Using pro rules most umpires use the halfway point as the the point between balk or not. If the runner just makes a hard secondary then it's a balk, if he breaks and makes halfway or better and turns back then the pitcher is OK. This an interp, not something found in the rules.
quote:Originally posted by Michael S. Taylor:
Using pro rules most umpires use the halfway point as the the point between balk or not. If the runner just makes a hard secondary then it's a balk, if he breaks and makes halfway or better and turns back then the pitcher is OK. This an interp, not something found in the rules.
I sometimes save responses from highly respected umpire posters and keep them for my own education....Ive taken a portion of this response from one of those, I just wish I could remember who it was so that I could credit him...
Mike/Jimmy are right here.......We encourage everyone to read the rule book....yet the rule book is not the all knowing and all seeing document we would like it to be.....
One of the problems with most baseball rulebooks is that they do not cover everything and are rarely revised or rewritten.
Many of the rules are poorly written and contain wording similar to what was used in the 1800s in the early days of the game. The OBR does not cover every possible play or situation and I believe that Jim Evans says that it contains some 100+ contradictions and errors....
The rule book does not teach you all you need to know about the rules or even how to umpire.....for that, you must seek out, read and follow the accepted casebooks, umpire manuals and mechanics manuals....
There are several useful references such as the PBUC (Professional Baseball Umpire Corp) manual, the Jim Evans Baseball Rules Annotated.... the Jaksa/Roder..... And the BRD which is printed with rules,mechanics and official interpretations for NFHS, NCAA and Pro rules.....
These are the things that make being an umpire difficult and also cause issues like the one being discussed in this thread....
quote:Originally posted by piaa_ump:
I sometimes save responses from highly respected umpire posters and keep them for my own education....Ive taken a portion of this response from one of those, I just wish I could remember who it was so that I could credit him...
Mike/Jimmy are right here.......We encourage everyone to read the rule book....yet the rule book is not the all knowing and all seeing document we would like it to be.....
One of the problems with most baseball rulebooks is that they do not cover everything and are rarely revised or rewritten.
Many of the rules are poorly written and contain wording similar to what was used in the 1800s in the early days of the game. The OBR does not cover every possible play or situation and I believe that Jim Evans says that it contains some 100+ contradictions and errors....
The rule book does not teach you all you need to know about the rules or even how to umpire.....for that, you must seek out, read and follow the accepted casebooks, umpire manuals and mechanics manuals....
There are several useful references such as the PBUC (Professional Baseball Umpire Corp) manual, the Jim Evans Baseball Rules Annotated.... the Jaksa/Roder..... And the BRD which is printed with rules,mechanics and official interpretations for NFHS, NCAA and Pro rules.....
These are the things that make being an umpire difficult and also cause issues like the one being discussed in this thread....
Just a guess, but this sounds like a Siegelism.
quote:Originally posted by Matt13:
Just a guess, but this sounds like a Siegelism.
It very well could be Matt........and it wouldnt be the first one I saved from him....again wish I could have saved the author/source, as I am not one to present material uncredited...
quote:Originally posted by Michael S. Taylor:
Using pro rules most umpires use the halfway point as the the point between balk or not. If the runner just makes a hard secondary then it's a balk, if he breaks and makes halfway or better and turns back then the pitcher is OK. This an interp, not something found in the rules.
The "half way" guidline used to be the formal criteria and was even included in that old video "See a Balk, Call a Balk."
It is no longer, at the professional level, the criteria. If R1 breaks hard it doesn't matter if he stops halfway, a third of the way, a fourth of the way.
The umpire, through training and experience, is called upon to adjudge whether R1 was breaking, feinting or just getting a secondary.
quote:Originally posted by piaa_ump:quote:Originally posted by Michael S. Taylor:
Using pro rules most umpires use the halfway point as the the point between balk or not. If the runner just makes a hard secondary then it's a balk, if he breaks and makes halfway or better and turns back then the pitcher is OK. This an interp, not something found in the rules.
