Runner Steals During Checked Swing Appeal

[umpire_scott]

FWIW the main reason for the statement that I make is to eliminate or at least greatly reduce the coaches calling out to one umpire asking if they had a better angle or saw a pulled foot.  A few years ago I was having a lot of coaches do this.  Even if they called time they would go to the umpire that they wanted to change the call rather than the umpire that made the call.  In addition to this they often felt and sometimes still do feel that an umpire that does not go to his partner to get a second opinion is arrogant and stubborn. So I witnessed another umpire instruct this at the plate meeting.  I felt it held some merit and incorporated a shorter version in my plate meeting.  Once again I would never do this at high school and above.  Paid coaches should know how to act, and if they don't then they deal with the consequences.  When I do tournament ball I like to nip the common headaches in the bud.  I have personally found that most coaches at least attempt to adhere to what I say.  My entire comment is "If you have a question on a call, request time. Once it is granted go to the umpire that made the call.  It is his/her discretion whether they go to their partner for help.  Please respect that discretion".  It takes about 5 seconds and has greatly reduced instances of coaches not following that protocol.  

Another example of this is rules set.  We play these tournaments under OBR with slight modifications.  I would say that less than 10% of the coaches I've dealt with know that a balk is a delayed dead ball in OBR.  After a few instances where F1 pitched, the batter bunted, and everyone stood there looking at the ball, I added to my plate meeting.  "Remember that we are playing under MLB rules and a balk is a delayed dead ball.  We wait for the play to end and award accordingly"

My plate meeting generally takes about 30 seconds.  I review the lineups, cover the ground rules, say my two tidbits of info, ask if there are any questions and then if it's pool play we flip for home.  

The tournament director is big on rapport with coaches and talking things out.  He doesn't wanted coaches dumped unless it is absolutely necessary.  He appreciates us covering these things in the ground rules to try and minimize conflicts.  I've found it works.  Once again I would never do this at higher levels where I'm evaluated.  But I'd also never do 6 games in one day at higher levels where I was being evaluated.

 

[umpire_scott]

On 7/14/2016 at 9:44 PM, Matt said:

I did. Learn how to communicate effectively. There was no mention by anyone about waiting for the play to stop. Given that the whole OP is about a live-ball situation with play going on, it only makes sense that you were referring to that. If not, the responsibility is yours to explain how your situation is different than the OP's.

I did explain it.  I said " I would never have engaged the coach as the ball was still live".  That cannot be any more clear.  I then added that if i felt that words needed to be exchanged I would call time.  This is because I'm not going to "exchange words" across the field for everyone to be a part of.  If the coach was saying things that I felt needed addressing I would call time and we would discuss them face to face.  I'm quite certain if Maven, Grayhawk, or some others on here had stated something similar you would not have required them to be so clear to the minute detail.  I would never assume any umpire on this forum would call time in the middle of a live ball situation just to address a coach.

[ALStripes17]

FWIW the main reason for the statement that I make is to eliminate or at least greatly reduce the coaches calling out to one umpire asking if they had a better angle or saw a pulled foot.  A few years ago I was having a lot of coaches do this.  Even if they called time they would go to the umpire that they wanted to change the call rather than the umpire that made the call.  In addition to this they often felt and sometimes still do feel that an umpire that does not go to his partner to get a second opinion is arrogant and stubborn. So I witnessed another umpire instruct this at the plate meeting.  I felt it held some merit and incorporated a shorter version in my plate meeting.  Once again I would never do this at high school and above.  Paid coaches should know how to act, and if they don't then they deal with the consequences.  When I do tournament ball I like to nip the common headaches in the bud.  I have personally found that most coaches at least attempt to adhere to what I say.  My entire comment is "If you have a question on a call, request time. Once it is granted go to the umpire that made the call.  It is his/her discretion whether they go to their partner for help.  Please respect that discretion".  It takes about 5 seconds and has greatly reduced instances of coaches not following that protocol.  

Another example of this is rules set.  We play these tournaments under OBR with slight modifications.  I would say that less than 10% of the coaches I've dealt with know that a balk is a delayed dead ball in OBR.  After a few instances where F1 pitched, the batter bunted, and everyone stood there looking at the ball, I added to my plate meeting.  "Remember that we are playing under MLB rules and a balk is a delayed dead ball.  We wait for the play to end and award accordingly"

My plate meeting generally takes about 30 seconds.  I review the lineups, cover the ground rules, say my two tidbits of info, ask if there are any questions and then if it's pool play we flip for home.  

