is it a double?

quote:

Originally posted by thedudesdad:
Batter hits line to right center, right fielder charges at ball &dives as it is coming down & ball goes past him where center fielder gets ball as back up and throws to second where batter goes. is this a 2b or a 1b with an eroor on rf?

I scored it a 2b but someone said it is an 1b w/e9 having batter going to 2ndcause he in their opinion he could never reach ball by diving

Can’t say for sure, and neither could anyone else who wasn’t there to see it in person.

Here’s part of what OBR says: The official scorer shall not score mental mistakes or misjudgments as errors unless a specific rule prescribes otherwise.

Typically, if the fielder misjudged the ball when he dove for it, there was no error.

But more importantly, if you where the scorer, its your judgment that counts, not someone else’s. Scoring isn’t done by majority opinion. As long as you applied the scoring rules correctly, and it sure looks like you did, let other express their opinions, then say thank you and mark it the way you saw it.

2b.

In a playoff game, my freshman son came into a bases loaded situation. First pitch was a line drive to center, centerfielder charged, dived and missed. Ball rolled to the 420' sign and the bases painfully cleared.

I scored grand slam. Everyone else was screaming "Error!!!! He was stupid!!!"

As Stats points out, The official scorer shall not score mental mistakes or misjudgments as errors unless a specific rule prescribes otherwise. In that case, the proper scoring was inside the park HR with 4 RBI. Nothing a few glasses of wine didn't fix later...

We weren't at your game, so we can't say for sure but as described it was a double.

Thnaks for the answers. I scored it a 2b but it was also my son who hit it. Just want to make sure that I wasnt "daddy scoring" even though I am usually tougher on my own kid when scoring most people wouldnt be.

I'll bet that in either of the above examples, that if "their" kid was the one who hit the ball, no other "opinions" would have been expressed.

quote:

Originally posted by birdman14:
I'll bet that in either of the above examples, that if "their" kid was the one who hit the ball, no other "opinions" would have been expressed.

That’s always going to generally be true, but I think a lot of folks would be surprised at how many parents really get upset when their kid is given something they feel isn’t merited. Granted, its not a common as a parent wanting something that isn’t deserved, but it does happen.

Birdman14 - Spoken like the parent of a hitter.

Scoring with your kid pitching is just as hard as when he's hitting. Your heart wants every play made and when one isn't, you want it to be an error.

Sometimes, it isn't.

quote:

Originally posted by JMoff:…Scoring with your kid pitching is just as hard as when he's hitting. Your heart wants every play made and when one isn't, you want it to be an error.

Sometimes, it isn't.

How true. It wasn’t until I started scoring games for teams my son wasn’t on, that I began to really enjoy doing it. Now I’m seldom accused of anything other than being too tough on the players of both teams LOL!

It really takes a lot of pressure off, when the 1st thing after every play isn’t someone “hinting” that there was a parent’s bias in how the play was marked, true or not.

I really believe that if HS could provide scorers the same way they provide umpires, it would be a benefit to everyone. But I can’t see anyone paying gas money and even $10 a game to have a “professional” scorer, the way they pay a lot more to have “professional” umpires.

I've done both jobs and have to say scoing is easier on the knees and other body parts!

I found that knowing the rules is a big advantage in these discussions. Sometimes just being about to recite something like the infield fly rule and why it's in the book gains you a level of credibility that knocks out some of that nonsense. That is especially true if you are percieved as a level headed guy.

quote:

Originally posted by luv baseball:
I've done both jobs and have to say scoing is easier on the knees and other body parts!

Ain’t dat da troot?

quote:

I found that knowing the rules is a big advantage in these discussions. Sometimes just being about to recite something like the infield fly rule and why it's in the book gains you a level of credibility that knocks out some of that nonsense. That is especially true if you are percieved as a level headed guy.

Yes, having a good grasp of the rules certainly is an advantage doing anything in the game. It just makes things easier.

I tell scorers that they don’t have to memorize the entire rulebook, but they do have to be very familiar with whatever the equivalent of Rule 2.00 and Rule 10.00 are, and should be able to find things in the entire rule book, even if they don’t completely understand them. Unfortunately, it’s a chore to get most people to even look at the rule book.

I agree completely on having a working knowledge of the rules. Sometimes it helps, sometimes it doesn't.

There are those who will argue till the cows come home about it "not being an error because he never got a glove on it" even when it rolled between his legs on an ordinary effort play. I recently had an argument with a softball parent about the "hand being part of the bat", no the hand is part of the arm and doesn't cost $300 to replace. It wasn't a strike because the pitch was not a strike and the pitch hit her. It's only a strike when a batter is hit with a pitched ball AND the pitch is a strike (either in the zone or because the batter swung at the pitch).