I sometimes save responses from highly respected umpire posters and keep them for my own education....Ive taken a portion of this response from one of those, I just wish I could remember who it was so that I could credit him...
Mike/Jimmy are right here.......We encourage everyone to read the rule book....yet the rule book is not the all knowing and all seeing document we would like it to be.....
One of the problems with most baseball rulebooks is that they do not cover everything and are rarely revised or rewritten.
Many of the rules are poorly written and contain wording similar to what was used in the 1800s in the early days of the game. The OBR does not cover every possible play or situation and I believe that Jim Evans says that it contains some 100+ contradictions and errors....
The rule book does not teach you all you need to know about the rules or even how to umpire.....for that, you must seek out, read and follow the accepted casebooks, umpire manuals and mechanics manuals....
There are several useful references such as the PBUC (Professional Baseball Umpire Corp) manual, the Jim Evans Baseball Rules Annotated.... the Jaksa/Roder..... And the BRD which is printed with rules,mechanics and official interpretations for NFHS, NCAA and Pro rules.....
These are the things that make being an umpire difficult and also cause issues like the one being discussed in this thread....
Some of these sources are specifically aimed at the amateur umpire (J/R, Jimm Evans Annotated, BRD) Professional umpires are in fact told not to read or consider the rulings contained in these books. In the Minor Leagues they are to rely on their training, the PBUC manual and rulings sent out to umpires from MiLB. The major leaguers rely on the MLBUM and rulings sent out from MLB.
There are, from time to time, different interps of the same rule in MiLB and MLB.
We have seen, in the past ten years, quite a few changes to the OBR, but as PIAA intimated, Jim Evans has identified over 230 errors or inconsistencies in the rule book. The promised rewrite and reorganization of the rulebook that MLB made 15 years ago has not come to pass.
Its funny, because now I am so curious so I Googled that video "See a Balk, Call a Balk" and it had a demo you could view before ordering. Since it is $29.95. and guess what the video shows?? Our exact scenario throwing ahead of the runner to second, and BEING CALLED FOR A BALK!!
I guess I will have to spend the money. It is simply a balk.
I guess I will have to spend the money. It is simply a balk.
quote:Originally posted by Landon:
Its funny, because now I am so curious so I Googled that video "See a Balk, Call a Balk" and it had a demo you could view before ordering. Since it is $29.95. and guess what the video shows?? Our exact scenario throwing ahead of the runner to second, and BEING CALLED FOR A BALK!!
I guess I will have to spend the money. It is simply a balk.
I am amazed. You are introduced to the existance of a video that incorrectly identifies balks, and you decide you have to have it.
Save your money and get the Evans video if you want accuracy If however, you just want to see someone who agrees with you, spend the $29.95 and watch a former MiLB umpire who was released inaccurately explaining balks as they may or may not have been called 25 years ago. It's so bad of a video, there is a scene with him speaking with a college pitching coach expounding on balks with even less accuracy.
Here's the bottom line: Do you think that the rulesmakers, when they included in the OBR the stipulation that a pitcher, whether in the windup position or set position, may, while engaged with the rubber, step and throw to a base we just kidding?
Do you think that the two authorized proschools that teach that rule and every professional umpire who enforces that rule are all wrong and you are right?
Really?
This is a very interesting situation, and when you have time to evaluate every little detail in a conversation such as this, it is easy to point out specific details of "when he" & "If he". Those of you here who are fellow umpires know that you have about 0.5 seconds (on the field) for your "BALK" decision, and yes, in this situation if you call a "Balk", expect the coach to come out quickly, because he will. So the big question is, are you prepared to explain yourself, and why you made the call. I try to keep it as simple as possible. If the pitcher lifts his leg, then, turns his hips (BALK). If he lifts his leg and his hip turns his body twords 2nd, (1 continious motion)(no balk). Keep it simple, be prepaired to explain your decision, and have fun. This is baseball, not politics.
