Jump to content

Ask MrUmp1 your rules question.


Recommended Posts

Yes I was assuming that but didn't think of it in the way you put it, but that was a judgement call and you know you can't argue a judgement call. Thats why you guys get the big bucks. Your last statement of the money is on the money......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Couple of things to look at. If the bat crosses the front edge of the plate or the front edge of his body then you have a swing. Most of the time when you get that whiplash action look from a check swing you have a strike also. Watch on MLB sometime when they show a slowmo of a check swing, and most of the time when they call a stike there is that bat going forward then the batter bringing it back quickly which gives that whipping motion. It is a tough call but you just learn through expierience what to look for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK.  runner on second tries to steal third,  The batter backs out of the box seeing the play develop, and ducks, leaving his bat up.  The catcher hits the bat on his follow through with his hand.  Interference is called and the baserunner is called out.  (The pitch was inside and called a ball)  Is this interference and is this the proper call?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK.  runner on second tries to steal third,  The batter backs out of the box seeing the play develop, and ducks, leaving his bat up.   The catcher hits the bat on his follow through with his hand.  Interference is called and the baserunner is called out.  (The pitch was inside and called a ball)  Is this interference and is this the proper call?

Look at what I put in bold in your quote. Thats the key. The batter must stay in his batting stance and not move and alter the play. If he never moves and the catcher hits him with the ball or his body then you have nothing. If he moves into the line of fire and alters the play then we have obstruction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How many bases? (first few are no brainers for good umps)

Man on first in all situations.

1) Pitched ball hits plate and goes over backstop.

2) Pitched ball hit to short and short throws it over first and out of play.

3) Pitched ball hit to rf, runner has to make sure it is down.  Overthrow of second rolls to third, hits base and caroms up and out of the park.

4) Pitched ball hit to on ground to rf, throw at runner at third sails out of the park.

5) Pitched ball hit on ground to rcf gap to the wall, (should be a triple)  rf picks up ball, sees the runner on his way to second is not going slow, and on his draw back to throw the ball in he loses his grip and tosses the ball over the outfield fence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How many bases? (first few are no brainers for good umps)

Man on first in all situations.

1) Pitched ball hits plate and goes over backstop.

2) Pitched ball hit to short and short throws it over first and out of play.

3) Pitched ball hit to rf, runner has to make sure it is down.  Overthrow of second rolls to third, hits base and caroms up and out of the park.

4) Pitched ball hit to on ground to rf, throw at runner at third sails out of the park.

5) Pitched ball hit on ground to rcf gap to the wall, (should be a triple)  rf picks up ball, sees the runner on his way to second is not going slow, and on his draw back to throw the ball in he loses his grip and tosses the ball over the outfield fence.

1. 1 base

2. 2 bases from the time of the throw whaich means a runner gets first and second.

3. 2 bases from the time of the throw, doesnt matter how long it takes to go into dead ball territory.

4. 2 bases from time of throw.

5. same as above, 2 bases from time of throw. In the last one you know the runner will have reached first when the fielder trys to throw the ball so he is going to get 3rd. Don't have my book right in front of me but there may be some special penalty if it is on purpose. I know that an umpire can in special situations award a runner whatever bases he thnks he would have achieved if the play would have been normal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How many bases? (first few are no brainers for good umps)

Man on first in all situations.

5) Pitched ball hit on ground to rcf gap to the wall, (should be a triple)  rf picks up ball, sees the runner on his way to second is not going slow, and on his draw back to throw the ball in he loses his grip and tosses the ball over the outfield fence.

Must be a dang short fence...lol... :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks like Federation rules which Texas uses, says that if 5 complete innings are not played. then the game will be replayed from the beginning. Where and when they play are between the teams involved and perhaps even the district committee if the two teams can not come to an agreement which would be rare. Playoff games are different , any game started and then suspended because of weather, will be picked up from where it was. I had this happen in Houston last year in a series. I think we only got 2 batters into the bottom of the 1st inning when lightning suspended play and then the rains came.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest PantsOnFire

I was a H.S. game at East Chambers and actually heard an umpire say "Well, I have a big strike zone" after the game.