The tournament director is big on rapport with coaches and talking things out.  He doesn't wanted coaches dumped unless it is absolutely necessary.  He appreciates us covering these things in the ground rules to try and minimize conflicts.  I've found it works.  Once again I would never do this at higher levels where I'm evaluated.  But I'd also never do 6 games in one day at higher levels where I was being evaluated.

 

There are a lot of high-level umpires here that have offered advice to your situation. You don't have to defend it. Like any clinic, just say 'thanks' and add the info to you're toolbelt. It's your choice whether or not you need those tools for the DIY project you're on this week.

That being said, there are a lot of other major differences between OBR and other rulesets. You have THAT many instances of balk calls with the ball remaining live? What about the feint to 3B? The hybrid pitching stance? No Force Play Slide Rule? It's just too much at a plate meeting.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

[Replacematt]

9 hours ago, umpire_scott said:

I did explain it.  I said " I would never have engaged the coach as the ball was still live".  That cannot be any more clear.  I then added that if i felt that words needed to be exchanged I would call time.  This is because I'm not going to "exchange words" across the field for everyone to be a part of.  If the coach was saying things that I felt needed addressing I would call time and we would discuss them face to face.  I'm quite certain if Maven, Grayhawk, or some others on here had stated something similar you would not have required them to be so clear to the minute detail.  I would never assume any umpire on this forum would call time in the middle of a live ball situation just to address a coach.

To be blunt, I don't know if you would do that or not. Take that as you will.

[umpire_scott]

On 7/16/2016 at 9:21 AM, Matt said:

To be blunt, I don't know if you would do that or not. Take that as you will.

Nor do I know if you would.  Maybe that's why it was unclear to you.

[umpire_scott]

On 7/16/2016 at 5:42 AM, ALStripes17 said:

 

 

There are a lot of high-level umpires here that have offered advice to your situation. You don't have to defend it. Like any clinic, just say 'thanks' and add the info to you're toolbelt. It's your choice whether or not you need those tools for the DIY project you're on this week.

 

That being said, there are a lot of other major differences between OBR and other rulesets. You have THAT many instances of balk calls with the ball remaining live? What about the feint to 3B? The hybrid pitching stance? No Force Play Slide Rule? It's just too much at a plate meeting.

 

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

I agree that it is too much to cover all the differences.  But the coaches know most of the other ones or they don't come up.  I've had the live ball balk happen twice this month.  In fact it happened today during a 16U game.  I did not do the plate meeting as I was the BU.  My partner did not mention the delayed dead ball balk.  R3 and F1 balks.  I call it. Batter swings and pops ball up to shallow center.  R3 stops and has no idea what to do.  F4 goes back to field ball but does not catch it.  BR never moves from the batter's box.  After the ball hits the ground I wait and wait for someone on either side to do something.  BR should have easily made it to first on the play and R3 would have scored negating the balk.  But after a few seconds of everyone standing around not knowing what to do I called "time" and awarded the balk.  I didn't want to but I didn't know what else to do.  F4 was not making any effort to retire BR at first (which wouldn't have made a difference anyway as that would have created the balk being awarded).  BR was not going to run to first because he thought is was a dead ball balk.  And R3 was looking at me as if to ask "Am I allowed to go home?".

[umpire_scott]

On 7/16/2016 at 5:42 AM, ALStripes17 said:

 

 

There are a lot of high-level umpires here that have offered advice to your situation. You don't have to defend it. Like any clinic, just say 'thanks' and add the info to you're toolbelt. It's your choice whether or not you need those tools for the DIY project you're on this week.

 

That being said, there are a lot of other major differences between OBR and other rulesets. You have THAT many instances of balk calls with the ball remaining live? What about the feint to 3B? The hybrid pitching stance? No Force Play Slide Rule? It's just too much at a plate meeting.

 

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

I also want to say that I have no issue taking advice and using it or not using it.  Multiple high-level umpires posted on this topic.  The only one I "defended" my position against was the one that was arrogant and condescending in his reply.  I have had multiple umpires private message me during my time on this forum and tell me that they won't even post anymore because they are tired of being belittled by some of these "high-level" umpires.  I find it very sad that these "high-level" umpires are not bothered by this enough to change their colors a little and be more accommodating.  Sometimes I'm a dreamer and I feel like if I stand up to it enough that some of them will get the hint.  It hasn't worked so far as they just belittle me.  But I don't really care.  I know within the realm of what I do I am a good umpire.  Am I a high level umpire?  No and I don't pretend to be. But most high-level umpires are instructing based upon their level of games.  That does not always apply to what I'm doing.  And for once when I bring that up I'd love to hear a high-level umpire back off their stance and admit there might be another perspective.  