I always answer in short answers, No stop, didn't gain distance or something similar.
After reading all these posts it was funny (unless you are a Phiilie) to see Bumgarner come past his post leg and step more than 45 degree angle and get away with a balk last night.
Additionally in the next 1/2 inning same ump seems to call a ball down the line fair before it got to the base although we were never given a shot of what the home plate ump was doing on the play so may have to give him benefit of doubt. It sure seemed like he was the one calling it though and echoed by McCarver.
Additionally in the next 1/2 inning same ump seems to call a ball down the line fair before it got to the base although we were never given a shot of what the home plate ump was doing on the play so may have to give him benefit of doubt. It sure seemed like he was the one calling it though and echoed by McCarver.
quote:Originally posted by otownmike:
After reading all these posts it was funny (unless you are a Phiilie) to see Bumgarner come past his post leg and step more than 45 degree angle and get away with a balk last night.
Sorry, Phillie fan here.
It doesn't matter if he crossed his post leg. His free foot has to go past the back edge of the rubber. He did not do that so he did not balk in that way.
The only questionable part about it is how far toward HP did Bumgarner go. However, that isn't what got Jimmy Rollins. He was gone before that ever became a factor. He can't blame anything on that. He went when he felt Bumgarner wasn't coming over.
While I know that doesn't influence if the move is a balk or not, it sure does help. Jimmy got picked and that's it.
quote:Additionally in the next 1/2 inning same ump seems to call a ball down the line fair before it got to the base although we were never given a shot of what the home plate ump was doing on the play so may have to give him benefit of doubt. It sure seemed like he was the one calling it though and echoed by McCarver.
It was very close. But, the PU means very little due to how the mechanics work at this level and how I do it on fields where there is a cutout for 1B. PU has the ball up to the cutout. After that, BU takes it in A position. It helps to prevent 2 umpires making opposite calls. Easier to judge if the ball is beyond the agreed upon barrier. It was a tough call and there may have been 2 different calls on it depending on which umpire made the call. This is U1's call. I think it was correct IMO.
Oh, and who cares what McCarver thinks.
quote:Originally posted by otownmike:
After reading all these posts it was funny (unless you are a Phiilie) to see Bumgarner come past his post leg and step more than 45 degree angle and get away with a balk last night.
Additionally in the next 1/2 inning same ump seems to call a ball down the line fair before it got to the base although we were never given a shot of what the home plate ump was doing on the play so may have to give him benefit of doubt. It sure seemed like he was the one calling it though and echoed by McCarver.
1. Crossing the "post leg" is irrelevant to a balk call.
2. "By the book" mechanics give U1 "the base and beyond" on fair/foul calls, however, several ML crews have their own mechanics on that and working together all summer long they are all on the same page.
quote:Originally posted by Jimmy03:quote:Originally posted by otownmike:
After reading all these posts it was funny (unless you are a Phiilie) to see Bumgarner come past his post leg and step more than 45 degree angle and get away with a balk last night.
Additionally in the next 1/2 inning same ump seems to call a ball down the line fair before it got to the base although we were never given a shot of what the home plate ump was doing on the play so may have to give him benefit of doubt. It sure seemed like he was the one calling it though and echoed by McCarver.
1. Crossing the "post leg" is irrelevant to a balk call.
2. "By the book" mechanics give U1 "the base and beyond" on fair/foul calls, however, several ML crews have their own mechanics on that and working together all summer long they are all on the same page.
Some crews use the cutout as the line of demarcation.
quote:Originally posted by dash_riprock:quote:Originally posted by Jimmy03:quote:Originally posted by otownmike:
After reading all these posts it was funny (unless you are a Phiilie) to see Bumgarner come past his post leg and step more than 45 degree angle and get away with a balk last night.