This infuriates me ! THERE IS ONLY ONE STRIKE ZONE !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

speaking of strike zones--I tried explaining to some friends, that the strike zone

does not go up all the way to the shoulders anymore ( People remember the old

knees to the shoulders) In my opinion most umps don't call anything much above the

belt a strike..Am I correct with this???

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Official stoke zone.  From the bottom of the knees to a midway point between the belt and the bottom of the armpits. Which means at the top it should be maybe an inch above your belly button. Now this is what makes baseball the unique sport it is. Even in the pros those guys are not robots calling the exact same pitches Stokes or balls. Many coaches have a "book" on umpires and they know what pitches they are more likely to call strikes than most. Ask any coach and he will tell you the most important thing is that an umpire should be consistent in what he calls, then they can adapt from there. I had a coach yell at me at a game earlier this year about a pitch late in a game where he said all we want is you to be consistent. Since i have called many games for this coach over the years I ask him in between innings at what point would you could consider me being inconsistent? 1 pitch out of 200 or 5 or 10???? he just laughed. I can tell you that pitches called Stokes at a little league game are different that at a pro game. If you called the same zone then those little leaguers would walk way to many and become frustrated instead of having some fun and enjoying baseball.  Now back in the 80's and early 90's I used to do some calculated wagering on some pro baseball games. ( calculated wagering = gambling lol ) What we bet was the over and under line on some games. We had data on pro umpires and what the total amount of runs scored in their plate games were. There were a few that had many more lower scoring than most and some had higher scoring games that most. So we took those few umpires and always bet under or over in those umps games. We did very well with this. The 2 that came to mind are Durwood Merrill and Chuck Meriweather. Now Durwood called every thing a strike so his games were lower scoring. Meriweather had a strike zone like a coffee can, so he had higher scoring games because there were more hits. All of this is what makes baseball my favorite game to watch and participate in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your correct on being consistant, I've seen many batters AFTER getting rung up on a low strike late in the game complain when in fact the umpire has been calling there all game. I too believe a pitcher has to 'thro for the ump' I meen if he's giving you the outside black why thro anywhere else. I love a 'pitchers ump' as the batter has a club in his hand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest PantsOnFire

Some umpires are different than others. Some Umps like it low and other like it high, and some love the outside corner. Throw where they are going to call it. PERIOD! If a coach wants to stay ina ball game; don't ask an umpire to explain the zone!

This is exactly what I am talking about ! Mr. Ump and Rhino seem to think the strike zone is up for interpretation ! What a coach really wants is THE STRIKE ZONE consistently called.

If an umpire can "like it low , or high , or the outside corner" , then can he makes his own definition of what is safe and out ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For us in the stands, it is always a beautiful strike if it's our guy pitching, or a ball (in th EXACT SAME PLACE) if it's the opponent's pitcher.  We can always call it from the stands.  That is why most of us are "bleacher umpires". 

I think that MrUmp1 has defined what the strike zone is.  He has also explained why there seems to be some differences in what is called, namely a human perspective.  If you want, we can install millions of dollars worth of equipment in every single ballpark, so the calls can be perfect...rriiiiiiiggghhht.....

When a ball is coming in your general direction at the speed in which even some of our high school hosses throw, then an umpire must do these things all at once...

1.)  Suppress the survival instinct of jumping out of the way, since the catcher in front of him has been known to swat at a ball, instead of stopping it with his body, thereby putting the ability to continue the family name of said ump in jeopardy;

2.) judge the height of said speeding object at the exact moment it crosses the plate;

3.) judge the placement between the black lines of home plate of same speeding object at the SAME TIME as he is judging height;

4.) call "strike" or "ball" within the fan allotted time of 3.2 nanoseconds

5.) Do all the above PERFECTLY, EVERY SINGLE TIME.

I, as a fan, reserve the right to scream "Come on Blue!" when I am not happy with a call.  I, as a fan, have the right to ask for consistency from an umpire.  I, as a fan, reserve the right to call the strike zone from the bleachers.  However...

