Umpires Gone Wild

Exchange at the plate tonight when a Lancaster player walked up with a livestrong armband on in the game against Charlotte:
Catcher: Hey blue, I got tossed for wearing one of those the other night.
Umpire: I got a lot more important things to worry about back here.
Catcher: Yeah I hear ya -- he did too.

 

Is this when I should say "You da Man" Dodger? Nah....anyone who supports tossing a kid for wearing a rubberband wouldn't understand. Instead I'll just head to work, shaking my head....

 

I think Dodger knows i have a warped sense of humor...

I have never seen the bracelet in question.. or the material its made of..

But i will say if its twisted leather a pitched baseball or batted baseball's rotation will rip it into the skin..

I dont think its the fact it was made of rubber or any other material. I'm sure it has something to do with safety...
so when does common sense come into play here if it is not a problem to everyone..
I suppose this is the same reason other jewelry is not accepted at this level.


Another note.. does it matter if the helmets dont meet the latest standards or approval from the baseball commision or whoever makes this rule. ? they may have been approved 2 years ago but now are thrown out , does it really matter ?

I dont think the player in question the other day should have been ejected for the bracelet without warning. I do think if he continued to express an objection or try showing up the umpire then yes ejection or suspension or both were in order depending on the rule...

Maybe in this case the sports programs are protecting their respective organizations..
They dont need a McDonalds case where the woman sued because she spilled hot coffee on herself.. or
The person that bought a motor home and put in cruise control and went to the back to make coffee and crashed .
Now the companies have to spend millions to add warnings because we in the
real world do stupid things.

 

Intimidator, we concur on that...A kid should be properly equipped. If there is flagrant disregard for this requirement, he should be ejected. But a simple warning allows everyone to avoid the mess that has ensued.

But let me add: the rules do not provide for a warning. Instead the umpires remind the coaches in the pre-game to make certain their players are properly equipped.

So are you suggesting that the officials should not apply this rule strictly by the book? Isn't that a contradiction from our previous discussions?

 

I am sure there are ammendments to the rule book and most associations have rules that go beyond the actual rule book..
If the coach was told prior to the game about certain rules then fault should go to the coach also..

my suggestion about the arm band or any other device deemed unsafe or illegal would be follow whatever the rule is.. local league rule or baseball rule...

 

Dodger...i have a question about what action you would have taken in the ASF-CSF game. I was wondering, if the batter had been successfully walked, and runners were on 1st and 3rd, then the pitcher committed a balk would you have called it? If so, are you saying that we should change the rules depending on the situation of the game?

(Sorry about revisiting the past just wandering)

 

No problem iliveforthis. I love talking about this stuff. To revisit, had the batter been successfully walked, the bases would have been loaded with nobody out and the CSF kids would have had one or more opportunities to win the game (or ASU to lose it). What a great momentum lift for them if they had. As it turned out, they lost games 2 and 3 after winning game 1 on the balk call.

But anyway, had their been an obvious balk call, even on the intentional walk (pitcher dropped the ball standing on the rubber; pitcher started to home and stopped, etc.) I would have called it and it would have hurt me badly to have to call it. But this call was not obvious -- in fact it is still questionable even on the replay. And given the intent of the balk rule, to prevent the pitcher from deceiving the baserunner in any number of illegal ways I won't go into here, it certainly was not a time to be looking to make that call. There were only two possible reasons for the ump to make the call he made in the situation that it was made. One was to determine the outcome -- and I'll say that I do not believe the umpire made the call because he wanted one team to win and one team to lose. The other more likely reason was to call attention to himself, to get on tv, to let everyone know he was in charge and had the power to make such a call. Certainly the reason couldn't have been that the pitcher's alleged failure to come to a discernible stop (again a questionable conclusion from the replay anyway) disadvantaged a baserunner.

Once the intentional walk was over, and the pitcher is pitching to the next batter (a possible squeeze play situation, a potential play at the plate on any ground ball -- the baserunners' jump at third is critical), the umpires better call a balk if they really see a balk. And whether they really see it -- that is where I go back to the rules of calling a balk that piaa ump provided before. Do you want to lose a game on a balk call where only one of four umps claims to have seen it and where the replay is unclear about the call? And, apologies in advance to Intimidator Coach, but do you really want to win one that way? I know I don't. If I make a balk call in that situation, it better be clear to all baseball people on the replay.

