PU covering 3rd

[kstrunk]

No runners, BR is a speedster, hits a screamer of a worm burner up the middle that goes past F8. I'm PU, moving toward library, watch the play. As BR approaches 2nd, I note BU is way behind with no angle, there's gonna be a banger at 3rd, so I communicate "I got third", set up in the cut out, and make the call. 

As I'm walking back to the plate, I'm thinking, "I'm an idiot and that was wrong". My partner agreed. My only defense was that I was in the better position to get it right. 

Is this ever acceptable? If pre-gamed? 

[ricka56]

Whether BU in 'A' is going to take him all the way around to 3B is a must in my pregame. 

PU taking this play at 3B is in some mechanics books. Without a pregame, with good communication (as you had), what you did, IMO, was acceptable. And I wouldn't let the immobile partner make you feel bad about taking it. 

[noumpere]

It's acceptable if, for example, your partner falls down, or has a brain-fart, or you are using straight FED mechanics (which at lease used to give PU third on a triple).

 

Exactly where you draw the line because "BU is way behind with no angle" depends on how both of you read the play.  In general, though, your thoughts and those of your partner were correct.

[grayhawk]

11 minutes ago, kstrunk said:

No runners, BR is a speedster, hits a screamer of a worm burner up the middle that goes past F8. I'm PU, moving toward library, watch the play. As BR approaches 2nd, I note BU is way behind with no angle, there's gonna be a banger at 3rd, so I communicate "I got third", set up in the cut out, and make the call. 

As I'm walking back to the plate, I'm thinking, "I'm an idiot and that was wrong". My partner agreed. My only defense was that I was in the better position to get it right. 

Is this ever acceptable? If pre-gamed? 

Did your partner agree that he should have been waiting at the 3B cutout (good) or past the 3B bag in foul territory (better) for the play at third base?

[kylehutson]

I think my previous posts here will prove that I'm not the world's foremost expert on mechanics.

That being said, I think communication is key. I had a situation this year where F9 had a play on a hard grounder (no runners on base), but missed it. I was BU and had turned around to look for the (entirely possible at that point) F9-F3 throw - that kept me pinned near the 1B line. When F9 missed it, I turned back around and my partner yelled "I've got the runner", and he was in a fantastic position to take the runner all the way to 3rd. His excellent communication turned what could have been a cluster#$%& into a play that looked like it had been pre-gamed and routine.

[kstrunk]

9 minutes ago, grayhawk said:

Did your partner agree that he should have been waiting at the 3B cutout (good) or past the 3B bag in foul territory (better) for the play at third base?

Uhhh.... na... unfortunately he was offended, thought I insinuated he couldn't do his job. Which wasn't my intention, nor did I imply anything of the sort. 

I am interested in the 'foul territory' mechanic though... is this the preferred position even in 2 man mechanics? I'm trying to improve, so want to be in the BEST position, if that's it, I need to make a change, as I typically set up in the cut out, regardless if on the dish or the bases. 

[grayhawk]

5 minutes ago, kylehutson said:

I think my previous posts here will prove that I'm not the world's foremost expert on mechanics.

That being said, I think communication is key. I had a situation this year where F9 had a play on a hard grounder (no runners on base), but missed it. I was BU and had turned around to look for the (entirely possible at that point) F9-F3 throw - that kept me pinned near the 1B line. When F9 missed it, I turned back around and my partner yelled "I've got the runner", and he was in a fantastic position to take the runner all the way to 3rd. His excellent communication turned what could have been a cluster#$%& into a play that looked like it had been pre-gamed and routine.

I know the point of your post was about communication, and how you can cover for your partner when he's out of position, but 2 things on your play:

1.  Get inside on this play. Yes, you have time.  Read it and hustle.

2.  If you had gotten inside, the throw wouldn't have been coming from behind you.

If you had been inside with chest to ball, you would have seen the whole play and easily beat the BR to third base.

[kylehutson]

2 minutes ago, grayhawk said:

I know the point of your post was about communication, and how you can cover for your partner when he's out of position, but 2 things on your play:

1.  Get inside on this play. Yes, you have time.  Read it and hustle.

2.  If you had gotten inside, the throw wouldn't have been coming from behind you.

If you had been inside with chest to ball, you would have seen the whole play and easily beat the BR to third base.

Excellent analysis, as usual, @grayhawk

[ricka56]

1 minute ago, kstrunk said:

Uhhh.... na... unfortunately he was offended, thought I insinuated he couldn't do his job. Which wasn't my intention, nor did I imply anything of the sort. 

Well, he could have communicated to you that he has it. When I have a runner rounding 2B, I peek to see if my partner is looking to poach my (previously pre-gamed) call and then signal to him that I have it. If Pokie is too slow to catch-up or signal, then that's on him. 

[ricka56]

25 minutes ago, grayhawk said:

Did your partner agree that he should have been waiting at the 3B cutout (good) or past the 3B bag in foul territory (better) for the play at third base?

If you are taking this play in foul ground, what do you do if the ball gets away and you have to cover HP ? If all of a sudden the ball gets away and you have to beat feet to get home, seems like PU would have a runner to his left and a throw coming from his right. In 2-man, I will take this play in the cutoff (fair territory) and have a clear lane in fair territory to get home where I can see both runner and throw. 

[grayhawk]

1 minute ago, kstrunk said:

Uhhh.... na... unfortunately he was offended, thought I insinuated he couldn't do his job. Which wasn't my intention, nor did I imply anything of the sort. 