But I agree, more frequently you can put down a riot before it starts by simply explaining (loudly) what the umpire is calling and why to somebody sitting a few rows away. If you get, "Oh" and everybody returns to their seats, you can usually enjoy the rest of the game.

And a routine pop up between the pitchers mound and home plate that drops & stays fair is an error on somebody even if nobody in the infield got a glove on it...

quote:

Originally posted by JMoff:
Birdman14 - Spoken like the parent of a hitter.

Scoring with your kid pitching is just as hard as when he's hitting. Your heart wants every play made and when one isn't, you want it to be an error.

Sometimes, it isn't.

Actually, I get to work both sides of it. My son is a two-way player.

quote:

And a routine pop up between the pitchers mound and home plate that drops & stays fair is an error on somebody even if nobody in the infield got a glove on it..

Why is your infield situation different than a fly ball falling harmlessly between two standing, watching outfielders? Isn't that always called a hit? Same on easy balls lost in the sun or lights?

quote:

Originally posted by Prime9:
Why is your infield situation different than a fly ball falling harmlessly between two standing, watching outfielders? Isn't that always called a hit? Same on easy balls lost in the sun or lights?

Well, I don’t always call it a hit. “Routine” is the operative word. That word epitomizes “average”, and that means it should be caught. But, as with everything like that, you have to be there to see it in context. And I’m not one to often buy into the “he missed it because of the sun or lights”.

quote:

And I’m not one to often buy into the “he missed it because of the sun or lights”.

Ah, you must have never played, in South Florida!

But to the question that I don't know the real answer to, you see routine fly ball outs, fall harmlessly between two players both thinking the other has it. I've never seen that not called a hit?? The premise of what should have been reasonably caught, doesn't come into consideration?

quote:

Originally posted by Prime9:

quote:

And I’m not one to often buy into the “he missed it because of the sun or lights”.

But to the question that I don't know the real answer to, you see routine fly ball outs, fall harmlessly between two players both thinking the other has it. I've never seen that not called a hit?? The premise of what should have been reasonably caught, doesn't come into consideration?

I don't know the answer this one either. 10.12(a)(1) clearly states "...The official scorer shall charge an outfielder with an error
if such outfielder allows a fly ball to drop to the ground if, in the official scorer’s judgment, an outfielder at that position making ordinary effort would have caught such fly ball..."

It's almost like the scorers version of the "neighborhood" play at second base. However if you read the book, it should be scored an error.

I've only scored the pop up in the infield a hit one time that I can remember. The batter fouled the ball back. It was over my head ten rows behind the backstop when a 60 mph gale and backspin conspired to blow it back. I thought it was coming down on me for a second. It ended up at the pitcher's mound. Most increadible thing I've every seen.

The catcher was litterally at the backstop when he started to chase it back to the infield. The pitcher was in the catcher's box and he still couldn't get back to it. The shortstop had the best chance of anyone, but didn't get there. I gave the batter a single (he actually should've been on second). The umpire, finally having to turn around and get the blowing dust of the approaching microburst in his eyes, suspended play.

VERY extreme case, though...

quote:

Originally posted by Prime9:
Ah, you must have never played, in South Florida!

Believe me. There’s nothing goin’ on there that doesn’t go on everywhere, even if it seems like it.

quote:

But to the question that I don't know the real answer to, you see routine fly ball outs, fall harmlessly between two players both thinking the other has it. I've never seen that not called a hit?? The premise of what should have been reasonably caught, doesn't come into consideration?

Well, I don’t know what to tell you, other than you likely haven’t been around SKs who do a very good job. There really is a lot more that goes into the decision than to be able to say absolutely that its going to be scored this way or that. That’s precisely why the scorebook should be given to someone who has experience and/or an understanding of the scoring rules, commensurate with the level.

Its just like coaching, umpiring, or playing. The lower levels are where the learning takes place. No one should expect any coach, player, umpire, or SK to do their job at the ML level, but as the levels increase, so should the level of everyone connected with the game, and I think people can see that to be true.

quote:

Originally posted by Stats4Gnats:

quote:

Originally posted by Prime9:
But to the question that I don't know the real answer to, you see routine fly ball outs, fall harmlessly between two players both thinking the other has it. I've never seen that not called a hit?? The premise of what should have been reasonably caught, doesn't come into consideration?

Well, I don’t know what to tell you, other than you likely haven’t been around SKs who do a very good job. There really is a lot more that goes into the decision than to be able to say absolutely that its going to be scored this way or that. That’s precisely why the scorebook should be given to someone who has experience and/or an understanding of the scoring rules, commensurate with the level.

