PU Covering Second Play at 3rd (2-man)

[Jimurray]

8 minutes ago, maineump said:

Exactly - BU needs to take the BR in case he goes to 2B on an outfield hit, and PU takes R1 into 3B.

Ball stays in the infield - BU has 'em all.

Unless you are using PBUC, Evans or CCA mechanics with R1 only.

[lawump]

2 hours ago, maven said:

Looks like FED has it right: with R1 only, PU should "be ready to cover play at third base on R1 advancing when there is a clean hit to the outfield.... On an infield hit, [BU] has all calls in the infield." 2015-16 UM, p. 46.

Why does FED have it right?  They are clearly in the minority on this mechanic.  PBUC, CCA, and, apparently, Evans all have the PU taking R1 into third base in certain situations when the ball does not leave the infield.  FED is all by itself.  Now, as a lawyer, I get that more doesn't always mean better and that sometimes a minority position, upon reflection, gets adopted as the new majority position.

So, in all seriousness, I would like to know from you why you think FED's mechanic is better?   Again, in all seriousness, maybe the FED mechanic it is better for FED games where they have a wide, wide disparity in umpiring ability and physical fitness between the best high school umpire in the country and the worst (a much greater disparity than NCAA or MiLB). 

I'm curious that when two official mechanics manuals (PBUC and CCA), written by people who spend 365 days a year working on umpiring (unlike the authors of FED's mechanic manual), and which both formerly had FED's mechanic but rejected it in recent years in favor of the PU taking R1 into third base on certain batted balls that don't leave the infield...that you are so strongly in favor of FED's mechanic.

 

[maineump]

2 hours ago, Jimurray said:

Unless you are using PBUC, Evans or CCA mechanics with R1 only.

My bad - I thought we were talking about runner on 2B.

With R-1, there are still times where U1 has everything, and they are anything that starts with something the plate guy has to stay near the plate, like a bunt or play in front of the plate or having to take the call on 1B line. But on the 'everyday' play the PU has to be ready to move up to 3B. He has to really pay attention, because PU still has overthrow responsibilities at 1B

[maven]

4 hours ago, lawump said:

So, in all seriousness, I would like to know from you why you think FED's mechanic is better?   Again, in all seriousness, maybe the FED mechanic it is better for FED games where they have a wide, wide disparity in umpiring ability and physical fitness between the best high school umpire in the country and the worst (a much greater disparity than NCAA or MiLB). 

You answered your own question. FED mechanics are right for FED. Don't read a robust defense of the mechanic into my few words.

[Jimurray]

1 hour ago, maven said:

You answered your own question. FED mechanics are right for FED. Don't read a robust defense of the mechanic into my few words.

I don't get it.

[Welpe]

I appreciate the revived discussion. Thanks for keeping this thread going folks, it has been instructive. And thank you @lawump for the CCA citations.

[ricka56]

PU may be able to get a better angle/distance on a play at 3B on a 2nd play in the infield, and may get a different/correct result on the 2nd play at 3B, but how often does that happen ? (I believe in my case, never). As a matter of probabilities and number of occurrences, I think it is more probable/often that PU can help on a pulled foot/swipe tag at 1B (not going to cover 3B) than PU getting the call right (differently) at 3B more often than BU would.

In my 2-man games where F3 stretches towards me (BU) I will get the out pending more info on a possible pulled foot from my partner because I know he is watching the play at 1B. If my partner is boogying down the 3BL to get a highly unlikely 2nd play at 2B, I'm not going to be comfortable banging that out on a possible pulled foot sitch when I don't have that 2nd pair of eyes on the straight-lined play.   

The number of close 2nd plays at 3B is very small...the number of possible pulled foot situations alone dwarfs the 2nd play in the infield. I think we should cover the more probable situation with PU staying with the play at 1B.   

[noumpere]

I think all the mechanics sets have gone back and forth on this over the years.  And, let's face it, we can come up with (practical, non-third-world) plays that are better handled one way and others that are better handled the other.

 

So, my guess is that someone used one mechanic and had a play that would have been better handled the other way.  Then, that person got put "in charge" of mechanics (or had the ear of whoever was in charge) and got the mechanic changed.

 

I know that my view on this (I prefer BU to have all the bases) is skewed by the times I've been burned by not having PU looking at the play at first.  I've never been burned (which is NOT to say that I've not had groans and discussions) when BU has taken the second play at third.

 

So, my view kind of echoes ricka56's view:  The coaches know that the play at third *can be* tough for either umpire, and they'd rather have the help on the pulled foot / swipe tag at first.