I am interested in the 'foul territory' mechanic though... is this the preferred position even in 2 man mechanics? I'm trying to improve, so want to be in the BEST position, if that's it, I need to make a change, as I typically set up in the cut out, regardless if on the dish or the bases. 

When you are BU, and your only runner is the BR, then taking this play from foul territory will give you the best look.  Being in foul territory puts everything in front of you.  One major caveat - you have to bust ass to get there, be in position and be SET for the call.  You obviously can't do this when you have multiple runners where you must stay in the working area.

As PU in 2 man (or in 3 man if U1 goes out), you need to take plays at third from the cutout because if there's an overthrow, you have to be inside to beat the runner to the plate.  In 3 man, when neither base umpire goes out, PU can and should take plays at third from foul territory (because U1 will be sliding down for a possible play at the plate).

[grayhawk]

3 minutes ago, ricka56 said:

If you are taking this play in foul ground, what do you do if the ball gets away and you have to cover HP ? If all of a sudden the ball gets away and you have to beat feet to get home, seems like PU would have a runner to his left and a throw coming from his right. In 2-man, I will take this play in the cutoff (fair territory) and have a clear lane in fair territory to get home where I can see both runner and throw. 

I was talking about the BU getting in foul territory.

[ricka56]

7 minutes ago, grayhawk said:

I was talking about the BU getting in foul territory.

Maybe for 3/4-man, but do you (BU) really go into  foul territory from 'A'  for a triple ? Aren't you risking 2B coverage if BR stops and retreats back to 2B  

[Stk004]

In 2 man, if PU covers 3rd and there's clearly going to be a play, shouldn't U1 take the potential play at the plate? 

[grayhawk]

Just now, ricka56 said:

Maybe for 3/4-man, but do you (BU) really go foul territory from 'A'  for a triple ?   

If I can get there, yes.  It's an advanced mechanic, because you can't be caught over there if the BR puts on the brakes and there's a play back into second.  On a play like in the OP, where the ball gets past F8 and I am reading triple all the way, I'll get there.  Why not get the best look when you have no other responsibilities?

[grayhawk]

2 minutes ago, Stk004 said:

In 2 man, if PU covers 3rd and there's clearly going to be a play, shouldn't U1 take the potential play at the plate? 

In Fed mechanics and a naked triple, once the BR commits to third, PU takes the play at third and BU cuts home for a play at the plate.  I am not a fan of this mechanic.

With R1 (or R1 & R3), BU does not rotate to the plate.  PU should take the play at third from the cutout and then rotate back home in fair territory on an overthrow.

[ricka56]

1 minute ago, grayhawk said:

If I can get there, yes.  It's an advanced mechanic, because you can't be caught over there if the BR puts on the brakes and there's a play back into second.  On a play like in the OP, where the ball gets past F8 and I am reading triple all the way, I'll get there.  Why not get the best look when you have no other responsibilities?

I'm sure it looks good to be in foul territory, getting the best view and making the call, but at some point before BR fully commits to 3B, you need to fully commit to foul territory. If there is going to be a close play at 3B for which you want the best view, then there is a chance that BR will retreat (realizes that he doesn't want to make the 1st out stretching a double into a triple).

I don't think the benefit outweighs the risk. YMMV

[grayhawk]

9 minutes ago, ricka56 said:

I'm sure it looks good to be in foul territory, getting the best view and making the call, but at some point before BR fully commits to 3B, you need to fully commit to foul territory. If there is going to be a close play at 3B for which you want the best view, then there is a chance that BR will retreat (realizes that he doesn't want to make the 1st out stretching a double into a triple).

I don't think the benefit outweighs the risk. YMMV

It's kind of like the Crane technique.  "If do right, no can defense."

[ricka56]

6 minutes ago, grayhawk said:

It's kind of like the Crane technique.  "If do right, no can defense."

You look good in that pose... here's why I won't follow your advice. 

[grayhawk]

2 minutes ago, ricka56 said:

You look good in that pose... here's why I won't follow your advice. 

If that's your situation, you have other problems to address.

[Welpe]

9 minutes ago, ricka56 said:

You look good in that pose... here's why I won't follow your advice. 

The downward dog set position. The very advanced mechanic. 

[ricka56]

Just now, grayhawk said:

If that's your situation, you have other problems to address.

You don't know the half of it. 

[maven]

1 hour ago, grayhawk said:

When you are BU, and your only runner is the BR, then taking this play from foul territory will give you the best look.  Being in foul territory puts everything in front of you.  One major caveat - you have to bust ass to get there, be in position and be SET for the call. 

A major reason that nobody teaches this mechanic (AFAIK) is that, with the BU busting to get outside for a play at 1B, he's utterly, massively, cosmically screwed if the BR pulls up, retreats to 2B, and there's a play there.

[grayhawk]

19 minutes ago, maven said:

A major reason that nobody teaches this mechanic (AFAIK) is that, with the BU busting to get outside for a play at 1B, he's utterly, massively, cosmically screwed if the BR pulls up, retreats to 2B, and there's a play there.

It's supposed to be hard.  If it wasn't hard, everyone would do it.  It's the hard that makes it great.

 

[maven]

43 minutes ago, grayhawk said:

It's supposed to be hard.  If it wasn't hard, everyone would do it.  It's the hard that makes it great.

I'm not complaining that it's hard, I'm pointing out that it's a bad risk.

Being outside gives a slightly better look than being inside, with a huge downside. The benefit is not worth the risk.

As we all know, mechanics are about minimizing risk and maximizing our looks. This one just doesn't compute for me.