would call the out and get help. That doesnt make sense. My mantra on this sit is "call the pitch, watch for CI and BI, call the play". With the pitch being that far up I would probably be happy that it was not close and go to calling the play. But as the pitch gets closer to the strike zone, calling the pitch is the first thing you should do, and, if it was caught in front of the plate, R3 tagged or not , count important or not, calling CI will be the right thing to do. BTW, the Vandy triple steal might have been CI also. Nobodys complaining. If your are gonna advise us of a philosophy change what exactly is it. I know of one. "Let em play baseball".

[dumbdumb]

Well MAU

 

Everyone can watch this same umpire work the Michigan/Nebraska game on Sunday as the PU.

 

Play kinda of reminds me of that old hoops philosophy that I read about somewhere. Advantage/disadvantage. A little contact is bound to occur when a bunch of players are moving around within 18 feet of the basket. It is up to the official to decide if small amounts of contact put the opponent at a disadvantage in which case the whistle is blown. If the contact did not put the player at a disadvantage, then the whistle is withheld. Otherwise, to call the game exactly and as literally as the rules are written, would make for a not so pleasant experience. Might as well just have each team line up at the free throw line and all the players shoot 10 free throws and the team that hits the most wins, and we all go home.

 

Appreciate your insights into "possibilities" of handling certain situations as they occur without demanding that they "must" be handled in that manner. We need your insights into certain situations as they occur and into handling those situations as they occur so we can ponder how we would handle that situation if it did indeed occur in a game we were working.

[MidAmUmp]

The philosophy I'm advising is to umpire with common sense. Those of you who say that a balk/CI should be called, please explain to me who was put at a disadvantage and who gained an advantage on this play?

Again, to be clear on my position, had the batter made even a half assed attempt to swing, I'm calling it because the batter was put at a disadvantage. If the pitch was near enough for the catcher to catch the ball, I'm calling it because the catcher gained an advantage. But on this specific play (batter not trying to hit, ball to the backstop) no one gained an advantage and no one was put at a disadvantage so there's no reason to insert myself in the game.

As bam said - you can umpire BY the book or WITH the book. I'm stealing that, by the way.

You are trying to apply a black and white rule in a gray situation. Rule book umpires seldom advance to the upper levels.

I said (and pissed several off) to call the balk/CI in this situation and see what happens. I stand by that because I know what will happen...all hell will break loose. You'll end up running 3-4 people minimum, your supervisor will hear from the coach before the game is over and you'll have a message from him waiting on you after the game, the conference will end up getting involved, and your only defense is "that's the rule" to which you'll be asked what I've posed above about common sense, fair play, advantages and disadvantages. There's not going to be a whole lot of support for you moving forward. Facts are facts...an umpire balked in the winning run on an intentional walk in a regional championship a few years back. He was supported at the time because he was technically right but he hasn't worked post season since then either. I'm not saying it's right, I'm just saying it's reality. And while you may say that will not happen to you at your level don't be surprised when it does.

[johnnyg08]

The philosophy I'm advising is to umpire with common sense. Those of you who say that a balk/CI should be called, please explain to me who was put at a disadvantage and who gained an advantage on this play?

Again, to be clear on my position, had the batter made even a half assed attempt to swing, I'm calling it because the batter was put at a disadvantage. If the pitch was near enough for the catcher to catch the ball, I'm calling it because the catcher gained an advantage. But on this specific play (batter not trying to hit, ball to the backstop) no one gained an advantage and no one was put at a disadvantage so there's no reason to insert myself in the game.

As bam said - you can umpire BY the book or WITH the book. I'm stealing that, by the way.

You are trying to apply a black and white rule in a gray situation. Rule book umpires seldom advance to the upper levels.

I said (and pissed several off) to call the balk/CI in this situation and see what happens. I stand by that because I know what will happen...all hell will break loose. You'll end up running 3-4 people minimum, your supervisor will hear from the coach before the game is over and you'll have a message from him waiting on you after the game, the conference will end up getting involved, and your only defense is "that's the rule" to which you'll be asked what I've posed above about common sense, fair play, advantages and disadvantages. There's not going to be a whole lot of support for you moving forward. Facts are facts...an umpire balked in the winning run on an intentional walk in a regional championship a few years back. He was supported at the time because he was technically right but he hasn't worked post season since then either. I'm not saying it's right, I'm just saying it's reality. And while you may say that will not happen to you at your level don't be surprised when it does.