Additionally in the next 1/2 inning same ump seems to call a ball down the line fair before it got to the base although we were never given a shot of what the home plate ump was doing on the play so may have to give him benefit of doubt. It sure seemed like he was the one calling it though and echoed by McCarver.
1. Crossing the "post leg" is irrelevant to a balk call.
2. "By the book" mechanics give U1 "the base and beyond" on fair/foul calls, however, several ML crews have their own mechanics on that and working together all summer long they are all on the same page.
Some crews use the cutout as the line of demarcation.
Yep. As do some AAA crews.
I understand the post leg is not the determining factor however it is attached to the rubber and granted the tv angle could be deceptive but he may have crossed it and he definitely was past 45 when JRoll took off. Both Davey Lopes and JRoll called the balk immediately (Davey Lopes knows a thing or two about stealing bases).
Additionally if you are saying the ball up the fist-base line was at the base I disagree. I do agree 1U calles it from the base and beyond.
Guys really it's ok to say they may have missed a call or two this series, it still makes them ML umpiries, the best there are.......however we can add another one last night on calling the bunt a fair ball.
Additionally if you are saying the ball up the fist-base line was at the base I disagree. I do agree 1U calles it from the base and beyond.
Guys really it's ok to say they may have missed a call or two this series, it still makes them ML umpiries, the best there are.......however we can add another one last night on calling the bunt a fair ball.
quote:Sorry, Phillie fan here
Mr. Umpire......If you are going to call somebody something try to get it right. I am a die-hard Cardinal fan, have been since 1964 (they would be the NL team with the most championships and although well behind the Yankees - also into double-digits). I never want the Phillies to win.
quote:Originally posted by otownmike:quote:Sorry, Phillie fan here
Mr. Umpire......If you are going to call somebody something try to get it right. I am a die-hard Cardinal fan, have been since 1964 (they would be the NL team with the most championships and although well behind the Yankees - also into double-digits). I never want the Phillies to win.
Misunderstood. I am a Phillies fan. So, if you are going to respond to something, try to read it right.
quote:Originally posted by otownmike:
I understand the post leg is not the determining factor however it is attached to the rubber and granted the tv angle could be deceptive but he may have crossed it and he definitely was past 45 when JRoll took off. Both Davey Lopes and JRoll called the balk immediately (Davey Lopes knows a thing or two about stealing bases).
Additionally if you are saying the ball up the fist-base line was at the base I disagree. I do agree 1U calles it from the base and beyond.
Guys really it's ok to say they may have missed a call or two this series, it still makes them ML umpiries, the best there are.......however we can add another one last night on calling the bunt a fair ball.
Again, misunderstood. U1 usually has the ball from the cutout and beyond. Not the base. I do the same when my BU is in A position with a 1B cutout. The ball WAS beyond the cutout.
And, about the bunt, I think it was missed but no camera angle is conclusive. But, it would have been difficult to see b/c of F2. I can understand the miss and no way to do things differently to see it.
quote:Oh, and who cares what McCarver thinks.
Hey I get it, everyone has an opinion....all McCarver did was catch in the MLB for 21 season, manage pitchers that included Bob Gibson and Steve Carlton, finish 2nd for MVP in 1967 losing to his teamate Orlando Cepeda, play in three WS with the Cards and 3-NLCS with the Phillies and hit over .300 in the post-season. But he doesn't know anything? That is like saying Harvey, Joyce, Wolf, Crawford, McLellen, Wendlestedt, and a host of others don't know anything. It just doesn't fit, but we all know what opinions are like.
quote:Originally posted by otownmike:
Hey I get it, everyone has an opinion....all McCarver did was catch in the MLB for 21 season, manage pitchers that included Bob Gibson and Steve Carlton, finish 2nd for MVP in 1967 losing to his teamate Orlando Cepeda, play in three WS with the Cards and 3-NLCS with the Phillies and hit over .300 in the post-season. But he doesn't know anything? That is like saying Harvey, Joyce, Wolf, Crawford, McLellen, Wendlestedt, and a host of others don't know anything. It just doesn't fit, but we all know what opinions are like.
