Would You Grant Time?

[Sut'n Blue]

 

I suppose level and rule set doesn't matter all that much but this was 16U travel ball (OBR).

5th inning , no score, 1 out, R1. Pitcher seems to be in a good rhythm and is doing pretty well. As batter is walking over to start his at bat his coach tells him to call a time out and break the pitcher's rhythm. The coach must have thought he was being discreet but PU, my partner, heard him very clearly. Batter takes the first pitch and on the next pitch asks for time. Assuming no issues with pitcher having started motion, etc., If you were PU, would you grant the time out? 

 

[The Man in Blue]

My reply is "What for?"

A reasonable request gets time.  "Because" or "coach said so" does not.

I suppose some on here would say you should grant it unless there is a good reason not to.  Abusing "time" as gamesmanship is a good reason not to, IMO.

Since you said it was OBR but code doesn't matter for your question, here is the relevant NFHS rule for those calling NFHS:

5-2-1(e)

Art. 1 ... "Time" shall be called by the umpire and play is suspended when:

e. a player or coach request "Time" and it is granted by the umpire for a substitution, conference with the pitcher or for similar cause; or

 

A controversial option: grant time, count it as an offensive conference since it was done under the coach's direction.

[beerguy55]

Do you always grant time when asked?  Why would you treat this any differently from any other request, and in what scenarios would you grant time, assuming you just don't blindly allow it every time it's asked?

The more interesting scenario is if the batter decides "he has something in his eye", or some other fake excuse to call time, and what you do about it, assuming at some point you figure out what's going on.

[Replacematt]

1 hour ago, Sut'n Blue said:

 

I suppose level and rule set doesn't matter all that much but this was 16U travel ball (OBR).

5th inning , no score, 1 out, R1. Pitcher seems to be in a good rhythm and is doing pretty well. As batter is walking over to start his at bat his coach tells him to call a time out and break the pitcher's rhythm. The coach must have thought he was being discreet but PU, my partner, heard him very clearly. Batter takes the first pitch and on the next pitch asks for time. Assuming no issues with pitcher having started motion, etc., If you were PU, would you grant the time out? 

 

The conversation has no bearing on whether I do or not.

[The Man in Blue]

25 minutes ago, beerguy55 said:

The more interesting scenario is if the batter decides "he has something in his eye", or some other fake excuse to call time, and what you do about it, assuming at some point you figure out what's going on.

 

You get the benefit of doubt once.  If the batter says that, I grant time.  If he doesn't do anything to indicate that is actually the case, he doesn't get it a second time and may get a warning. 

If he does a convincing job and asks again after the next pitch, I am giving him time for an injury and calling the trainer or coach down to check him out.  (Any coaching and it becomes a charged conference.)  At that point, either we are done or he needs to come out of the game to tend to his injury.  

[Thunderheads]

7 minutes ago, The Man in Blue said:

 

You get the benefit of doubt once.  If the batter says that, I grant time.  If he doesn't do anything to indicate that is actually the case, he doesn't get it a second time and may get a warning. 

If he does a convincing job and asks again after the next pitch, I am giving him time for an injury and calling the trainer or coach down to check him out.  (Any coaching and it becomes a charged conference.)  At that point, either we are done or he needs to come out of the game to tend to his injury.  

I tend to agree w/ Matt here.

@The Man in Blue ... good luck with the above.  I'm thinking that's a dirty end of that stick

[The Man in Blue]

19 minutes ago, Thunderheads said:

I tend to agree w/ Matt here.

@The Man in Blue ... good luck with the above.  I'm thinking that's a dirty end of that stick

Not sure what you mean ... I didn't mean I could force him out of the game on an injury.  But I am going to strongly recommend that to the coach by saying "We aren't going to hold up the game for this.  Either he needs tended to or this is a delay tactic, which is penalized with a strike on the batter."

I also agree with Matt.  You can keep what the coach said in the back of your mind but there is nothing actionable based on it, so why bother.

[Thatsnotyou]

18 hours ago, The Man in Blue said:

 

You get the benefit of doubt once.  If the batter says that, I grant time.  If he doesn't do anything to indicate that is actually the case, he doesn't get it a second time and may get a warning. 

If he does a convincing job and asks again after the next pitch, I am giving him time for an injury and calling the trainer or coach down to check him out.  (Any coaching and it becomes a charged conference.)  At that point, either we are done or he needs to come out of the game to tend to his injury.  

You call the coach down...for an injury...and charge him with a conference? Trying to be way too cute here. And it’s an injury according to you, so that’s not correct. 
 

Either don’t grant time or learn from the first one. They want to ask time again without a reason, say no. They want to step out without it, here’s your strike. 

[The Man in Blue]

You misread what I said.  That is true of any injury time out.  An injury time out does not count as a charged conference; we do not want to discourage a coach from checking on a potentially injured player.  However, if the coach tries to take advantage of that opportunity and coach his player during that time out, it can become a charged conference.

OK: “Johnny, let me take a look at that.  Yeah, yeah, I think you’ll be OK.  Go get ‘em.”

Not OK: “Johnny, let me take a look at that.  Yeah, it’s fine.  I want you to protect the runner on this next pitch.”  

[Thatsnotyou]

7 hours ago, The Man in Blue said:

You misread what I said.  That is true of any injury time out.  An injury time out does not count as a charged conference; we do not want to discourage a coach from checking on a potentially injured player.  However, if the coach tries to take advantage of that opportunity and coach his player during that time out, it can become a charged conference.

OK: “Johnny, let me take a look at that.  Yeah, yeah, I think you’ll be OK.  Go get ‘em.”

