Going for help. Keep it simple

[VolUmp]

When you go to your partner for help, there should be a formula behind what you ask:

"John, I have nothing. Do you have anything different?"

Then John has exactly three options, and three options only:

1) NO

2) Can't help you.

3) YES. It hit the batter's foot.

1= Exactly what he asked ... nothing different.  It means either you saw nothing, or you're even more certain than he is that there was nothing ... you saw the pitch MISS the batter.  It's like "The call is confirmed!" in NFL football.

2= You are somewhere between 1% and 99% certain that the pitch hit the batter. Unless you're 100%, you can't help. It's like, "The call stands!" in NFL football."

3= You are 100% certain the pitch hit the batter. You saw it, and should have called it, but just didn't get the job done.  It's like "After review, the batter was hit on the foot!" In NFL Football.

The fewer officials, the less time this should take. With 3 or 4 officials, you may want to ask each official what they have, and the Crew Chief may be the one to ultimately rule, but lengthy discussions where everyone throws in an opinion somewhere between 1 and 99% is useless.

[BrianC14]

Personally, I don't like opening the discussion with "here's what I've got".  The reason being is that my partner knows full well what I've got based on the call that I just made.   The last thing I want to do is to try and influence his line of thought.  I'll just ask a very specific question based on what the appeal has been.

Example:   "Joe, he (appealing manager) is asking about a pulled foot.  What did you see?"

Joe answers with whatever input he has.   If it's going to overturn the call, I ask Joe "Do you want me to give the "safe signal" after we finish here?   Joe can decide if he'll do that, but honestly, I would rather do that, but will defer if he wants it.  

If there's no overturn of the call, then I just say, "Ok, I'll give a confirmation signal of 'out' when we're done here.  Are we good to go?"

Joe:  "Yup, let's go."

That conversation takes about 30 seconds, tops.   

[VolUmp]

7 minutes ago, BrianC14 said:

Personally, I don't like opening the discussion with "here's what I've got".  The reason being is that my partner knows full well what I've got based on the call that I just made.   The last thing I want to do is to try and influence his line of thought.  I'll just ask a very specific question based on what the appeal has been.

Example:   "Joe, he (appealing manager) is asking about a pulled foot.  What did you see?"

Joe answers with whatever input he has.   If it's going to overturn the call, I ask Joe "Do you want me to give the "safe signal" after we finish here?   Joe can decide if he'll do that, but honestly, I would rather do that, but will defer if he wants it.  

If there's no overturn of the call, then I just say, "Ok, I'll give a confirmation signal of 'out' when we're done here.  Are we good to go?"

Joe:  "Yup, let's go."

That conversation takes about 30 seconds, tops.   

OK. Could not disagree more. 

It's NEVER Joe's call. 

Joe NEVER gives any signal.

Where do you receive your training?

[noumpere]

The problem with Volump's approach, in my view, is that each umpire might have a piece of the puzzle, which adds up to the whole picture.  If you just ask it as he does, you'll get a lot of "I can't help you" when the CREW knows the answer.

 

I do agree that the original umpire should give the final decision (in leagues where there isn't a crew chief -- different from game UIC).

[BrianC14]

1 hour ago, VolUmp said:

OK. Could not disagree more. 

It's NEVER Joe's call. 

Joe NEVER gives any signal.

Where do you receive your training?

Look at this video (go ahead, save the time and skip to the end) - but tell me who makes the signal to overturn the call ?    In my example, I am assuming that the UIC is the home plate umpire; that's how things are handled in my state.   It's a matter of giving him the option to make the signal if the call is overturned;  he can tell me to do it if he wants.  I don't have a problem with you being in disagreement, because maybe this is not how things roll where you work.   Fine.  

Now you tell me - in this video, where do you think these guys receive their training?    

 

[BrianC14]

1 hour ago, noumpere said:

The problem with Volump's approach, in my view, is that each umpire might have a piece of the puzzle, which adds up to the whole picture.  If you just ask it as he does, you'll get a lot of "I can't help you" when the CREW knows the answer.

 

I do agree that the original umpire should give the final decision (in leagues where there isn't a crew chief -- different from game UIC).

