Advantage/Disadvantage and Common Sense & Fair Play at your level

[sdix00]

 

So, there are a lot lot of extremely helpful posts on this site, and this one on Common Sense and Fair Paly (CS&FP) and Advantage/Disadvantage by @MidAmUmp is no exception.

http://umpire-empire.com/index.php/topic/53347-osuou-stealing-home-video/page-2#entry169913

 

In fact, I have read it. . .and re-read it several times.   This post made my Kindle list (meaning, I push a button in Chrome and push the page to my Kindle for  later reading). 

 

 I have made game management my focus this last year.   I work really hard to stay out of the way and let games run themselves, only getting involved when I need to. 

 

On the other hand, it is been my experience with FED rules, that the FED seems to want us to make calls regardless of the situation in regards to CS&FP and Advantage/Disadvantage.  For example, consider that there is no hint in the FED rules of "interference without a play", or "reset after backswing interference", or  "deception" note in the FED balk rule.  It does not say that "the pitcher's intent should govern."    Further, it has been said that FED rules have been simplified in an effort to remove the umpire.  (Whether they are truly simpler is another thread.)  

 

 

Would you agree or disagree that there is a significantly-different standard of enforcement between Pro/NCAA vs FED?  What about Pro vs. Youth/LL?   Is this a question of game management or recognizing teachable moments?   I think a strong argument can me made that the "Spirit" of the FED rules is to do exactly what they tell us to do. 

 

Consider the play referenced in MidAmUmp's post above.   He educates us that not enforcing the CI penalty is appropriate in this particular mixture of variables, but would you agree that it is still appropriate to not enforce CI the penalty in FED,  given what you understand to be the purpose of the NFHS? 

 

Another question - with the advent of TV games with dozens of cameras, is it still appropriate to call the "neighborhood play"?  If a player has won the play in the spirit of the rules, but not in the technical aspect, is it still appropriate to reward that player in this day of 12 ESPN cameras, or worse, 24 cell phone cameras? Consider the batter who hits a home run but misses HP by three inches and is appealed.  He "beat" the pitcher, still satisfied the "spirit" of the missed base rule by not taking shortcuts, but failed to "touch" as it is required in print.

 

So I am interested to hear YOUR thoughts on CS&FP and the concept of Advantage/Disadvantage at the levels you umpire.   What experiences and/or challenges have you had when applying this concept in your games?

 

 

[BigUmp56]

I think if you were to poll most experienced umpires who work both FED and OBR games you'd hear a prevailing theme about this subject. And that would be that FED wants to "dummy" things down to the lowest common denominator and take quite a bit of judgment away from the umpires. I have no reason why this is, but it's how many of us feel.

 

Tim.

[blue23ll]

I agree Tim.  I would submit that ASA and Little League do the same things. The easiest way to attempt to guarantee some semblance of uniformity is to train out individuality.

[MidAmUmp]

I'm honored that you feel my post is Kindle worthy.

 

Here's my take on that particular play...

 

1.  Just to be very clear, on the play I was talking about, I don't think very many umpires when put in the exact situation as it was (read my description of the intensity) would even recognize the catcher jumping out in front and be quick enough to register in their minds that it is Catcher's Interference & a balk, score the run and award the batter 1st base.

2.  Those who are quick enough to recognize it are one of two types of umpires: Very damn good - and would use common sense and fair play (as was done here) and choose to ignore the CI/Balk because there was no one put at a disadvantage and no one gained an advantage -OR- black & white "by the book" umpires, always looking for rules violations, looking for an opportunity to insert themselves in the game.  And let's just be honest, they will never work a game at this level.

 

My personal opinion on the various rules sets...

Most have been dumbed down.  It would appear most rule books have been written by lawyers and insurance companies.  They are taking umpire judgment out of the equation in lieu of blanket rules with safety taking precedence.  I'm not saying that's totally a bad thing, but in many instances I think the baby has been thrown out with the water.

 

You have to look at it from the particular organization's side, too.  The NCAA probably has somewhere in the neighborhood of 5000 umpires (might be more) working games at all 3 of their levels.  Probably about 2500-3000 of those umpires attend the NCAA meetings at the beginning of the year.  So that leaves approx. 2000 people going out there, enforcing their rules with no clue of how the NCAA wants them to be enforced.  Those numbers are significantly greater for NFHS, and even more for groups like Little League.

 

Look at your own area.  You can name 5-6 guys right now in your area who don't attend meetings, show up for a pay check, and don't give a damn.  Now increase that number across your state and then to all 50 states.  That's what these organizations are dealing with when writing rules.

 

Common sense is getting thrown out.  A perfect example: The original Jaksa-Roder Manual (used at Brinkman-Froemming's school) mentions "Post Obstruction Evidence".  Let's say a runner is in a rundown between 1st & 2nd, runs back to 1st and is obstructed by the 1st baseman.  Instantaneously, the SS throws the ball to the pitcher covering 1st and that throw goes out of play.  The interp. is to award R1 3rd base because of the Post Obstruction Evidence.  Yes, the play is dead at the point of obstruction, but the throw was occurring at that time, so take that into consideration when enforcing the penalty.

 

Now, some rule sets have gone away from this thinking most umpires are too dumb to actually enforce this, so they just say all obstructions are a delayed dead ball, let it play out and you get stuck dealing with a rundown that should be a dead ball immediately waiting to see the entire scenario play out before enforcing any penalties.

 

Another example is malicious contact.  Now the NCAA says any contact above the waist is to be considered malicious contact.  So an "in possession" catcher can sit on the ground in front of the plate and either force the runner to go around him, or slide into him and risk making contact above the waist (sitting down will mean any contact is above the waist) and even though the runner made a legal slide, he is to be called out and ejected for malicious contact.

 

As with most things in our world these days, common sense is packing up and leaving town.

[mstaylor]

And here comes Mike ad the defender of Fed. I agree that they have some LCD rules, the always delayed dead on obstruction being one. There are three other reasons for their specific rules, participation, safety and sportsmanship. The LCD rules are frustrating to deal with and put the others in a bad light. FPSL is a safety rule that needs to be called as they direct, bay rules and others fall in that boat. Participation does are things like the odd DH rule. Rules like always awarding at least a base on obstruction and verbal obstruction are sportsmanship and to be punitive so they need to be enforced as written. Do I agree with everything they do, absolutely not but most of the differences have a reason.<br /><br />Sent from my C771 using Tapatalk 2<br /><br />