Continuous Batting Order

[basejester]

It is an easy call. If you can't tell, it hit the hand first.

All calls are easy if it's OK to just guess.

 

[Rich Ives]

All calls are easy if it's OK to just guess.

 

The hit the hand one was reportedly taught at one on the pro schools.

Why are so many folks looking for a reason to not send the batter to 1B?

[Rich Ives]

It's not an easy call.

Instead you have found a simple formulaic solution to a very difficult umpire situation and you are probably missing more of these types of calls then you realise or your ego would allow you to admit in your games with such a sophomoric approach.

Is your advice sound for a new umpire or one who's unsure? Agreed. But it's like telling an umpire "if in doubt call them out." Not bad advice to handle a challenging situation and for damage control for an umpire who is about to lock up in a game....... but that doesn't in anyway guarantee you are getting the call correct when you call them out. The same goes when applying one of these "rules of thumb" to handle a difficult situation like check swing/potential hit batter/foul ball decisions. 

You can come here to learn or you can come here to argue.

[Replacematt]

It's not an easy call.

Instead you have found a simple formulaic solution to a very difficult umpire situation and you are probably missing more of these types of calls then you realise or your ego would allow you to admit in your games with such a sophomoric approach.

Is your advice sound for a new umpire or one who's unsure? Agreed. But it's like telling an umpire "if in doubt call them out." Not bad advice to handle a challenging situation and for damage control for an umpire who is about to lock up in a game....... but that doesn't in anyway guarantee you are getting the call correct when you call them out. The same goes when applying one of these "rules of thumb" to handle a difficult situation like check swing/potential hit batter/foul ball decisions. 

You really want to start insulting me?

That advice is from none other than Jim Evans.

I suggest that you start to be quiet and listen. There are several things you have posted here lately that indicate a hubris that isn't commensurate with your experience. (God, this sounds familiar.)

[ricka56]

All calls are easy if it's OK to just guess.

A call is required...sometimes we get hosed and all we can do is guess. 
The call is easy...dealing with irate coaches can be hard.

Sometimes the best we can do is go with the call that is supported by a preponderance of the evidence. The umpire can't absorb the evidence without good timing.

[Cato the Younger]

"Why are so many folks looking for a reason to not send the batter to 1B?"

OP posted a play where the consensus is the batter is out. Sometimes you are not sending them to first you are calling them out because they are swinging. Secondly there are situations where the ball is first off the bat and then glancing the batter after "bat-ball" contact that really should be a foul ball by rule. Other times you actually may be deeked. Some of the situation even involve batters trying to get hit turning into a curve ball for example. 

Sure I have used the simple formulaic solution but that doesn't mean we are always getting it right, and the handling of this situation is solved as what has been posted by some earlier in the thread would imply. 

As for the pro, schools teaching (allegedly Jim Evans as posted above) it again is excellent advice to handle a difficult situation and it's my default "rule of thumb as well". So I am doing actually what many of you guys are doing in many of my games. Where I disagree is when someone implying that this is an easy call and acting like the situation is solved like a basic math problem because of good survival advice for a difficult situation provided to hundreds of umpires of varying abilities at an umpire school. 

This "rule of thumb" generally will keep you out of trouble but don't fool yourself into thinking that it means you are always getting the play right. 

Edited December 3, 2015 by Cato the Younger

[Cato the Younger]

You really want to start insulting me?

That advice is from none other than Jim Evans.

I suggest that you start to be quiet and listen. There are several things you have posted here lately that indicate a hubris that isn't commensurate with your experience. (God, this sounds familiar.)

 

If posting my opinion is insulting you I am truly sorry. Hopefully, we can both find some value in what each others posting here in the future. 

That said there is nothing in your posting (you have posted often around here giving me a good sample size) that changes my opinion or assessment of what I posted above. 

For example you have posted that one of the more challenging situations that a plate umpire faces is an"easy call" because you discovered a technique endorsed by Jim Evans that helps you deal with that situation. 

As for my experience........ please do share........ what would that be? 

A low post count here has nothing to do with my "experience" in umpiring.

[grayhawk]

I can't endorse this being an "easy" call.  Anytime we can't actually see what happened, and have to use other information to form a judgment, then it's not easy.  Using proper timing and gathering all available information before making the call will help.  I think what IS easy is that once you have determined that the pitch touched both the batter's hand/finger AND the bat to default to Evans' teaching that it hit the batter first.

The REALLY difficult call is when the ball travels into fair territory.  In that case, we have to determine:

Did the ball only hit the bat/knob?  If so, the ball is live.
Did the ball hit the batter?  If so, we have either a HBP, a dead ball strike, ball 4, or a foul ball.