Its just like coaching, umpiring, or playing. The lower levels are where the learning takes place. No one should expect any coach, player, umpire, or SK to do their job at the ML level, but as the levels increase, so should the level of everyone connected with the game, and I think people can see that to be true.

Stats,
Prime's question is a very good one. This seems to be the common call at all levels, regardless of qualifications of SK. Being that you are the regular SK poster here, I'd love to see you take another stab at this question if you don't mind.

quote:

Originally posted by cabbagedad:
Stats,
Prime's question is a very good one. This seems to be the common call at all levels, regardless of qualifications of SK. Being that you are the regular SK poster here, I'd love to see you take another stab at this question if you don't mind.

I don’t know what else to say. The scorer should use his/her experience and knowledge of the scoring rules to make the best determination possible. I can’t speak for all other scorers or even what’s common. All I know is, on a play like JMoff described, where a “ROUTINE” popup is hit between the mound and the plate and drops, no one should hold their breath hoping I’m not going to pop someone with an E.

The very same factors are at work on what Prime9 described. If it’s a “ROUTINE” fly ball that falls between 2 players, you can look for an E to show up on someone. The only difference is, there’s more room to cover for outfielders, but that’s why the word “ROUTINE” is so important. That implies there was little or nothing going on, like a 40MPH wind, gnats, fog, sun, lights, the moon, or even a sudden desire to check out the SHB with the 38AAA’s and tight sweater, sitting in the front row. Routine means someone should have caught it.

I’ve scored it both as an E and an H, but there are always reasons for each. The mere fact that a ball falls untouched doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be an error. I don’t know if you remember the now famous catch Billy Martin made in the ’52 series on an infield pop. If you’ve ever seen it, you can tell it was anything but routine, and if it had dropped, there’s no way anyone would have scored it an error.

I remember a ball hit off my son in the 1st inning of a LLI Jrs game. It was a ball hit into the air with a very good hang time. F8 was playing shallow and got there without even needing to jog, F6 and F4 were also there in plenty of time as well. F4 was screaming “MINE! MINE!”, then suddenly back off and ducked his head, and the ball dropped 3’ from F8. F4 was a sub because the regular F4 didn’t show up, and should have allowed F8 to just stick out his glove and make a very easy catch, but he didn’t. I popped the F4, and as it turned out, the game ended up being a no hitter, and I had all kinds of people claiming the only reason I scored it an error was because I wanted my kid to get a no hitter, as though I knew that would be the only thing close to a hit in the game.

But there are a lot of people who don’t know all those other things should be taken into consideration. Heck, There probably is only one scorer in 1,000 below the pros who’s even read the Ordinary Effort definition in OBR, let alone really understands it. Some of us have though, and we really try our best to not only score things by the letter of the rule, but by the spirit as well.

I’m sorry if I can’t offer something hard and fast to answer the question, but there’s nothing hard and fast when judgment is involved.

Prime9 asked a good question for which it appears nobody has a good answer. "Why is that almost always scored a hit?"

The outfield routine fly ball scored a hit happens at every level, MLB on down.

The only rule book reason I can come up with is, these plays may look ordinary but aren't ruled that way. I have no idea why not, but it appears to be the case...

I don't score them that way and neither does NATS, but most MLB scorers seem to...

quote:

Originally posted by Stats4Gnats:
... or even a sudden desire to check out the SHB with the 38AAA’s and tight sweater...

I'm mildly embarrassed that this read like plain english to me.

quote:

Well, I don’t know what to tell you, other than you likely haven’t been around SKs who do a very good job. There really is a lot more that goes into the decision than to be able to say absolutely that its going to be scored this way or that. That’s precisely why the scorebook should be given to someone who has experience and/or an understanding of the scoring rules, commensurate with the level.

Perhaps you are correct in your assertion that the SKs in my neck of the woods are inferior? Actually, I see this situation at the MLB level all the time, even when California scorers are involved.

Taking this a step further, that is "that you don't buy into the; he missed it because of sun or lights." Actually, if you can and should asses an error to a fielder for watching a ball drop that with reasonable effort should have been caught. Why would you charge an error to a fielder who legitimately can't see the baseball in a bright sun field or hit into a bank of lights? That does occur on the field and there is NOTHING you can do in some circumstances.

Why isn't that scored a hit and treated like a gust of wind that changes the path of the ball causing the fielder to misjudge it? Is it not similar to "an act of god situation like the wind or rain? Rain drops in the eyes can't cause an error.

I saw Chipper Jones charged with an error at 3b this year on a high bouncer lost in the lights. Also, I can recall Matt Holliday losing one in left field during the playoffs that actually hit him in the leg. The play was scored an error.