Not OK: “Johnny, let me take a look at that.  Yeah, it’s fine.  I want you to protect the runner on this next pitch.”  

 Calling a coach down to check on an injury when you know there isn’t an injury is just inviting a blow up. It’s silly. 

[The Man in Blue]

Maybe in your neck of the woods it is silly.  Around here, it is not uncommon to request a coach check on a player exhibiting signs of an injury.

[Richvee]

Interesting. If I have a batter request time, as long as the pitcher hasn’t started his delivery, there’s a 99.9% chance I’m granting it. I don’t know if he has something in his eye, a gnat just flew in his ear, he has a cramp or itch,  or if he’s just uncomfortable. Just like if the pitcher feels uncomfortable or something, he can step off. If it’s to break the pitcher’s rhythm?? If the pitcher is working at breakneck speed, the batter has a right to get set.  To me that’s part of the game.   Part of the dance. Most times players set the tempo of the dance.  Sometimes pitchers are to quick, and I need to help control the tempo somewhat. In those cases I’ll grant time to let batters get set. What the coach said prior had no bearing. 

[Thatsnotyou]

1 hour ago, The Man in Blue said:

Maybe in your neck of the woods it is silly.  Around here, it is not uncommon to request a coach check on a player exhibiting signs of an injury.

He’s not showing signs of an injury. You know what he’s doing. Stick with your first reply.
 

”Abusing "time" as gamesmanship is a good reason not to, IMO.“

[The Man in Blue]

Risk vs. reward.

Using one of those paranoid examples:

My way = you’ve acknowledged there may be an issue and the potential behavior.  You’ve addressed both.

Your way = “Sorry kid, you can’t have ‘time’, get back in there.”  The next pitch hits him in the jaw.  Whether it was the case or not, you just denied a kid ‘time’ to get something out of his eye and he got hit by a pitch “he couldn’t see”.  @lawump’s cronies will salivate over that.  
 

It is neither my job nor in my qualifications to assess an injury and tell a player he/she is fine and should keep playing.  If a player exhibits anything to raise concern , whether it is real, fake, or perceived, I’m doing my duty and notifying the player’s coach.  What the coach does after that is out of my power.

But then, some of us are there for the kids and some of us are there to collect a check and get out of there as fast as possible.

If you need the last word, go ahead.  That’s all I’ve got.

[Thatsnotyou]

2 hours ago, The Man in Blue said:

Risk vs. reward.

Using one of those paranoid examples:

My way = you’ve acknowledged there may be an issue and the potential behavior.  You’ve addressed both.

Your way = “Sorry kid, you can’t have ‘time’, get back in there.”  The next pitch hits him in the jaw.  Whether it was the case or not, you just denied a kid ‘time’ to get something out of his eye and he got hit by a pitch “he couldn’t see”.  @lawump’s cronies will salivate over that.  
 

It is neither my job nor in my qualifications to assess an injury and tell a player he/she is fine and should keep playing.  If a player exhibits anything to raise concern , whether it is real, fake, or perceived, I’m doing my duty and notifying the player’s coach.  What the coach does after that is out of my power.

But then, some of us are there for the kids and some of us are there to collect a check and get out of there as fast as possible.

If you need the last word, go ahead.  That’s all I’ve got.

When you're going to accuse me of collecting a check and getting out of there as fast as possible, yeah, I'll take the last word.

So now you're taking a liability stance here? Nice straw man. We've all dealt with a situation like this. We've all seen the "pitcher is dominating but not working too quickly, let's just try to mess with him by requesting time constantly". I think we're both in agreement, based on your posts, that the second time is BS and we know it. A "what for (if time allows)" or "no" is acceptable. He wants to step out at that point, it's on him.

 

These situations are pretty easy to read. He called time twice - I know exactly why he's doing it based not only on game situation, but hearing the coach tell him to do it as well (why are you willingly ignoring information?). He must be injured! That's the only explanation! Just so you can call the coach down and play the dumb card of "coach your player MUST be injured if he called time twice, right?". And then nail him for a charged conference once he says something not directly injury related. Aha! That's where I have an issue of how you go about handling this.

Some of us are there to manage the game and be a good umpire. I guess you making a mockery of a "time" situation by falsely assuming an injury is just being there for the kids. The way you'd go about handling this situation is incredibly odd.

[beerguy55]

15 hours ago, Richvee said:

Interesting. If I have a batter request time, as long as the pitcher hasn’t started his delivery, there’s a 99.9% chance I’m granting it. I don’t know if he has something in his eye, a gnat just flew in his ear, he has a cramp or itch,  or if he’s just uncomfortable. Just like if the pitcher feels uncomfortable or something, he can step off. If it’s to break the pitcher’s rhythm?? If the pitcher is working at breakneck speed, the batter has a right to get set.  To me that’s part of the game.   Part of the dance. Most times players set the tempo of the dance.  Sometimes pitchers are to quick, and I need to help control the tempo somewhat. In those cases I’ll grant time to let batters get set. What the coach said prior had no bearing. 

Frankly, as a batter I was the opposite...if the pitcher took too long to take his sign or start delivery I was requesting time...otherwise, no pitcher ever in my life successfully quick pitched me.

[Richvee]

1 hour ago, beerguy55 said:

Frankly, as a batter I was the opposite...if the pitcher took too long to take his sign or start delivery I was requesting time...otherwise, no pitcher ever in my life successfully quick pitched me.

Again. That’s the same situation. It’s the dance. Same applies to pitchers taking a long time. As long as F1 hasn’t started his motion ,I will grant the batters request for time.