Umpiring a game of a coach you "know"

[ArchAngel72]

I do not mean "know" like you know he's a coach and been coaching for years.

 

I mean like I went to grade school and all the way thru highschool with this coach.  I played little league all the way to Highschool and also Legion ball with him.

 

Well anyway I have done a few games for him and his team this season just cause he is a coach in the league now.

Last night he got into it with me on what he thought should have been interference. To me it clearly wasn't

Situation was no outs R2  batter hits a slow roller towards F6, F5 cuts across the grass to cut it off and make the play but he whiffed on it.  At that point R2 has given F5 a wide enough area not to interfere with him and whom in MY judgment was making the play.  F6 however backing up F5 now gets in R2's way and they collide a little/ In hindsite I should have called Obstruction on F6 but doing 13U alone on a 50/70 I had a lot going on and just let it play out at that point. It ended up R1 and now R3 as it would have if I had called the Obstruction.

Well Coach B gets into it with me on how that's clear interference and I should have called it etc etc etc.. I try to explain it to him how the 3rd baseman is the one making the play at that time. He is the one that would be interfered with and the guy behind him does not get that luxury.

Well this is my fault as we went back and forth far to long probably 2 minutes.  Finally I say look Coach its my judgement on that call.  This is what I saw and thats where it stands.

That ended the discussion however after that the strike zone was never good enough and there was a play at 3rd that I saw the foot and heard the foot come into the bag and then the tag applied but from my vantage point I never saw his foot come off the bag. He argued that he could see it.  I couldnt his F5 at that point was blocking the view it still looked like he was on the bag.

Well he went off on that and argued that as well.  I let him get about a minute of jawing and then said Enough Coach. It was my judgement on what I could see.  Thats the end of it.  This here is your one and only warning any more and you will be gone. Clear? 

He stopped and said "clear"

The rest of the game was better 

But I swear I have never had a bad time like that from any other coach and wonder if it was because I was too familiar with him.  I also have not let any other coach go on so long.. My side my fault as I myself felt familiar with him. Least thats how I feel looking back at it.

 

Anyone ever run into that umpiring for old friends?  Did you run into issues due to it?

 

[noumpere]

Sounds like INT to me.

[Catch18]

You clearly care about the previous relationship. Ok, that’s fine.

He doesn’t give 1 **** about it. At that point if it becomes too “uneasy” or whatever adjective you have, then don’t take his games. It will likely get worse before it gets better.

I had the same this season. Little league/babe Ruth/high school teammate, got HS licensed together, worked countless leagues and tournaments together, graduated from the same college (I played, he got cut).

He moved on to coaching ~5-10 yrs ago and I worked a scrimmage this year for him as a favor. I got cash at the plate (less than regular rate, I let it go the 1 time). No issues during that game, all went well. Fast forward to a HS regular season game, I was not on the crew. From a reasonable source (but not completely confirmed) I hear about a possible incident with him chest-bumping an umpire, and at the end of the game, the AD escorts them off the field. I decided that earlier scrimmage was the last game I’ll work with his school involved.

Discretion is the key here.

[ArchAngel72]

5 hours ago, noumpere said:

Sounds like INT to me.

LL Rule Book 7.08b

Any Runner is out when b. Intentionally interferes with a thrown ball or hinders a player making a play on a batted ball.

The 3rd baseman was the one at the time who was making a play on the ball.  Thus the Shortstop while backing up the 3rd baseman Must give way to the runner or he is in fault of Obstruction.

 

OBR 6.01.10   He fails to avoid a fielder who is attempting to field a batted ball, or intentionally interferes with a thrown ball, provided that if two or more fielders attempt to field a batted ball, and then the runner comes in contact with one or more of them, the umpire shall determine which fielder is entitled to the benefit of this rule, and shall not declare the runner out for coming in contact with a fielder other than the one the umpire determines I entitled to field such a ball.  

 

I had determined F5 was the protected player WHOM at the time WAS making as play on the slow roller which he Whiffed on.   F6 also stated to the runner once he was on 3rd HE TRiED to get in his way to slow him down. I actually found that out from the 3rd base coach after the game, he told me Yeah that kid actually admitted he tried to get a call by jumping into the runner. 

/facepalm.  

Just another reason why once you get to a 70 foot diamond and better you NEED 2 umps at least.

 

 

[ousafe]

Re: INT, I'd have INT if R2 collided with F6 *after* F5 had missed the ball and F6 now had a play on it.  If R2 collided with F6 as or before F5 missed the ball, I'd have OBS.

[ArchAngel72]

19 minutes ago, ousafe said:

Re: INT, I'd have INT if R2 collided with F6 *after* F5 had missed the ball and F6 now had a play on it.  If R2 collided with F6 as or before F5 missed the ball, I'd have OBS.

R2 collided with F6 has F6 jumped in front of him on purpose AS F5 was making a play on the ball.;

It WAS OBS and I failed to call that.  It would not have mattered as he made it to 3rd safely and I would not have given him anything else.  As noted F6 admitted right after it happened he purposely jumped in front of the player to TRY to get a call.  Had I heard that I would have tossed him for purposefully malicious contact and or making a mockery or unsporting conduct 

As it was he was lucky He did not say it loud enough for me to hear

 

[noumpere]

7 hours ago, ousafe said:

Re: INT, I'd have INT if R2 collided with F6 *after* F5 had missed the ball and F6 now had a play on it.  If R2 collided with F6 as or before F5 missed the ball, I'd have OBS.

That's how I read the OP --

 

14 hours ago, ArchAngel72 said:

F5 cuts across the grass to cut it off and make the play but he whiffed on it.  ... F6 however backing up F5 now gets in R2's

The "now" (emphasis added) seems to imply the contact happens AFTER F5 whiffed.

[ArchAngel72]

3 hours ago, noumpere said:

That's how I read the OP --

 

The "now" (emphasis added) seems to imply the contact happens AFTER F5 whiffed.

As F5 was making a play on the ball F6 intentionally got in R2's way.

 

[noumpere]

6 hours ago, ArchAngel72 said:

As F5 was making a play on the ball F6 intentionally got in R2's way.

 

Change the description, change the ruling.

[Dottelife]

I have umped and refed my own kids before. Rang them both up looking at strike 3.