To me, both cases were scored illogically as is awarding a hit to a routine fly ball that happens to fall in without being challenged.

quote:

Originally posted by Prime9:
Perhaps you are correct in your assertion that the SKs in my neck of the woods are inferior? Actually, I see this situation at the MLB level all the time, even when California scorers are involved.

I wasn’t implying that your area had any more inferior scorers than anywhere else. What I was trying to get across, was that you may well not have seen many good ones.

quote:

Taking this a step further, that is "that you don't buy into the; he missed it because of sun or lights." Actually, if you can and should asses an error to a fielder for watching a ball drop that with reasonable effort should have been caught. Why would you charge an error to a fielder who legitimately can't see the baseball in a bright sun field or hit into a bank of lights? That does occur on the field and there is NOTHING you can do in some circumstances.

Just because the sun is shining and might be a problem, doesn’t make it so. Players learn how to shade their eyes, wear sun glasses, position their bodies to mitigate the effects of certain things too. There’s nothing that says fielders should be given the doubt about anything, and in fact the opposite its true. But its really immaterial because there’s no way possible any scorer and know for sure that the sun was really the reason they didn’t make a routine play.

At our field, about the end of the HS season, about an hour before sundown, the sun is directly in the SS and LFrs eyes. A ball in the air with a high arc gives the LF a bad time, but doesn’t bother the SS much at all. As the sun gets lower, it gets to the point where even GBs are affected for the SS, but for the OFr, fly balls are hardly affected at all.

I know that because I’ve scored at that field for 7 years, and seen how things happen. I’m not scoring in a void. I’ve see how great fielders and poor ones handle balls in adverse conditions, and have a pretty good understanding about when something was really a problem and when it wasn’t. What you seem to be trying to do is to have a one size fits all policy for something that’s now a judgment call, and always has been.

I can tell you this. If you watch a few hundred ML games as a scorer, not a fan, I believe you’ll see that not as many of those things you think are always scored as hits, are. Chances are, a call like that happens only one a game, and its difficult for a fan to gain much of a perspective from that.

quote:

Why isn't that scored a hit and treated like a gust of wind that changes the path of the ball causing the fielder to misjudge it? Is it not similar to "an act of god situation like the wind or rain? Rain drops in the eyes can't cause an error.

It can be scored as either one because it’s a judgment call.

quote:

I saw Chipper Jones charged with an error at 3b this year on a high bouncer lost in the lights. Also, I can recall Matt Holliday losing one in left field during the playoffs that actually hit him in the leg. The play was scored an error.

To me, both cases were scored illogically as is awarding a hit to a routine fly ball that happens to fall in without being challenged.

Well, evidently JMoff and I aren’t the only ones who don’t agree with you. You’ve just proved what I’m trying to tell you. Every play is different, the scorer has to “be there”, and best judgment has to be what eventually rules the call, just like for an umpire’s judgment call.

You’re failure to understand that scoring like umpiring or anything that turns a subjective observation into a “Yes/No”, “True/False”, “On/Off”, “Safe/Out”, or “Hit/Error” answer is exactly why I provide the people I score for with more than just the “run-of-the-mill” stats. I provide them with those metrics, but also provide them with metrics that don’t account for anything subjective as a negative.

FI, I’ll compute a Total Batting average that includes ROEs the same as a hit, and a Total Run average that doesn’t worry whether a run is earned or not. That way my judgment doesn’t even come into play. But it really makes no difference, as long as the scorer stays consistent.

quote:

Just because the sun is shining and might be a problem, doesn’t make it so. Players learn how to shade their eyes, wear sun glasses, position their bodies to mitigate the effects of certain things too. There’s nothing that says fielders should be given the doubt about anything, and in fact the opposite its true. But its really immaterial because there’s no way possible any scorer and know for sure that the sun was really the reason they didn’t make a routine play.

At our field, about the end of the HS season, about an hour before sundown, the sun is directly in the SS and LFrs eyes. A ball in the air with a high arc gives the LF a bad time, but doesn’t bother the SS much at all. As the sun gets lower, it gets to the point where even GBs are affected for the SS, but for the OFr, fly balls are hardly affected at all.

I know that because I’ve scored at that field for 7 years, and seen how things happen. I’m not scoring in a void. I’ve see how great fielders and poor ones handle balls in adverse conditions, and have a pretty good understanding about when something was really a problem and when it wasn’t. What you seem to be trying to do is to have a one size fits all policy for something that’s now a judgment call, and always has been.

I apologize for belaboring what I thought was a pretty straight forward question regarding rules, to someone that considers themselves an expert.