We equate a UIC with a crew chief where I work;   heck, there's only two of us, and with a very wide range of experience.   If I go to get help on a call, and my partner happens to be the plate umpire (the default where I work is that plate ump = UIC = crew chief), then he gets that option given to him, but he's free to pass it back to me if he wants.   

Another example (and this was the one I was thinking of when I posted above):  Couple of weeks ago I worked with a guy who usually does D1 and D2 work.  We were in a pinch, and so he agreed to partner with me on a high school double header.   I've worked with him just once before, but knew of his experience.   Out of deference to his experience, I asked if he wanted to take the dish for game 1.    He said thanks, and accepted.   About the middle of game one was when I was asked by DC to get help on a pulled foot.  Again, with his experience in mind, I phrased the question just as I did in the my prior reply.   We wrapped it up very quickly, I asked about the signaling, and he says, "Go ahead, we don't have a change, you take it."    Which in effect signaled to everyone that he was in agreement with my call.   He could have opted to take the signal, and as it was an unchanged call, who would have cared?   The DC said "OK, thanks for asking".   All that was done in about 30 seconds.   Just keeping it simple.   And respectful.  

[ElkOil]

1 hour ago, noumpere said:

The problem with Volump's approach, in my view, is that each umpire might have a piece of the puzzle, which adds up to the whole picture.  If you just ask it as he does, you'll get a lot of "I can't help you" when the CREW knows the answer.

 

I do agree that the original umpire should give the final decision (in leagues where there isn't a crew chief -- different from game UIC).

FED agrees with you, too.

10-1-4 states: Any umpire’s decision which involves judgment, such as whether a hit is fair or foul, whether a pitch is a strike or a ball, or whether a runner is safe or out, is final. But if there is reasonable doubt about some decision being in conflict with the rules, the coach or captain may ask that the correct ruling be made. The umpire making the decision may ask another umpire for information before making a final decision. No umpire shall criticize or interfere with another umpire’s decision unless asked by the one making it.

There is no provision for one umpire to overrule another, nor is there a provision for a different umpire than the original one to make a ruling.

[BrianC14]

7 minutes ago, ElkOil said:

FED agrees with you, too.

10-1-4 states: Any umpire’s decision which involves judgment, such as whether a hit is fair or foul, whether a pitch is a strike or a ball, or whether a runner is safe or out, is final. But if there is reasonable doubt about some decision being in conflict with the rules, the coach or captain may ask that the correct ruling be made. The umpire making the decision may ask another umpire for information before making a final decision. No umpire shall criticize or interfere with another umpire’s decision unless asked by the one making it.

There is no provision for one umpire to overrule another, nor is there a provision for a different umpire than the original one to make a ruling.

"may ask".... key phrase there.   Your reply could also fit well with the post about the base umpire that overruled his partner on a "no bunt attempt" call.   

[VolUmp]

38 minutes ago, BrianC14 said:

Now you tell me - in this video, where do you think these guys receive their training?  

Poor form, Brian ... Apples and Oranges.  Did you not read my entire post?

The fewer officials, the less time this should take. With 3 or 4 officials, you may want to ask each official what they have, and the Crew Chief may be the one to ultimately rule, but lengthy discussions where everyone throws in an opinion somewhere between 1 and 99% is useless.

In Both College and FED, the protocol is the same ... because the FED adopted the NCAA protocol (LawUmp has mentioned this recently).  In 2-man, the umpire making the original call makes the final ruling.  Period.  When you get to the point of having a crew chief, yes ... as I clearly stated ... things may change.

[BrianC14]

11 minutes ago, VolUmp said:

Poor form, Brian ... Apples and Oranges.  Did you not read my entire post?

The fewer officials, the less time this should take. With 3 or 4 officials, you may want to ask each official what they have, and the Crew Chief may be the one to ultimately rule, but lengthy discussions where everyone throws in an opinion somewhere between 1 and 99% is useless.

In Both College and FED, the protocol is the same ... because the FED adopted the NCAA protocol (LawUmp has mentioned this recently).  In 2-man, the umpire making the original call makes the final ruling.  Period.  When you get to the point of having a crew chief, yes ... as I clearly stated ... things may change.

Hey, I didn't like being kicked in the A frame with your comment about where I was trained, so you drew some flak. 

