Square to plate or dugout?

[Jimurray]

My state 3 and 4 man manual requires the BU in deep B or C to be square to the plate. The last PBUC I had required square to the dugout. I always assumed CCA was square to the dugout but I can't find what they require. I like square to the dugout. Is there a reason to be square to the plate?

[Forest Ump]

Not really. It's an older way to work 3 and 4 man. Modern mechanics have you square to the lines.

[Tborze]

Better for your neck, back, knees, shoulders, vision?  

[Jimurray]

47 minutes ago, Tborze said:

Better for your neck, back, knees, shoulders, vision?  

Well HOK would eliminate back and knees and most likely shoulders as a determinant. So, neck would be the question? In a square to the dugout position would a slight turn to watch the pitcher for a balk or a check swing (RH batter) create a poor angle or a neck stress as opposed to the quicker and less knee stress, and neck stress,  when pivoting for the steal of 2B from deep B or the pickoff at 2B from deep B or C. I still like square to the dugout in deep B or C. Deep B and turning with the ball is where I end up in 2 man with a throw with a stealing R1 to get a very good view of the play at 2B. What square to the plate in 3 and 4 man gives you I would like to know.

[Tborze]

11 hours ago, Jimurray said:

Well HOK would eliminate back and knees and most likely shoulders as a determinant. So, neck would be the question? In a square to the dugout position would a slight turn to watch the pitcher for a balk or a check swing (RH batter) create a poor angle or a neck stress as opposed to the quicker and less knee stress, and neck stress,  when pivoting for the steal of 2B from deep B or the pickoff at 2B from deep B or C. I still like square to the dugout in deep B or C. Deep B and turning with the ball is where I end up in 2 man with a throw with a stealing R1 to get a very good view of the play at 2B. What square to the plate in 3 and 4 man gives you I would like to know.

Sorry!  I was just offering a possible reason to your question, why?   

FWIW I am square to the dugout. 

[noumpere]

Here's how much it matters:

 

 

So, when in Rome, ...

 

(FWIW, I would usually square to about the pitcher or the on-deck circle or something -- splitting the difference between what has been suggested here)

[LRZ]

2 hours ago, noumpere said:

Here's how much it matters:

Took the         right out of my mouth.

[Forest Ump]

True, it's a small detail, but it's the small details that you execute that  get you to the next level. I've observed umpires that square up to the lines and it does look sharper for the whole crew. My opinion only.

[noumpere]

14 minutes ago, Forest Ump said:

True, it's a small detail, but it's the small details that you execute that  get you to the next level.

Yes -- if that kind of stuff matters to whoever is hiring you (and I admit that it does to some) -- that's why the "when in Rome" comment