Let me see if I can clarify my question(s). Is there basis in the rules to the premise of "a reasonable effort" should have resulted in an out? It would seem, that even at the highest level, that the old premise of "but he didn't lay a glove on it" thus we will rule it a hit, prevails! More often than not, the uncaught fly ball that we are talking about is ruled a hit. Even when it's pretty obvious to the experienced eye, that a fielder should have made the play.

Secondly, I further suggest, that experienced baseball players will tell you that the sun and the lights can and often do affect catching the baseball. I disagree strongly with your conclusion, based upon observation, that those failures only occur with "lesser players." Furthermore, I would suggest that any experienced baseball players can witness those plays occurring and inherently realize that the fielder misplayed the ball due to "the elements (in this case, sun or lights)."

My South Florida remark was based upon playing in the bright Sunlight for many years. If the ball intersects the sun at just the right angle, no attempt at blocking the sun with your glove or glasses will change the invariable "ducking and covering" reflex that follows after you have completely lost it. Should that experienced, professional player, in many cases, be given an error? If the wind holds the ball up and blows it over his head it is not scored an error but a hit. So, why are these examples involving "the elements"scored differently on a fairly consistent basis?

I don't blame you or your expert cronies with a failing, just wondering why it can't be a bit more objective?

quote:

Originally posted by Prime9:
I apologize for belaboring what I thought was a pretty straight forward question regarding rules, to someone that considers themselves an expert.

That’s uncalled for, but I’ll let it go as coming out of frustration.

quote:

Let me see if I can clarify my question(s). Is there basis in the rules to the premise of "a reasonable effort" should have resulted in an out? It would seem, that even at the highest level, that the old premise of "but he didn't lay a glove on it" thus we will rule it a hit, prevails! More often than not, the uncaught fly ball that we are talking about is ruled a hit. Even when it's pretty obvious to the experienced eye, that a fielder should have made the play.

There’s nothing in the rules about "a reasonable effort". However, there is something in OBR about “ORDINARY EFFORT”.

ORDINARY EFFORT is the effort that a fielder of average skill at a position in that league or classification of leagues should exhibit on a play, with due consideration given to the condition of the field and weather conditions.

Rule 2.00 (Ordinary Effort) Comment: This standard, called for several times in the Official Scoring Rules (e.g., Rules 10.05(a)(3), 10.05(a)(4), 10.05(a)(6), 10.05(b)(3) (Base Hits); 10.08(b) (Sacrifices); 10.12(a)(1) Comment, 10.12(d)(2) (Errors); and 10.13(a), 10.13(b) (Wild Pitches and Passed Balls)) and in the Official Baseball Rules (e.g., Rule 2.00 (Infield Fly)), is an objective standard in regard to any particular fielder. In other words, even if a fielder makes his best effort, if that effort falls short of what an average fielder at that position in that league would have made in a situation, the official scorer should charge that fielder with an error.

As for the old premise of “"but he didn't lay a glove on it" thus we will rule it a hit, prevails”, as you can see by the following, the premise is a bunch of hooey.

Rule 10.12(a)(1) Comment: … It is not necessary that the fielder touch the ball to be charged with an error. If a ground ball goes through a fielder’s legs or a fly ball falls untouched and, in the scorer’s judgment, the fielder could have handled the ball with ordinary effort, the official scorer shall charge such fielder with an error. For example, the official scorer shall charge an infielder with an error when a ground ball passes to either side of such infielder if, in the official scorer’s judgment, a fielder at that position making ordinary effort would have fielded such ground ball and retired a runner. The official scorer shall charge an outfielder with an error if such outfielder allows a fly ball to drop to the ground if, in the official scorer’s judgment, an outfielder at that position making ordinary effort would have caught such fly ball.

It’s a matter of the scorer’s judgment.

quote:

Secondly, I further suggest, that experienced baseball players will tell you that the sun and the lights can and often do affect catching the baseball. I disagree strongly with your conclusion, based upon observation, that those failures only occur with "lesser players." Furthermore, I would suggest that any experienced baseball players can witness those plays occurring and inherently realize that the fielder misplayed the ball due to "the elements (in this case, sun or lights)."

I don’t know where you got the idea that I believe those things only occur with lesser players. I suggest that the things you believe happen so often, are in fact, pretty rare.

quote:

My South Florida remark was based upon playing in the bright Sunlight for many years. If the ball intersects the sun at just the right angle, no attempt at blocking the sun with your glove or glasses will change the invariable "ducking and covering" reflex that follows after you have completely lost it. Should that experienced, professional player, in many cases, be given an error? If the wind holds the ball up and blows it over his head it is not scored an error but a hit. So, why are these examples involving "the elements"scored differently on a fairly consistent basis?

They aren’t! For some reason you think they are, but experienced scorers try to just judge whether or not the play would have been made with ordinary effort.

quote:

I don't blame you or your expert cronies with a failing, just wondering why it can't be a bit more objective?