I wasn't caught up in how much time things took;   in my example, if I'm going for help on a pulled foot, U2 and U3 are going to be of little help to the final decision.   Yes, I know there's plenty of other type of 'get help' issues, but again, I wasn't focused so much on the time element as I was on who's going to give the signal.   There are some people in my own association that may not even  know what I'm talking about;  if I run into one of those guys, I just take the call (if it was originally mine).  To reiterate, in my area we default to plate umpire = UIC = crew chief.   When in Rome.....  

[VolUmp]

2 hours ago, BrianC14 said:

To reiterate, in my area we default to plate umpire = UIC = crew chief.   When in Rome.....  

We do too ... equate Plate with UIC for 99% of our games ... but we don't equate UIC with Crew Chief, (except that only the UIC can forfeit a game.)

Regardless, I don't believe it is ever acceptable in a two-man game to train to have anyone other than the official who made the original call make the final call and "own" the call.  If I go for help, and get it, and change the call, and the coach wants to speak to my partner, he MAY NOT.  PERIOD.  We explain this at the plate meeting in less than 15n seconds.  If he ignores my "stop" sign and walks on the field to my partner, he's restricted or ejected.  Period.  He may speak to me only, and if I suspect I kicked the original call, I'm even going to double the length of his leash, but I'm not going to give the impression that the call was transferred completely to my partner, or that one can "overrule" the other.  Other than the defensive team's request to "check" on the half-swing, transferring the jurisdiction of a call in baseball simply doesn't exist.

Edited May 23, 2017 by VolUmp
Clarification

[MidAmUmp]

First, in the original post, you should never get together on a ball off the batter's foot. That call is anyone on the crew's call. So if a base umpire has a ball off the foot, he needs to call it immediately. If a coach asks you to get together, tell him "no...it's any umpires call, if they would have had something they would have called it immediately."

Usually when a crew gets together that I've been on, we let the calling umpire tell us what he has...or doesn't have & what the coach is asking. That way the entire crew is on the same page with what's going on. Then the calling umpire will ask if anyone has anything different or any information. We discuss everything and then the calling umpire will signal the final call. 

I had a situation this year where (as mentioned above) we had to piece the puzzle together. The plate umpire was blocked out by the catcher. I was the 3rd base umpire and had the ball hitting the bat a 2nd time. I came in immediately calling time. We got the entire crew together. I told them I had the ball hitting the bat a 2nd time, but didn't know if the batter was in or out of the batter's box at the time. The 2nd base umpire wasn't 100% sure that the ball hit the bat a 2nd time, but had the batter in the box when he thought it might have happened. So after piecing the puzzle together, we came up with a foul ball...which after we watched it on replay...we got it right.

In situations where the crew gets together (without replay) the calling umpire makes the final call/signal. If you're working 2-man the coach should be smart enough (although some I'm not too sure about) to figure out who changed the call. But if it's 3 or more on the crew, the calling umpire makes the call and when asked who changed it, the response should be "the crew did."

[VolUmp]

10 minutes ago, MidAmUmp said:

But if it's 3 or more on the crew, the calling umpire makes the call and when asked who changed it, the response should be "the crew did."

Mid, on a two man crew, do you follow my procedure(s) as I stated them?

If I go for help, and get it, and change the call, and the coach wants to speak to my partner, he MAY NOT.  PERIOD.  We explain this at the plate meeting in less than 15 seconds.  If he ignores my "stop" sign and walks onto the field to my partner, he's restricted or ejected.  Period.  He may speak to me only, and if I suspect I kicked the original call, I'm even going to double the length of his leash, but I'm not going to give the impression that the call was transferred completely to my partner, or that one can "overrule" the other.

[MidAmUmp]

3 minutes ago, VolUmp said:

Mid, on a two man crew, do you follow my procedure(s) as I stated them?

If I go for help, and get it, and change the call, and the coach wants to speak to my partner, he MAY NOT.  PERIOD.  We explain this at the plate meeting in less than 15 seconds.  If he ignores my "stop" sign and walks onto the field to my partner, he's restricted or ejected.  Period.  He may speak to me only, and if I suspect I kicked the original call, I'm even going to double the length of his leash, but I'm not going to give the impression that the call was transferred completely to my partner, or that one can "overrule" the other.

It depends on the situation. If I kicked the ever-loving dogSH*# out of a call and everyone knows it but me, he will only talk to me. I'll take all the heat.