That's a lot to process.

 

[Rich Ives]

I can't endorse this being an "easy" call.  Anytime we can't actually see what happened, and have to use other information to form a judgment, then it's not easy.  Using proper timing and gathering all available information before making the call will help.  I think what IS easy is that once you have determined that the pitch touched both the batter's hand/finger AND the bat to default to Evans' teaching that it hit the batter first.

The REALLY difficult call is when the ball travels into fair territory.  In that case, we have to determine:

Did the ball only hit the bat/knob?  If so, the ball is live.
Did the ball hit the batter?  If so, we have either a HBP, a dead ball strike, ball 4, or a foul ball.

That's a lot to process.

 

Not this one.

All we are saying is that if you can't tell the difference rule a HBP. You will get a batter reaction before a fielder gets to the ball.

 

[grayhawk]

Not this one.

All we are saying is that if you can't tell the difference rule a HBP. You will get a batter reaction before a fielder gets to the ball.

 

I agree, which is why I put it last.  It's still a possibility, however.

I'm all for checking a batter's hand or fingers to see if there's evidence that he got hit.  Can't use that information with a possible live ball to rule on.

[ricka56]

I'm all for checking a batter's hand or fingers to see if there's evidence that he got hit. 

I've never done this. Unless I could see blood/bone or immediate swelling, I doubt that I'd be able to determine if a pitch hit a hand/finger. I think that once the umpire starts inspecting for damage, he's mostly boxed himself into a HBP award. 

[grayhawk]

I've never done this. Unless I could see blood/bone or immediate swelling, I doubt that I'd be able to determine if a pitch hit a hand/finger. I think that once the umpire starts inspecting for damage, he's mostly boxed himself into a HBP award. 

I've seen they do this on numerous occasions in MLB.  If it's good enough for MLB, it's good enough for me.  

[ricka56]

I've seen they do this on numerous occasions in MLB.  If it's good enough for MLB, it's good enough for me.  

I've seen it in MLB games too. From my recollection, they always awarded HBP when the batter winces (fake or real) during inspection. I just wonder how they can tell. 

[basejester]

Maybe they're just trying to sell the award.

 

[Replacematt]

 

If posting my opinion is insulting you I am truly sorry. 

Your opinion isn't the issue. Referring to my ego (whatever the hell that may mean) and implying that I am taking the easy way out is.

[Cato the Younger]

Your opinion isn't the issue. Referring to my ego (whatever the hell that may mean) and implying that I am taking the easy way out is.

 

Don't take it to personally my friend. I do enjoy everyone's perspective Including yours. 

I will say that when an umpire always goes to the default "rule of thumb"  to handle a difficult situation he is taking an easy way out. 

Not saying this is you, but based upon your posting above it certainly appeared that you were.

The tide will be turning very soon for us with the advancing camera technology. The new iPhones can shoot 4K video with stunning slow-motion instant replay. What comes down the pipeline next? Many of these rules of thumb that were "pure gold" for us in the past are all going to need to be examined soon as technology will definitely influence our credibility at all levels. If we always stick to the rules of thumb, our credibility will suffer and not only at the higher levels.  

I will give you a good example. I spent some time with John Kibler before he passed away. He indicated to me that when he first broke into the NL very few games were televised. As games were televised and camera technology evolved including replay and slow-motion video the major-league umpires who in the past had a "if in doubt" the batter checked his swing philosophy suddenly realized that in these "if in doubt " situations it was actually appearing that the batter swung on the slow motion replay on tv. It didn't take long for them to realize they were taking a lot of heat because the batter appeared to be swinging.

A number of major league umpires changed their philosophy in the 1970s and early 1980s calling strikes on situations that in the past they would have ruled the batter checked his swing. This was television and technology changing the way umpires called these situations. The general "rule of thumb" back then according to Kibler wants to say "no he didn't go" in an "if in doubt" situation to support the plate umpire. Obviously if the plate umpire is coming down to the base umpire plate umpire ruled the batter did not go. The rule of thumb went out the window when base umpires were losing their credibility supporting the plate umpire.

There a great YouTube video that I'm sure a number of you've seen that a batter pretends to be hit. The grainy YouTube video is pretty convincing that he was not. We are going to need more tools in our toolbelt in the future other than some rule of thumb that Jim Evans gave out either at the Academy Of Professional Umpiring or his amateur clinic in Arizona. That's all I'm attempting to do here.