I’m trying to make you understand that those making the rules knew full well that there was no way to make it objective, and that’s why they use the term, “scorer’s judgment”. its a term used 16 times in rule 10.00 of OBR. Neither I nor my “expert cronies” wrote those rules. All we do is the best we can to score games using the rules as guidelines. Lots of people don’t agree with the way scorer’s score games, just like they don’t agree with the way umpires umpire games. That’s always gonna happen when judgment’s involved.

I’m sorry you feel the need to have everything 100% objective. I can only imagine what you must feel like watching umpires call balls and strikes, or make calls on plays in the field. All I can suggest for you is to volunteer to take over the scoring/statistician duties for the team you cheer for or your son plays on. Then it’ll be up to you to make the call. When that happens, I’ll be the 1st one having your back for exercising your judgment.

quote:

I’m trying to make you understand that those making the rules knew full well that there was no way to make it objective, and that’s why they use the term, “scorer’s judgment”. its a term used 16 times in rule 10.00 of OBR. Neither I nor my “expert cronies” wrote those rules. All we do is the best we can to score games using the rules as guidelines. Lots of people don’t agree with the way scorer’s score games, just like they don’t agree with the way umpires umpire games. That’s always gonna happen when judgment’s involved.

Thanks for taking the time to respond and explain. I don't have a strong feeling one way or the other, was just wondering why?

I get the the scorers, or umpires judgement retort. I don't have to agree though. The fly ball scenario ("ordinary effort" should be applied but mostly is NOT) is akin to the umpires judgement application of the rules to HIS strike zone. When the rules very clearly define a strike as it supposed to be called.

All anyone really wants is consistency, but it seems it can even be applied to the what should be the simple examples we have been discussing.

quote:

Originally posted by Prime9:
Thanks for taking the time to respond and explain. I don't have a strong feeling one way or the other, was just wondering why?

I’m just doing my best to do that.

quote:

I get the the scorers, or umpires judgement retort. I don't have to agree though. The fly ball scenario ("ordinary effort" should be applied but mostly is NOT) is akin to the umpires judgement application of the rules to HIS strike zone. When the rules very clearly define a strike as it supposed to be called.

It’s the very same thing. It’s the umpire’s judgment as to whether or not a ball in in or out of the strike zone, and why arguing or challenging a call can get someone in so much trouble. But that’s really besides the point. What is on target, is whether or not the OE standard is applied. I maintain that most experienced scorers do it as a matter of course without even thinking about it. I know for most plays like that, the thought of OE doesn’t often even enter my mind. But then again, I’m usually very aware what the “average” player at the level I’m scoring plays like.

quote:

All anyone really wants is consistency, but it seems it can even be applied to the what should be the simple examples we have been discussing.

That’s because there is no SIMPLE example. There are always mitigating factors that you have to be there and see the entire thing for. And even then, it makes a big difference if you’re sitting on the 1st base line, the 3rd base line, outside the fence in LF, in the dugout, or up in the 40th row of the bleachers.

That’s why you’ll see most decent scorers sitting in pretty much the same location all the time, so they get a consistent look at the plays. My spot is always a close to directly behind the PU and slightly to his right as possible. That’s where I sit at our home games, even though it’s the opponent’s side of the field, and you’ll find me within 20’ of that location every game I score.

Like I said, all anyone can do is their best, and there’s never gonna be agreement on what that is.

quote:

It’s the very same thing. It’s the umpire’s judgment as to whether or not a ball in in or out of the strike zone, and why arguing or challenging a call can get someone in so much trouble. But that’s really besides the point. What is on target, is whether or not the OE standard is applied.

But Stats, the actual upper and lower boundaries of the strike zone are well defined. The application should be the same as the "OE" to errors. You must admit that those rule defined strike zone boundaries are not utilized by most umpires calling games at even the highest levels. Where has the high strike, just below the letters, gone? The rules have not changed. There is a rule based on OE but often not used at even highest levels plus it seems to be applied differently to infield pops that fall versus outfield fly balls. But, most often in pro games, they are always scored hits.

Sorry to belabor as their is no resolution amongst us to this, was just hoping that you could shed light on it from the rules perspective which you have.

Good scoring!

quote:

Originally posted by Prime9:
But Stats, the actual upper and lower boundaries of the strike zone are well defined. The application should be the same as the "OE" to errors. You must admit that those rule defined strike zone boundaries are not utilized by most umpires calling games at even the highest levels. Where has the high strike, just below the letters, gone? The rules have not changed. There is a rule based on OE but often not used at even highest levels plus it seems to be applied differently to infield pops that fall versus outfield fly balls. But, most often in pro games, they are always scored hits.