If it's something that deserves an explanation, then we'll go as a crew to explain what we have.

[VolUmp]

1 minute ago, MidAmUmp said:

If it's something that deserves an explanation, then we'll go as a crew to explain what we have.

In two man? You can't speak for what you and one other official determined?

[MidAmUmp]

3 minutes ago, VolUmp said:

In two man? You can't speak for what you and one other official determined?

I said "If it deserves an explanation"...I'm not talking about I had the fielder on the bag and my partner had him pulling his foot. I'm talking about an uncommon situation or a "big" situation that can change the tone of the game, or a rules misapplication. It might be a situational management issue, where we're trying to keep the coach in the game.

I had a pretty bazaar play this year. The crew got together and discussed the entire play and got on the same page. Then the entire crew went to both coaches to explain our call. Had my partners just gone back to their positions and left me to talk to both coaches, I'm about 99% sure the defensive coach would have gotten run. 

[VolUmp]

1 minute ago, MidAmUmp said:

I said "If it deserves an explanation"...I'm not talking about I had the fielder on the bag and my partner had him pulling his foot. I'm talking about an uncommon situation or a "big" situation that can change the tone of the game, or a rules misapplication. It might be a situational management issue, where we're trying to keep the coach in the game.

Fine ... I'm only talking about 2-man for the purpose of my question.  The only way I would go explain my partner's call with him or alone is if he honestly was fuzzy on a rule and I had to bail him out.  Period.

[catsbackr]

We do pretty much what MidAmUmp said.

 

The calling umpire, if asked to conference with other umpires, says "This is what I've got, does anyone have anything different?"  If the call is changed, we offer an explanation to the coach the call affects.  The original calling umpire makes the signal.

[LRZ]

FWIW, I would not say to my partner, "Do you have anything different?" Sounds like boxing him in. "I had x. What do you have?" is, to me, more neutral. It's been years since I last worked with a partner who asked, "He didn't go, did he?" or "He held the bag, didn't he?"

[VolUmp]

Just now, LRZ said:

FWIW, I would not say to my partner, "Do you have anything different?" Sounds like boxing him in. "I had x. What do you have?" is, to me, more neutral. It's been years since I last worked with a partner who asked, "He didn't go, did he?" or "He held the bag, didn't he?"

Totally disagree with the first statement.  It is word for word how we are trained at the college level.

"What do you have?" is more likely to box him in.

It's easier to say, "No" than "Nothing."  "Nothing sounds like he wasn't paying attention."

"No" can mean any one of several things.

-- No, I saw what you saw

-- No, I didn't see anything

-- No, I didn't see anything worth telling you since it was not crystal clear to me

-- No, I was doing my job watching the runner while you were watching the ball

[White47]

 

95% of the time your partner knows what your coming to ask, especially if he is a seasoned umpire. for those time something super simple like what Volump said is the best, easiest and quickest way to get it settled. Sometimes this can almost be done with non verbally, but you wouldn't want to do that since the coach has asked you to talk about it. the other 5% of the time you go for help I feel like its a little more then just a quick yes or no. If its an odd situation there should probably be some conversation between you and your partner, Which can't really be layed out in a script because it will depend of the situation. 

[VolUmp]

2 minutes ago, White47 said:

the other 5% of the time you go for help I feel like its a little more then just a quick yes or no. If its an odd situation there should probably be some conversation between you and your partner, Which can't really be layed out in a script because it will depend of the situation

I will agree.  One that comes to mind is when both coaches are yelling ... offense wants OBS and defense wants INT.

[White47]

1 minute ago, VolUmp said:

I will agree.

I've been in a few conferences where my first question to my partners is, "What the beep just happened??"

[VolUmp]

4 minutes ago, White47 said:

I've been in a few conferences where my first question to my partners is, "What the beep just happened??"

Another one that comes to mind ... when the F2 clearly blocks the plate early, I have OBS, then he gets trucked by R3, and I (we) have to explain to both coaches that there are two penalties ... but one Trumps the other (see what I did there ... ), so R3 is out, ejected, and the F2 got off scot free.  That's always a fun explanation.

[zm1283]

Some of you are thinking waaaaay too much into this. 

This isn't really a "mechanic" either. Wouldn't it fit under "Situations"?