I didn't say McCarver doesn't know anything. Misread the very quote posted. And, this time it is only 1 sentence and it was misread and misunderstood. I said "Who cares what McCarver thinks". That is a world of difference between saying what he knows versus what he thinks.
OK. Let's use another who has been in a lot of games. Joe Torre, earlier this year or last year I believe, had a 4th out appeal called against his team. When he was questioned about it after talking to the umpires on the play, said (paraphrasing) "I didn't even know that rule existed." So, you tell me, has he been in the game long enough to "know anything"? And, yet, he didn't know one of the rules that is NOT a new one.
Go figure. A manager, who has managed "several" WS games, did not know a fundamental rule (to many umpires anyway). So, based on McCarver's credentials, he "knows" all of the rules of the game and Torre doesn't (a current successful manager) says what?
It says that the players/coaches/fans/announcers blab myths and don't open a rule book to know what the rules actually are.
Apparently,with some umpires we do have to settle for a "that's just the way it is" answer !
I was watching the game - and heard McCarver's comment "His foot went past his post leg"... two seconds later, the phone rings and I don't have to even look at the caller ID - it's my LHP son calling from college. "What an idiot - rule is the back of the rubber"...
So we are sitting there chatting and Mitch Williams chimes in with the "he didn't get past the 45 degree line."
Son and I both start laughing - where do they get these guys!!! Williams played long enough ago perhaps he was in spring training the year they tried a chalk line on the ground. That failed, in part because of pitchers like Bumgarner who throw from the third base side of the rubber. Stepping more toward first than home is still not going to get across a line drawn from the first base corner of the rubber.
I don't think it was a balk as I saw no evidence that his foot broke the back plane of the rubber - the post leg starts off in front of the rubber and if it is angled at all towards home, there is plenty of room for the foot to be behind the post leg and in front of the back plane. His step towards first was close - but if you look at the line where the first base running lane starts, he was stepping right at that line - which is at the mid point.
Of course, if Andy Pettite does that move, its a slick move - but I begin to digress towards a different topic of east coast/Yankee bias...
A different question - why not get a real ump to be on standby like they do for the US Open Golf where they have a rules expert to clarify things? They do this to some extent for the LL World Series.
08
So we are sitting there chatting and Mitch Williams chimes in with the "he didn't get past the 45 degree line."
Son and I both start laughing - where do they get these guys!!! Williams played long enough ago perhaps he was in spring training the year they tried a chalk line on the ground. That failed, in part because of pitchers like Bumgarner who throw from the third base side of the rubber. Stepping more toward first than home is still not going to get across a line drawn from the first base corner of the rubber.
I don't think it was a balk as I saw no evidence that his foot broke the back plane of the rubber - the post leg starts off in front of the rubber and if it is angled at all towards home, there is plenty of room for the foot to be behind the post leg and in front of the back plane. His step towards first was close - but if you look at the line where the first base running lane starts, he was stepping right at that line - which is at the mid point.
Of course, if Andy Pettite does that move, its a slick move - but I begin to digress towards a different topic of east coast/Yankee bias...
A different question - why not get a real ump to be on standby like they do for the US Open Golf where they have a rules expert to clarify things? They do this to some extent for the LL World Series.
08
Sorry mike, but your analogy just doesnt fit...
It is true that McCarver did all those things...and that makes him quite the authority on catching, playing and pitcher management.....it does not make him an authority on umpiring or on the rules.... McCarver has made many on air gaffs when refering to the rules.....
Comparing McCarver to the umpires you listed is not a valid comparison.....Im sure all those umpires are not authorities on commentating, playing or catching......
Umpires Umpire.........Players Play........Coaches Coach........