 

 

This is a great lesson.  I will tell you that it is more of an art than a science.  

 

Where less-experienced umpires make the mistake is that they invent rules to create common sense, fair play, and advantage/disadvantage where if they would've simply enforced the rule "as written" common sense, fair play, ad/dis would've played out.  But that's what happens when they don't know the rule.  (I'm not saying in the case of the OP)...but it takes a lot of experience to "umpire with the rule book"  something that I'm still practicing.

[dumbdumb]

 

The philosophy I'm advising is to umpire with common sense. Those of you who say that a balk/CI should be called, please explain to me who was put at a disadvantage and who gained an advantage on this play?

Again, to be clear on my position, had the batter made even a half assed attempt to swing, I'm calling it because the batter was put at a disadvantage. If the pitch was near enough for the catcher to catch the ball, I'm calling it because the catcher gained an advantage. But on this specific play (batter not trying to hit, ball to the backstop) no one gained an advantage and no one was put at a disadvantage so there's no reason to insert myself in the game.

As bam said - you can umpire BY the book or WITH the book. I'm stealing that, by the way.

You are trying to apply a black and white rule in a gray situation. Rule book umpires seldom advance to the upper levels.

I said (and pissed several off) to call the balk/CI in this situation and see what happens. I stand by that because I know what will happen...all hell will break loose. You'll end up running 3-4 people minimum, your supervisor will hear from the coach before the game is over and you'll have a message from him waiting on you after the game, the conference will end up getting involved, and your only defense is "that's the rule" to which you'll be asked what I've posed above about common sense, fair play, advantages and disadvantages. There's not going to be a whole lot of support for you moving forward. Facts are facts...an umpire balked in the winning run on an intentional walk in a regional championship a few years back. He was supported at the time because he was technically right but he hasn't worked post season since then either. I'm not saying it's right, I'm just saying it's reality. And while you may say that will not happen to you at your level don't be surprised when it does.

 

 

This is a great lesson.  I will tell you that it is more of an art than a science.  

 

Where less-experienced umpires make the mistake is that they invent rules to create common sense, fair play, and advantage/disadvantage where if they would've simply enforced the rule "as written" common sense, fair play, ad/dis would've played out.  But that's what happens when they don't know the rule.  (I'm not saying in the case of the OP)...but it takes a lot of experience to "umpire with the rule book"  something that I'm still practicing.

 

Many things lend credence to the old saying "experience is the best teacher"

[johnnyg08]

I do wonder if a protest committee would feel the same way about this umpiring philosophy?

 

I'm not judging the umpire(s), or any commenters on here about how they handled or would have handled this type of scenario, but what if the offense lodged a protest on this play?  

 

Would a protest be upheld in this situation?

 

Or would it fall under "judgment" as to whether it was judged to be interference or not?  

[grayhawk]

I do wonder if a protest committee would feel the same way about this umpiring philosophy?

 

I'm not judging the umpire(s), or any commenters on here about how they handled or would have handled this type of scenario, but what if the offense lodged a protest on this play?  

 

Would a protest be upheld in this situation?

 

Or would it fall under "judgment" as to whether it was judged to be interference or not?  

 

I think it would depend on what the umpire said.  If he said that he didn't believe F2 stepped out front and interfered with the batter's ability to swing, then it's a judgement call and would be denied.  However, if he misstated the rule in some way, then it could be upheld.

 

For instance, if he said that he saw F2 step in front, but since the batter didn't contact him that it's not interference, then I could see the protest being upheld.

[HeadHunterLA]

 

I would just always ask that you not be a black and white rule book umpire, let the game call itself, insert yourself in there if/when needed and always enforce rules with common sense and fair play in mind.

To me, this sums up MidAmUmp's entire post and is pretty darn good advice.

 

 

Exactly!  Don't over umpire.