Yes, the boundaries are well defined, and I readily admit that those boundaries are not followed to the letter by ANY umpires, no matter what the level. The main reason for that is, its impossible for a human being to call a pitch using those boundaries with accuracy any better than they do. BTW, that’s precisely why I’d love to see technology call the zone, at least in the ML.

As far as applying OE to calling pitches, that’s what’s done. The difference is, what’s “ordinary is defined by the zone.

I really think that if you watched a lot of ML games, not on TV but at the park, from the perspective of a scorer not just an observer, you’d see that while there is a certain amount of bias and poor judgment displayed, you’d see the lion’s share of the calls being made both in the spirit of and by the letter of the rules.

Perspective really does shape the way people believe things are, and that seldom is what is happening in reality. I know its hard to believe, but occasionally I find myself at odds with players, coaches, fans, or all three. Just to show any of them that while they have been watching the same game I have, they aren’t looking at it from the same perspective, I’ll ask them different questions to see if they really have been paying attention.

The easiest one is to ask how many pitches an opposing pitcher has thrown in the inning, or in total. Lots of folks pay attention to “their” pitcher, but not many to the opposing pitcher. Another one is GBO:FBO ratio, and another is 1st pitch strikes. It always amazes me how far off people usually are, but its understandable that how the team is performing has such an impact on the answers I get.

That’s why I encourage people to score games they watch, like happened so often when I was a kid. You learn to look at the game differently, and I think “better”.

quote:

Sorry to belabor as their is no resolution amongst us to this, was just hoping that you could shed light on it from the rules perspective which you have.

Nothing to be sorry about at all! If anything, I’m sorry I’ve been unable to provide a good explanation for why judgment isn’t something that can be mad objective.

I'd say that based on the comments on Rule 10.13 (2) "...a pop fly falls untouched, and in the scorers judgement the fielder could have handled the ball with ordinary effort, an error shall be charged."

I believe that this is fairly clear language stating that an error should be charged on the play where to ourfielders come together but let the ball drop. If it is clear which player called the ball then that's who I'd charge the "E" to.

As far as sun, wind and lights etc., I have been inclined to give HS and youger players the benefit of the doubt if the player obviously was fighting the ball from the beginning of the play. The reasoning for me is that ordinary effort for an MLB player vs a HS plyer should be rated higher. So when Johnny Centerfielder from East Side High loses a ball in a high sky and it's clear he never saw it I'm inclined to give it a hit. On the ther hand on a windy day say 15 MPH he drifts and drfits and finally makes a stab at a ball that ends up dropping I am ruling an error. A 75 mile per hour gale would get me to rethink that.

the truth is that these are the most subjective plays in scoring the game. Factors such as the level of skill of the players, field and weather conditions may have an impact but they are by rule judgement calls by the scorer. Honest people can agree to disagree over specific plays and often do. The best part about that is there will always be the next pitch to watch!

quote:

That’s why I encourage people to score games they watch, like happened so often when I was a kid. You learn to look at the game differently, and I think “better”.

I agree. I learned early and scored for Travel teams through H.S. teams. Then taught my wife to score for me when I was busy as a Head Coach. We score every game we have ever attended of my sons and he's playing in College. My wife recently taught his girl friend so she could learn to appreciate and be more involved rather than just watching & texting!

I guess I want a perfect world. I still get upset when I see an MLB scorer award a hit on our OE fly ball. And, obviously I feel it's almost a miscarriage of justice to give a fielder an error on a play clearly affected by the elements.

luv baseball is correct in that there is always that next pitch, next game, etc, to watch and or make the correct call!

I started scoring when I was 8 and wasn't old enough to play LL baseball. When I didn't make it as a 9U, I scored every game, every night for the LL as their official scorer. I played for a while after that, but was hooked.

I started scoring MLB games I was watching as a young adult, but I was always asking questions / second guessing the offical scoring. For my kids, I started scoring every game I've attended that they've played in (T-ball to HS). I got lazy during pro-scout (pitch 1 or two innings and go home, no rosters, total scrimmage format). I score for the HS baseball team. I will score for the HS softball team in 2013 when my son goes to college.

I have a book in the top drawer of my desk that I pull out for Sunday night baseball if I don't have anything else going on and can really watch. I have another one just for Red Sox vs. Yankees.

I have about ~35 scorebooks in a drawer from just my kid's games. I'm afraid to take them out to provide an accurate count because that drawer is barely closing and I'm afraid I'll spend all night trying to cram everything back in. No worries, as all stats for each kid is summarized in a spread sheet with neat totals.

Why? Because once you start you can't stop...