[Replacematt]

1 hour ago, umpire_scott said:

Nor do I know if you would.  Maybe that's why it was unclear to you.

That makes no sense whatsoever. Whatever you think has no bearing on what I perceive.

[Replacematt]

1 hour ago, umpire_scott said:

I also want to say that I have no issue taking advice and using it or not using it.  Multiple high-level umpires posted on this topic.  The only one I "defended" my position against was the one that was arrogant and condescending in his reply.  I have had multiple umpires private message me during my time on this forum and tell me that they won't even post anymore because they are tired of being belittled by some of these "high-level" umpires.  I find it very sad that these "high-level" umpires are not bothered by this enough to change their colors a little and be more accommodating.  Sometimes I'm a dreamer and I feel like if I stand up to it enough that some of them will get the hint.  It hasn't worked so far as they just belittle me.  But I don't really care.  I know within the realm of what I do I am a good umpire.  Am I a high level umpire?  No and I don't pretend to be. But most high-level umpires are instructing based upon their level of games.  That does not always apply to what I'm doing.  And for once when I bring that up I'd love to hear a high-level umpire back off their stance and admit there might be another perspective.  

I was neither arrogant nor condescending. The problem was that you were unclear. This isn't a matter of perspective. This is a matter of communication. Maybe you should change your colors and instead of going back to your old "poor me" and "this is all his fault" thinking, recognize that you implied something that no one had any way of knowing.

[ALStripes17]

I also want to say that I have no issue taking advice and using it or not using it.  Multiple high-level umpires posted on this topic.  The only one I "defended" my position against was the one that was arrogant and condescending in his reply.  I have had multiple umpires private message me during my time on this forum and tell me that they won't even post anymore because they are tired of being belittled by some of these "high-level" umpires.  I find it very sad that these "high-level" umpires are not bothered by this enough to change their colors a little and be more accommodating.  Sometimes I'm a dreamer and I feel like if I stand up to it enough that some of them will get the hint.  It hasn't worked so far as they just belittle me.  But I don't really care.  I know within the realm of what I do I am a good umpire.  Am I a high level umpire?  No and I don't pretend to be. But most high-level umpires are instructing based upon their level of games.  That does not always apply to what I'm doing.  And for once when I bring that up I'd love to hear a high-level umpire back off their stance and admit there might be another perspective.  

Those high level umpires started somewhere and worked their way up. Doing the little things in a manner that is considered 'the right way' is what gets you moved up. Those that feel belittled (and privately message you) have communicated poorly and/or don't have very thick skin. The majority of those on here that feel like their is arrogance in this forum are the ones that ask a question and get pissy when the answer is not what they expect. No one here said you had to change what you were doing. Again, like any camp, just say 'thanks' and move on. People on here will never know if you utilize their advice or not.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

[maven]

9 hours ago, umpire_scott said:

But most high-level umpires are instructing based upon their level of games.

That's not my experience at any clinic I've attended since 2003. From Evans to CWS umpires to local state-championship guys, literally every clinician I have encountered has started by asking what level I work, and by pitching their instruction to that rule code (as far as possible — Evans makes no bones about not knowing FED) and the level of play I would be seeing.

If you're seeing something different, I suggest that you're not getting good instruction or your money's worth, and recommend that you seek other clinics.

Were I your clinician, I'd recommend that you learn how not to have the last word. Your officiating and your blood pressure will both benefit greatly.

[umpire_scott]

8 hours ago, Matt said:

That makes no sense whatsoever. Whatever you think has no bearing on what I perceive.

Do I really have to spell it out to you Matt? You insulted me by implying that I was a bad umpire and insinuating that I just might call time in the middle of live ball play.  You told me to take that as I will and I did just that.  So in return I insulted you by stating that maybe the reason you didn't get what I was saying the first time is that you felt calling time during live ball play was something you might do.  It makes perfect sense and I sense you are intelligent enough to know that, but just too stubborn to admit it.

[umpire_scott]

8 hours ago, Matt said:

I was neither arrogant nor condescending. The problem was that you were unclear. This isn't a matter of perspective. This is a matter of communication. Maybe you should change your colors and instead of going back to your old "poor me" and "this is all his fault" thinking, recognize that you implied something that no one had any way of knowing.