These are 3 different and unique skills... We should not expect/or assume that doing one makes you an expert on the other.......
Most TV commentators are ex-players and you can list those who have spurious rules knowledge....as pointed out Joe Morgan, Mitch Williams and Harold Reynolds come to mind as well.......
As 08DAD states until the networks have an ex-MLB umpire on staff to do the interpretation, I do not expect anything to change...
It is true that McCarver did all those things...and that makes him quite the authority on catching, playing and pitcher management.....it does not make him an authority on umpiring or on the rules.... McCarver has made many on air gaffs when refering to the rules.....
Comparing McCarver to the umpires you listed is not a valid comparison.....Im sure all those umpires are not authorities on commentating, playing or catching......
Umpires Umpire.........Players Play........Coaches Coach........
These are 3 different and unique skills... We should not expect/or assume that doing one makes you an expert on the other.......
Most TV commentators are ex-players and you can list those who have spurious rules knowledge....as pointed out Joe Morgan, Mitch Williams and Harold Reynolds come to mind as well.......
As 08DAD states until the networks have an ex-MLB umpire on staff to do the interpretation, I do not expect anything to change...
quote:Originally posted by TRhit:
Apparently,with some umpires we do have to settle for a "that's just the way it is" answer !
As always, adding very much to the conversation with no substance or even evidence of anything.
otownmike:
Here are just a few bon mots from McCarver over the years:
1. The hands ARE part of the bat when the batter swings.
2. The runner was in the basepath, so no intereference.
3. Ladies and Gentlemen, that was not a balk. A left hander can fake a throw to first.
4. And the throw goes out of play, that's one plus one.
Even several of the pitchers McCarver caught thought that he was an idiot.
Here are just a few bon mots from McCarver over the years:
1. The hands ARE part of the bat when the batter swings.
2. The runner was in the basepath, so no intereference.
3. Ladies and Gentlemen, that was not a balk. A left hander can fake a throw to first.
4. And the throw goes out of play, that's one plus one.
Even several of the pitchers McCarver caught thought that he was an idiot.
quote:Originally posted by TRhit:
Apparently,with some umpires we do have to settle for a "that's just the way it is" answer !
I swear, you must have really p!ssed off the baseball gods. You seem to always get the worst umpires in the world.
MRUmpire may not have said McCarver is an idiot but I did. He gets more rules wrong and then lectures on how the umpires constantly kicks rules when he has no clue himself. I have said many times you play 80% of the games with 20% of the rules. The problem is maybe 5% have myths attached so many only know maybe 15%.
I can't explain any better than that how someone like McCarver can play a sport from a little boy to an adult and then annouce about it and not know more about it than he does. I have seen him spout myths about rules that directly applied to his position.
I can't explain any better than that how someone like McCarver can play a sport from a little boy to an adult and then annouce about it and not know more about it than he does. I have seen him spout myths about rules that directly applied to his position.
How about a RHP striding directly toward first, heel first until the last moment? Seems legal and perhaps different enough to fool some runners.
quote:As 08DAD states until the networks have an ex-MLB umpire on staff to do the interpretation, I do not expect anything to change...
That would be a great addition to a broadcast where he would be brought in to help explain questionable calls, rule interpretations. I believe FOX has that this year for the NFL games. The biggest question is since it is a tight brotherhod would they be objective enough to say the call was not made correctly? We all know umpires get it right over 90% of the time in real-time, fast motion. It is always the 10% that has everyone talking.
K-zone aside, an umpire's perspective on fan interference in the Yankees playoff series to the fair/foul call in the San Fran series, to the balk and fair/foul call in the Philly series there were definitely opportunities to bring in an ex-MLB ump to add clarity.
With McCarver I was not suggessting he gets it right all the time and as pointed out he has made mistakes with rule interpretations. Most of the people I hear downgrade McCarver have no idea of the player he was and the number of great pitchers he managed behind the plate, he definitely know and understands the game and articulates it pretty well.