Happy Holidays to everyone on this forum, I enjoy our discussions and although they can become "colorful" I think we're all still learning something.

When I saw that you were changing from BB to SB, I just couldn’t help wondering why. Don’t get me wrong, I have nothing against SB at all, but I just can’t imagine not scoring the BB games at our school in favor of the SB games at the same school unless I had some overwhelming reason, like a child or relative on the SB team, or my son quit coaching the BB team baseball and moved to the SB team.

Maybe part of it is that I’m the only person in the world who’d attended every spring season V baseball game our school has ever played since it began playing in 2007. Maybe its that I just can’t stand the thought of all the data I’ve compiled in those years, plus the years my boy played HSBB, going into the bit bucket and being lost for all time. Or, maybe its that I just like baseball a lot more than I like FPSB.

It could also be that there are about 20 other HSBB programs within the immediate area I could go to and immediately take over as the scorer/statistician, which would mean the old data not only wouldn’t be lost, but would be incorporated with data from a team run with a different coaching “philosophy”.

I really hadn’t thought much about it before, but I do know this, like you, there’s no way I could possibly stop now.

Scored almost every game my two played which is probably approaching 1,000 games. Waaaaaaay too many books to keep them all. I kept a few of the highlights like going to Cooperstown NY, a State Championship run and first tournaments. Probably about a dozen books in all out of the 40 or so I've owned. It was really hard to let those go and I didn't ever think to put them into a spreadsheet until it was too far along to g back and do it.

quote:

Originally posted by luv baseball:
Scored almost every game my two played which is probably approaching 1,000 games. Waaaaaaay too many books to keep them all. I kept a few of the highlights like going to Cooperstown NY, a State Championship run and first tournaments. Probably about a dozen books in all out of the 40 or so I've owned. It was really hard to let those go and I didn't ever think to put them into a spreadsheet until it was too far along to g back and do it.

I scored every LL game through LL Rrs. All but 3 tournament games from age 14 thru starting college. Every HS game, every home game 1st year of college, and every game 2nd year. Luckily, I never did deal in spreadsheets, but did keep every piece of data for every game I ever scored, in a DBM.

A few years back, I contacted the coach of my boy’s old HS, and offered to enter all the data for that school, from its beginning to date, because I heard he was trying to create a school record book. I told him, that all I needed was the old scoresheets, and I’d take care of the rest. He called me a week later and told me that when he couldn’t find them, he called the coach he replaced to see if he had them. Turns out, that coach, my son’s, wasn’t too pleased about being fired for cause, and he destroyed every piece of paper and all computer records when he left.

That was heartbreaking, and why I’m the keeper of the scoresheets now. Next season’s gonna be a bit of a problem because I’m not planning on using a scorebook, but rather a computer. However, I will have a pitch-by-pitch and play-by-play computer report available, plus have multiple copies of everything for the next SK to take over.

I believe the more records are available, the more respect the players and the program gets, and that tradition is something that binds a team together.

quote:

I believe the more records are available, the more respect the players and the program gets, and that tradition is something that binds a team together.

Stats; that is truly the definitive description of a guy doing what he loves! lol

quote:

Originally posted by Stats4Gnats:
When I saw that you were changing from BB to SB, I just couldn’t help wondering why.

I promised my son's HS coach I'd be his scorekeeper as long as my son was there, so I'm commited. He graduates this spring. He's also a pitcher, so I like to have an accurate pitch count and be sitting close enough to the coach that I can use a hook if I feel the need (never have).

As luck would have it, my daughter made the varsity SB team as a freshman last year. In AZ, that means she's playing the same team as my son but in the opposite location. For 18 games a season, I can't watch her play. Basically, I get to see the early season tournament and the odd rescheduled game or occasional day/night game when I can catch both. She pitched about 1/3 of the innings last year and the same girls are coming back. She could actually move up as she's improved quite a bit. At the very least, I owe her some equal time. I'll have a book with me, whether its the official one or not will be up to the coach.

At some point, when they're both done playing, I'll call the HS coach and offer my services on a more permanent basis, if the job is available.

quote:

Originally posted by JMoff:
…As luck would have it, my daughter made the varsity SB team as a freshman last year. …

No need to say any more than that!

If one of my children, or hopefully one day grandchildren, decided to play Kommie Kickball, cricket, Jai Ali, or some other sport I know nothing about, you can bet I’d have a copy of that sport’s scoring rules to study, and I’d be figgerin’ out a way to score the contest and generate stats!

It’s a great way to participate and show how much you support the kids!

Stats & JMoff - I was viewed as kind of a detail oriented stickler when I did "the book" but I have to say that you fella's outpace me. I luv'd every minute of it but not with the kind of dedication you guys have. I salute you both.