Matt calling "time" during a live ball situation is something I've literally never seen any moderately experienced umpire do, let alone someone at my experience level.  Now you may not like me based on my responses on these forums.  But I have done games as high as junior college.  I've been evaluated by my association and worked games with my association VP and they felt comfortable assigning me junior college games.  So I'm not an umpire that is going to call "time" while the ball is in play.  I clearly stated that I would never engage the coach as the ball was still live.  That should be enough for you to assume that I would respect a ball in play enough to not kill the play just to engage the coach. I feel as if you are just being stubborn about this.  When people are posting on this forum it is not a college thesis.  We may leave certain details out.  If you truly were not clear about what I was stating then I apologize.  I don't believe that to be the case.  My past experience from witnessing your responses to me and some others is that you like to look at a post and critique it when it comes from someone you don't respect as a "high-level" umpire.

[noumpere]

10 hours ago, umpire_scott said:

I also want to say that I have no issue taking advice and using it or not using it.  

Your actions belie your words.

 

And, I hope this comes across in the right way -- your actions here are symptomatic of the problems you have on the field and sometimes post about.

[umpire_scott]

29 minutes ago, maven said:

That's not my experience at any clinic I've attended since 2003. From Evans to CWS umpires to local state-championship guys, literally every clinician I have encountered has started by asking what level I work, and by pitching their instruction to that rule code (as far as possible — Evans makes no bones about not knowing FED) and the level of play I would be seeing.

If you're seeing something different, I suggest that you're not getting good instruction or your money's worth, and recommend that you seek other clinics.

Were I your clinician, I'd recommend that you learn how not to have the last word. Your officiating and your blood pressure will both benefit greatly.

Thanks for the reply Maven. I was speaking specifically about high-level umpires on these forums, not at clinics.  I've never had that experience at clinics I've attended.  I would be interested in your opinion about the multiple private messages I've received from umpires that have chosen to view rather than post on these forums because of the condescending approach taken by several of the other umpires.  I appreciate that you give your opinion, but always do so in a respectful manner.

[umpire_scott]

5 minutes ago, noumpere said:

Your actions belie your words.

 

And, I hope this comes across in the right way -- your actions here are symptomatic of the problems you have on the field and sometimes post about.

With all due respect noumpere I can list all the advice I've taken on this forum and applied it.  I no longer take a plate brush to clean the bases.  I've learned many new rules interpretations.  I've been on this forum for a few years and have posted numerous times.  The vast majority of my games go off without a hitch.  I just like to get input on those situations that do occur so I post on almost all of them.  So it may seem like I have a lot of issues on the field.  That is not the case at all.  I've also improved a lot in this area so I have even fewer issues than I once did.  I've admitted my faults regarding communicating with coaches during tense situations and being indecisive on calls.

But I don't take all advice.  Some of it simply won't work for me.  I think sometimes communicating on forums creates disagreements that would never exist in face to face communications.  

I appreciate you reply.  I admit that I defend my respect vociferously.  I don't take lightly being disrespected.  But also remember that it is also a positive character trait that when someone points out that a person is being condescending that the person see it and take responsibility for it.  I was pretty sarcastic in a comment to someone last week. When they reacted based on that I replied "that was sarcastic and I apologize".  I'd like to see the same humility at times from some members on this board.  Humility is a good quality to have and it would better serve the purpose of this board if some on this board developed it.

[RichMSN]

FWIW the main reason for the statement that I make is to eliminate or at least greatly reduce the coaches calling out to one umpire asking if they had a better angle or saw a pulled foot.  A few years ago I was having a lot of coaches do this.  Even if they called time they would go to the umpire that they wanted to change the call rather than the umpire that made the call.  In addition to this they often felt and sometimes still do feel that an umpire that does not go to his partner to get a second opinion is arrogant and stubborn. So I witnessed another umpire instruct this at the plate meeting.  I felt it held some merit and incorporated a shorter version in my plate meeting.  Once again I would never do this at high school and above.  Paid coaches should know how to act, and if they don't then they deal with the consequences.  When I do tournament ball I like to nip the common headaches in the bud.  I have personally found that most coaches at least attempt to adhere to what I say.  My entire comment is "If you have a question on a call, request time. Once it is granted go to the umpire that made the call.  It is his/her discretion whether they go to their partner for help.  Please respect that discretion".  It takes about 5 seconds and has greatly reduced instances of coaches not following that protocol.  

Another example of this is rules set.  We play these tournaments under OBR with slight modifications.  I would say that less than 10% of the coaches I've dealt with know that a balk is a delayed dead ball in OBR.  After a few instances where F1 pitched, the batter bunted, and everyone stood there looking at the ball, I added to my plate meeting.  "Remember that we are playing under MLB rules and a balk is a delayed dead ball.  We wait for the play to end and award accordingly"

My plate meeting generally takes about 30 seconds.  I review the lineups, cover the ground rules, say my two tidbits of info, ask if there are any questions and then if it's pool play we flip for home.  