 If I can't tell it hit his hand, he's going to first base, or I'm calling a strike accordingly. But this is the type of situation that's going to become more challenging for us down the road not less, and I think it's important we continue to dialogue about these types of things.

Edited December 3, 2015 by Cato the Younger

[Replacematt]

I will say that when an umpire always goes to the default "rule of thumb"  to handle a difficult situation he is taking an easy way out.

I agree, but that isn't what I was saying. 

After taking the appropriate measures, if you still cannot tell which it hit first, it hit the body. 

[grayhawk]

 

The tide will be turning very soon for us with the advancing camera technology. The new iPhones can shoot 4K video with stunning slow-motion instant replay. What comes down the pipeline next? Many of these rules of thumb that were "pure gold" for us in the past are all going to need to be examined soon as technology will definitely influence our credibility at all levels.

What rules of thumb do we have that a fan with a video camera will change?  "When in doubt, call 'em out" might be one, though I am not an adherent to that rule of thumb.  I just call what I see.  What else is there?

[Cato the Younger]

What rules of thumb do we have that a fan with a video camera will change?  "When in doubt, call 'em out" might be one, though I am not an adherent to that rule of thumb.  I just call what I see.  What else is there?

 

You're not looking far enough down the road my wise friend. The fans already have video. 

I think as officials we are all going to be using more and more technology to make calls and not that far into the future. I am in an administrative capacity at the highschool level, and it blows my mind the video available to football coaches at the high school level using things like Huddle and only with a couple of digital cameras. It is only going to be a matter of time before there will be a push for officials to use replay to get calls right even in a traditional sport like baseball. 

It is still cost prohibitive now and certainly prohibited by rule in Federation and except in certain situations at the NCAA level, but there are too many AD's and coaches who have little to no respect what is really involved in officiating along with it's traditions not to make the rule change in the name of progress and getting the call right. 

As John Kibler indicated when we discussed the check swing situation above; decades of tradition of major league umpires not needing to have criteria for a check swing other than if it were close you went with the plate guy went bye-bye in few short years. Umpires were looking stubborn and incompetent with the long used rule of thumb. You have to remember that group of umpires was also way more hardcore regarding the ethos of umpiring then the umpires are today at all levels including the major leagues. If they abandoned a "rule of thumb" with decades of tradition the modern more pliable contemporary umpiring today will throw things like the "area play at second" base away faster then you could make a delayed dead ball signal.  

[Cato the Younger]

What rules of thumb do we have that a fan with a video camera will change?  "When in doubt, call 'em out" might be one, though I am not an adherent to that rule of thumb.  I just call what I see.  What else is there?

To more specifically answer your question this is just a prediction and my opinion but I think umpiring will get more technical, and the Tower principal long touted by many basketball officials and a hallmark of good umpiring will go by the wayside.

I think replay will make the batter's box rules more technical. For example, if the batter does not compete a full step and they are hit with a batted ball exiting the box most umpires will call that a foul ball. In the future, we may be reviewing that via replay with a camera attached to the backstop to see where the batter was hit.

I  already mentioned the "area play" at second base. Many umpires still tout this as a safety rule. I had a number of situations even last season that I did not make them touch.

First baseman leaving early on plays at first base even when there's not a subsequent play will probably be more scrutinized. Many umpires including me allow the first baseman to leave early as long as the ball beats the runner and there's no subsequent play. Other than a coach after the inning walking off his duggout mentioning it ignoring the early exit has never given me a problem and I've seen it happen relatively often and I just call the batter-runner out.

 But I think the thing that concerns me is handling tag plays. If the ball beats the runner and fielder puts the ball down next to the base, I will call them out 100% of the time regardless if the glove actually touches the runner including any amazing hook slide the runner makes. I even routinely tell fielders good job you did the right thing, and you have to trust that the umpire will do the right thing by calling the runner out when you put the ball down next to the bag. 

I've had runners say he didn't tag me and my response is quite honest "he doesn't have to take you all he has to do is put the glove down next to the bag." Something that has worked for me for a long time is in danger of going the way of the "go with the plate umpire check swing call" in major league baseball. I will admit that taking away this rule of thumb is going to make many of these tag plays a lot more challenging.

 I think you asked a good question there's more examples, but I just wanted to give you a few that came quickly to mind.

Edited December 4, 2015 by Cato the Younger

[Rich Ives]

To more specifically answer your question this is just a prediction and my opinion but I think umpiring will get more technical, and the Tower principal long touted by many basketball officials and a hallmark of good umpiring will go by the wayside.

I think replay will make the batter's box rules more technical. For example, if the batter does not compete a full step and they are hit with a batted ball exiting the box most umpires will call that a foul ball. In the future, we may be reviewing that via replay with a camera attached to the backstop to see where the batter was hit.