[lawump]

11 hours ago, maven said:

You answered your own question. FED mechanics are right for FED. Don't read a robust defense of the mechanic into my few words.

Fair enough!

[Cav]

Like I said on the first page of this thread, I'm happy with NFHS mechanics to cover the OP.  That said, I would be more happy working with just one set of mechanics instead of flip-flopping for whatever reasons.  There's enough useless rules differences to worry about.  We will always have more than a few because the games are different for specific, and sometimes valid reasons.  But, why would we want or need any differences in mechanics?  I don't want to come across as crass, but if an official at any level can't perform, then it's time to give it up temporarily or permanently; the game deserves better.  I've mentioned that fact to more than one and hope my partners will have the cajones to tell me.  (Note to self: Choose your partners wisely.) 

Bottom line: Majority rules.      

 

[ricka56]

14 minutes ago, Cav said:

But, why would we want or need any differences in mechanics? 

Different levels of skill/play will have different "most likely" plays. I think what is more likely to happen should dictates the positioning/coverage (mechanics). For example, with R1/R3, I am in 'B' with higher levels (pickoff at 1B most likely decision play), but I'm in 'C' at lower levels (nothing is likely...'C' will be closest to most possible plays).. 

[Minnz]

Bottom line really is this is why pre-game is so important. Show up and pre-game with your partner on coverages. Who cares what the book says for mechanics. Make sure you and your partner on the the same page be it FED or CCA or whatever you want to use for whatever level you are calling. Get the call right, communicate as partners and enjoy the work.

[Welpe]

On 3/29/2016 at 3:38 PM, Minnz said:

 Who cares what the book says for mechanics.

While I agree that pre-game and staying on the same page is important, the guy assigning my games and association leadership cares quite a bit.

[maven]

So I had this very situation last Saturday. R1, bunt down the 1BL, plays at 1B and then 3B. F5 had crashed on the bunt, and F6 (a little late) covered 3B.

PU covers fair/foul and so is nowhere near 3B for that play, where R1 is clearly out. BU calls it, and asks after the inning, "where were you?"

Pre-gaming might have helped, and PU might have verbalized, "I'm on the line." If there's a ding here, it would be for crew communication, not for positioning — I don't think the crew could have done anything differently, and it looked fine in practice.

[kstrunk]

1 hour ago, maven said:

BU calls it, and asks after the inning, "where were you?"

Was BU annoyed that PU didn't cover third on an infield play? I guess I'm insinuating that BU should've known on an infield ball on the 1B line, PU wasn't going to be anywhere near third. Therefore, I'm wondering if there is a scenario wherein the PU is expected (by proper mechanics) to be in a position to cover a play at third on a play like this? 

[maven]

3 minutes ago, kstrunk said:

Was BU annoyed that PU didn't cover third on an infield play? I guess I'm insinuating that BU should've known on an infield ball on the 1B line, PU wasn't going to be anywhere near third. Therefore, I'm wondering if there is a scenario wherein the PU is expected (by proper mechanics) to be in a position to cover a play at third on a play like this? 

I wouldn't say annoyed. People get these mantras in their heads, "PU has the 2nd infield play at 3B," and they don't always process the situation fully.

[Jimurray]

1 hour ago, kstrunk said:

Was BU annoyed that PU didn't cover third on an infield play? I guess I'm insinuating that BU should've known on an infield ball on the 1B line, PU wasn't going to be anywhere near third. Therefore, I'm wondering if there is a scenario wherein the PU is expected (by proper mechanics) to be in a position to cover a play at third on a play like this? 

Not by proper mechanics. Both PBUC and CCA keep PU cover balls hit near HP and down the 1B line for the obvious reasons. What @Maven's BU was thinking I do not know.

[wingman3110]

I pre-game with my partner that with R1 and a bunt scenario I'm staying home. Too much stuff going on around the plate for me to be worried about taking off to 3B. F/F, RLI, tangle/untangle, etc.

[MObetterBlue]

I was glad to see @Maven brought up the bunt situation.  We have several youth teams in the area that like to call for a bunt with R1 specifically because F5 will come in.  Once the 3rd base coach sees this, they have a call for R1 to continue past 2nd to 3rd.  I think it's a pretty good play actually. 

Knowing about it though, as PU, I'll watch for fair/foul, obs/int and then head to third.  I'll have pre-gamed this with my partner and I'll be letting them know "I'm at third" when it's possible for me to get there.

I'll be 50 this year and my knees aren't the greatest but when the situation calls for it, I'll be down the line.  I'm also not opposed to letting my partner know that "I'm staying home" when ball gets hit to a gap and R1 may try to score.    It's all about the communication - pre-game and on the field.