The tournament director is big on rapport with coaches and talking things out.  He doesn't wanted coaches dumped unless it is absolutely necessary.  He appreciates us covering these things in the ground rules to try and minimize conflicts.  I've found it works.  Once again I would never do this at higher levels where I'm evaluated.  But I'd also never do 6 games in one day at higher levels where I was being evaluated.

 

If you bang your head against the wall enough times, eventually you start to like it.

You've received great advice here for a long time and you still think your ways are better.

One last thing before you are added to my ignore list, which is currently empty:

You are a "yeah but" umpire. At a camp I would have about two interactions with you and then I'd spend my remaining cycles on someone who uses his ears more and his mouth less.

Think about that.

[HokieUmp]

15 hours ago, umpire_scott said:

R3 and F1 balks.  I call it. Batter swings and pops ball up to shallow center.  R3 stops and has no idea what to do.  F4 goes back to field ball but does not catch it.  BR never moves from the batter's box.  After the ball hits the ground I wait and wait for someone on either side to do something.  BR should have easily made it to first on the play and R3 would have scored negating the balk.  But after a few seconds of everyone standing around not knowing what to do I called "time" and awarded the balk.  I didn't want to but I didn't know what else to do.  F4 was not making any effort to retire BR at first (which wouldn't have made a difference anyway as that would have created the balk being awarded).  BR was not going to run to first because he thought is was a dead ball balk.  And R3 was looking at me as if to ask "Am I allowed to go home?".

You may have killed it too quickly, then.  Personally, I would treat it like a play at the plate, where the catcher misses the tag and the runner misses the plate - it's nothing still.  I think if you and your partner just stand there and observe, someone will realize nothing's been called, so SOMEthing has to happen.  And then let the chips fall where they may.

FED screws us on this, as the kids get to school age, and think ALL balks are dead.  I've also had it twice this year, and just this weekend.  It's the state Babe Ruth 13-15 tournamant, where someone ought to know this sort of thing.  I get an F1 for a no-stop, he pitches, batter hits it into right field.  It falls in, there was a hybrid deal - the runner ran, the batter ran-ish up the line, and the fielders largely stood around and/or stared at me.  Batter got to first, runner got at least a base, so I was happy, and moved into position.  Had at least 3 fielders ask or tell me it was a balk.  I said, "it sure was. Pro-based rules, it's a live ball."  was the general look.

Thankfully, the coaches in the dugout knew it was live, and it went no further.  But even if it hadn't, I would have handled the situation with my usual poise and grace, and it would have been fine.  And it still wouldn't have justified bringing it up at the plate.  Let the players figure it out, and only 'rescue' them if the batter gets in the box and/or the pitcher gets set to pitch - at THAT point, you have to alter the game by schooling them.

[grayhawk]

37 minutes ago, HokieUmp said:

You may have killed it too quickly, then.  Personally, I would treat it like a play at the plate, where the catcher misses the tag and the runner misses the plate - it's nothing still.  I think if you and your partner just stand there and observe, someone will realize nothing's been called, so SOMEthing has to happen.  And then let the chips fall where they may.

FED screws us on this, as the kids get to school age, and think ALL balks are dead.  I've also had it twice this year, and just this weekend.  It's the state Babe Ruth 13-15 tournamant, where someone ought to know this sort of thing.  I get an F1 for a no-stop, he pitches, batter hits it into right field.  It falls in, there was a hybrid deal - the runner ran, the batter ran-ish up the line, and the fielders largely stood around and/or stared at me.  Batter got to first, runner got at least a base, so I was happy, and moved into position.  Had at least 3 fielders ask or tell me it was a balk.  I said, "it sure was. Pro-based rules, it's a live ball."  was the general look.

Thankfully, the coaches in the dugout knew it was live, and it went no further.  But even if it hadn't, I would have handled the situation with my usual poise and grace, and it would have been fine.  And it still wouldn't have justified bringing it up at the plate.  Let the players figure it out, and only 'rescue' them if the batter gets in the box and/or the pitcher gets set to pitch - at THAT point, you have to alter the game by schooling them.

LOL.  It's situations like that where the fans are sure that you are the only one there that doesn't know the rules.

[LMSANS]

Party's over...too much in-fighting.  If you think the topic needs further discussion, open a new topic...and keep it civil.