I, as a fan, DO NOT have the right to think myself capable of perfection, when I have not donned the steel toed "mailmans" which every umpire is shod with.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pants... you need some water on your fire pants.. lol  I do not know what has your panties tied in a knot about the strike zone, but I can tell you have never tried to Umpire anything maybe other than a little league game. Rhino understands what I am talking about when I talk about the strike zone. Hector has seen me call enough high school games to know I have a pretty good idea of what the strike zone is. Just watch a MLB game on TV and even those guys do not all call exactly the same zone. This is what makes baseball the great game it is. I have never called a perfect game and never will, but I love to umpire and be around some really great kids playing at the High School level in Southeast Texas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • KF89 unpinned and pinned this topic

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Member Statistics

    45,937
    Total Members
    1,837
    Most Online
    jacobmartin
    Newest Member
    jacobmartin
    Joined



  • Posts

    • It would shock me beyond belief if he tried to. Now, I hope and pray he appoints people that will investigate, charge, and imprison anyone found guilty of the crimes against him...including treason. I would be all for a special task force charge solely with the task of investigating crimes against Trump. Of course the Democrats will be screaming bloody murder that Trump is weaponizing the government against them. We all know the story. From a cursory standpoint, there seems to be a plethora of evidence to lock up many Democrats for a long time. Unless this is done, I see no end to destruction of our political system...and this country.
    • There is a difference, but I wouldn't at all put it past Trump to do so if he had the infrastructure in place to get away with it like the Dems currently do.  With the amount of effort he's invested in ruining those republicans who've opposed him, it wouldn't surprise me one bit.
    • I think it will be an interesting case and could potentially come up for appeal on a different constitutional point.  The Supreme Court has ruled in the past that the government doesn’t have to take possession of property in order to take it under the meaning of the Fifth Amendment.  If they take away the enjoyment or use of the property, it is no different than physically seizing it to build a highway for example. In a lawsuit as opposed to a criminal trial, a person/plaintiff doesn’t have to prove something beyond a reasonable doubt but rather by a preponderance of evidence or “more likely” to have happened. Maybe it could be described as more likely yes than no or 51%-49%.  ”IF” it can be shown at a trial by a preponderance of evidence that Texas more likely yes than no caused the flooding with its engineering of the project, the people suing might have a case. But…. Does that alone win the case under the Fifth Amendment taking clause? I am not so sure. In US v Causby the Supreme Court ruled that the US government took a man’s property by flying airplanes over it. It was a public airport lawfully leased by the US in WWII and used to fly heavy bombers from it. Causby had an egg farm and the extremely loud noise of some airplanes under full power and sometimes at night with a landing lights being so close, it bothered and scared the family and damaged his egg farm production. Some chickens died and some quit laying eggs due to the extreme disturbances and lights at night. The Supreme Court ruled in Causby’s favor saying that the US had taken away the enjoyment and use of his land even though they didn’t physically seize it. The use of the land was hampered and that was enough for the taking clause under the Fifth Amendment. So in the IH-10 case, did Texas take away the use or enjoyment of the property?  A point of Causby was that the military bombers at a public airport was certainly for “public use”. The planes were public/taxpayers’ and the airport and lease were taxpayers’ property so the “public” definitely used it   My question in this lawsuit against Texas, even in they can prove the damage, was the damage (like in Causby) for “public use”? If not would it then not be a Fifth Amendment case but rather a state law case?  If Texas law denies such a lawsuit under state sovereignty and the families can’t prove a Fifth Amendment case of “public use”, could they prove the damages but still lose the case under state law? I haven’t read that anywhere and just thinking out loud. I could be way off base. But I think it could be interesting…..
    • Both sides...that is, everyone tries to get their people elected. Trump has not weaponized the government to bankrupt and imprison his political opponents. Night and day difference for me.
    • Surely you're aware of the great lengths Trump has gone to disrupt the elections and destroy the careers of republican politicians who haven't supported some of his most outlandish claims, or dared to question him or disagree with him about January 6.  You and I actually agree on this issue, although it must only go one way for you, because Trump's actions against republicans who didn't fall into lockstep with him is one of my biggest concerns about reelecting him.  The fact that he took action to affect literally hundreds of republican primaries from national elections down to municipal levels across the country, is concerning. It would've been one thing had he done it in an effort to help republicans win. Instead his purpose was to push out his perceived detractors and install MAGA politicians at every level of government in as many places as possible, and has resulted in a fractured republican party.
  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...