I  already mentioned the "area play" at second base. Many umpires still tout this as a safety rule. I had a number of situations even last season that I did not make them touch.

First baseman leaving early on plays at first base even when there's not a subsequent play will probably be more scrutinized. Many umpires including me allow the first baseman to leave early as long as the ball beats the runner and there's no subsequent play. Other than a coach after the inning walking off his duggout mentioning it ignoring the early exit has never given me a problem and I've seen it happen relatively often and I just call the batter-runner out.

 But I think the thing that concerns me is handling tag plays. If the ball beats the runner and fielder puts the ball down next to the base, I will call them out 100% of the time regardless if the glove actually touches the runner including any amazing hook slide the runner makes. I even routinely tell fielders good job you did the right thing, and you have to trust that the umpire will do the right thing by calling the runner out when you put the ball down next to the bag. 

I've had runners say he didn't tag me and my response is quite honest "he doesn't have to take you all he has to do is put the glove down next to the bag." Something that has worked for me for a long time is in danger of going the way of the "go with the plate umpire check swing call" in major league baseball. I will admit that taking away this rule of thumb is going to make many of these tag plays a lot more challenging.

 I think you asked a good question there's more examples, but I just wanted to give you a few that came quickly to mind.

Replay at the MLB level has shown that you should not call the neighborhood play and there must be an actual timely tag at the base.

I also think that at the upper levels the quickness of F3s gives the illusion of their leaving too soon when in fact they do not.

[basejester]

 

I've had runners say he didn't tag me and my response is quite honest "he doesn't have to take you all he has to do is put the glove down next to the bag."

I'll respect that this has worked for you, but I would never say something like this.  I can imagine some serious problems that could result (and could have been easily avoided).  We're sending that runner back into the dugout where he will talk.  A smart and angry coach can box you into some uncomfortable questions later, because by rule the fielder clearly does have to make an actual tag. 

Coach:  My runner told me that you said, "He doesn't have to tag you.  All he has to do is put the glove down next to the bag."  Did you say that?

Umpire:   Yes.  (Or lie and lose credibility)

Coach:   Did the fielder tag him?

Umpire:  No ->  Protest
              Yes ->  Coach:  "Then why did you say that other crap to my runner?"

IMHO, if I see the runner avoid the tag, then I call safe.  If I call an out because the ball beat the runner and the glove was low (but without clear evidence for the safe), I call an out. I'm not going to offer up a point for the coach to start prying into a neighborhood tag.  After all, this looked like an out to the coach in the dugout.  He's not going to say much without our help in creating doubt.

          

  
 

[grayhawk]

I'll respect that this has worked for you, but I would never say something like this.  I can imagine some serious problems that could result (and could have been easily avoided).  We're sending that runner back into the dugout where he will talk.  A smart and angry coach can box you into some uncomfortable questions later, because by rule the fielder clearly does have to make an actual tag. 

Coach:  My runner told me that you said, "He doesn't have to tag you.  All he has to do is put the glove down next to the bag."  Did you say that?

Umpire:   Yes.  (Or lie and lose credibility)

Coach:   Did the fielder tag him?

Umpire:  No ->  Protest
              Yes ->  Coach:  "Then why did you say that other crap to my runner?"

IMHO, if I see the runner avoid the tag, then I call safe.  If I call an out because the ball beat the runner and the glove was low (but without clear evidence for the safe), I call an out. I'm not going to offer up a point for the coach to start prying into a neighborhood tag.  After all, this looked like an out to the coach in the dugout.  He's not going to say much without our help in creating doubt.

          

  
 

 

I took notice of that part of the post as well, and I agree with you.  If I know the tag was missed and the runner got in there, then my call is safe.  If the ball beat him, the tag was down and I wasn't certain that the runner avoided the tag, then I'm calling the out.  If the runner questioned it, my answer would simply be, "I had a tag."

[Cato the Younger]

Replay at the MLB level has shown that you should not call the neighborhood play and there must be an actual timely tag at the base.

I respect what you are saying and agree but my post relates not to the future of high levels of baseball like pro and DI NCAA many of these rules of thumb I am posting about relates to places like high school varsity where some of these "old school techniques" are still alive and well and in frequent use by many umpires.

[Cato the Younger]

 

I also think that at the upper levels the quickness of F3s gives the illusion of their leaving too soon when in fact they do not.

I work a ton of high school and college baseball and they leave early often enough to notice and it's not like I am dealing with Usain Bolt playing first in many of these situations.