Former ML umpires have had no issues correcting working umpires in the past. MLB hires formal umpires to evaluate current umpires and once they make that short trip across the hallway to the management side of things, their allegiance shift dramatically...and that's not necessarily a bad thing.
The so called "brotherhood" of ML umpires is no tighter than that found in the NFL.
Networks have used former umpires in the booth before (Ron Luciano in the early 80's), but discontinued the practice, in part because Ron was always correcting the broadcasters. NBC said that he was confusing the viewers. Makes you wonder if they want to get the rules right.
The so called "brotherhood" of ML umpires is no tighter than that found in the NFL.
Networks have used former umpires in the booth before (Ron Luciano in the early 80's), but discontinued the practice, in part because Ron was always correcting the broadcasters. NBC said that he was confusing the viewers. Makes you wonder if they want to get the rules right.
quote:Originally posted by Jimmy03:
Networks have used former umpires in the booth before (Ron Luciano in the early 80's), but discontinued the practice, in part because Ron was always correcting the broadcasters. NBC said that he was confusing the viewers. Makes you wonder if they want to get the rules right.
Plus, he had a face made for radio.
quote:Originally posted by Matt13:
Plus, he had a face made for radio.
Don't give him credit.
quote:Originally posted by yawetag:quote:Originally posted by Matt13:
Plus, he had a face made for radio.
Don't give him credit.
His words, not mine.
quote:The so called "brotherhood" of ML umpires is no tighter than that found in the NFL.
I definitely remember Luciano and I always felt he was a very good umpire. Best story ever about him is when he first met Earl Weaver in a minor league series. Ron threw Earl out of every game in a four game series and on the 4th game threw him out at the plate meeting. They developed a mutual respect for each other and it was hard to take hearing he comitted suicide in 1995.
Why would you say it is a "so-called." That wasn't meant negatively however in a brotherhood like they are in it is hard to be objective and have someone point out the mistakes. NFL officals have it easier in my opinion now. They make calls and let replay step in and it is off their shoulders. Umpires like Joyce this year have to carry it with them and he is a great umpire. Replay could have corrected it and everyone would have left happy.
quote:Originally posted by otownmike:quote:The so called "brotherhood" of ML umpires is no tighter than that found in the NFL.
Why would you say it is a "so-called." That wasn't meant negatively
I believe that the poster here who referred to it recently, and has referred to often, uses the term negatively. It's a shame.
When umpires aren't consistent he comes in and gripes that they're incompetent. When umpires are consistent, he comes in and gripes that they just stick together because they're umpires. Personally, I beginning to believe that he's just a very old grouch who isn't happy unless he's complaining about something.
I have a close close friend who is an NFL official. He feels they are very close to one another and that their rating process encourages that.
The NFL officials union also miscalculated when they went on strike. When they settled, they accepted a contract that wasn't near as good as the one they rejected just prior to their strike vote.
Regarding replay, he told me once that he believes several officials rely on reply to bail them out of making hard judgment calls. They may tend to make just make any call knowing that replay will correct an error. However, they way they are graded afer every game makes me doubt that many rely that much on replay. It would definitely hurt their rating.
I agree with you Jimmy and knowing umpires at the junior levels like I do I don't run into many who are not concerned with how they perform. I have no doubt MLB umps would continue to call games to the best of their ability and not use replay to bail them out of close calls. While it is defintely good money I also don't believe any of them umpire for the money.....it's for the love of the game....for finding a way to get between the lines. The logistics of using replay is more of an issue than using it I believe.
Another funny one from Luciano...when asked who his 5-worst coaches were during his career he said, "Weaver is 1-thru-4 and Robinson is 5 (a protege of Weaver)."
Another funny one from Luciano...when asked who his 5-worst coaches were during his career he said, "Weaver is 1-thru-4 and Robinson is 5 (a protege of Weaver)."