I am not saying anything here about changing rules. I am talking about umpires applying the rules and applying good judgment -- maybe better defined in this instance as COMMON SENSE. I've heard it said before that umpiring is two-thirds science and one-third art -- anybody with good eyesight, a brain and a willingness to learn can learn the rules and get the two-thirds part -- the truly good umps are the ones that know how to apply their art and get that one-third part right at least most of the time. To me that means lots of things -- proper positioning to get the best angle, selling your calls on close plays, knowing how to interact with the coaches, players and fellow umpires, being confident without coming off as arrogant, deciding when in a lopsided game it may be appropriate to enlarge the strike zone to avoid a marathon, deciding how much rope to give a player to react to a close or tough call without tossing him -- allowing an honest reaction to a tough call but knowing when the player or coach crosses the line; and most certainly knowing whether and in what situations it is appropriate or not to make some ticky-tack call (most times it is NOT).

In my much earlier life I was the student supervisor of officials for the UNC intramural program. It probably won't surprise you to hear that the officials I received the most complaints about were the officials who went out on the field with an arrogant attitude determined to show the participants that they knew rules that the participants hadn't even imagined. It was like they studied the book and then looked for places to apply a remote rule they had learned. I just don't think that is what umpiring is about. The best officials I had, who enjoyed the games with the participants, explained their calls i they weren't clearly understood, kept emotions in check with their good attitudes and approach to their job, etc. And by the way most of those good officials also played and enjoyed sports and understood what it meant to compete.

Yeah, it is especially tough to be an umpire if the kid clearly misses a base on a homerun and the other team appeals; it is tough to make a balk call that determines the outcome of a game even when the call is obvious; it is tough to toss a player when he throws his helmet to the bench after a bang-bang play at the plate. I want my umpires to hurt when they believe they HAVE to make a call like that to protect the integrity of the game and in soome circumstances they'll know they have to. I don't want them to go out searching for a time where they can inject themselves into the contest so that everyone will see what they know. All they really see is a jerk.

The umpire is there as the judge -- the arbitor, to ensure the game is played fairly, to keep order, to make the judgment calls, and yes to enforce the rules as they need to be enforced to ensure the game and the outcome are fair and that order is kept. After all, the rules were made to provide structure and ensure a fair game, not to be followed blindly like a cookbook without the application of common sense and a human touch. Yes, I want an umpire to make the calls clearly covered by the rules that have an impact on the contest. But I also want an umpire who has some sense and knows how to use it.

When I was a little league district official I had an umpire call a home run hitter out in an all-star tournament for giving a high five to the third base coach coming around third. I sat at the official scorer's table waiting and hoping the coach would properly protest so I could overrule the call (as the rule clearly requires "assistance" by the base coach). He did not, so the call stood. After that game I advised that umpire he wouldn't call anymore little league tournament games in our district. He ws the kind of ump that just looked for ways to make a call to draw attention to himself. Not the guy I want.

 

Intimidator, if the game deciding rule was something 'ticky tack' like wearing a Lance bracelet or barely missing a bag on a home run....I willingly would accept the loss. I am a ferocious competitor, but there are more important things than winning. Stealing a win with a technicality is just plain bush.

Dodger, well done. Explained my sentiments to a 'T'.

Rules are written, & umpires enforce them using their best judgment. One size does not fit all.
--Pitching rules in a 7th grade community game should not be called the same as a Legion game.
--Fouls should not be called the same in a midget league as in the NCAA finals.

The basic rules are the same, but judgment must be employed for the good of the game. The very best officials understand this & live by this code of conduct. And the truth is....we all want it. We want the game to flow & the kids to feel they had an fair & equal shot at winning. Nobody wants the story to be: The umpire called an obxcure technical rule that nobody else saw & which directly altered the outcome of the game. What price glory??

 

Thank you for the clarification. I regret to say that i have not seen the balk in the aforementioned game, and i agree that if it was and still is a questionable call then it should not have been called. However i do not believe that umpires should enforce certain rules only at centain times durring the game...the 1st and 2nd innings are just as importaint as the last ones (6&7 or 8&9). And i would highly respect an umpire that calls a balk (or catches a runner missing a base) durring a crucial part of a game if, of course, they did it because they felt it was the right call (not to fullfil some long-time goal of making Sportscenter)