Anyone else attend one? Thoughts on rules, mechanics or video presentations?
Original Post
Replies sorted oldest to newest
I went this weekend in San Francisco. Video presentation with NCAA feedback provided a great learning opportunity. I thought the speaker on Wellness was very interesting. I picked up on a few things from that. There was also a discussion about organized crime and infiltration into sports. I would have never considered that possibility as an umpire. All in all a great clinic.
Did you attend any conference meetings?
I hit the WAC and PAC 12 meetings. Both had interesting takes on the videos and changing foul to fair and fair to foul rule change and mechanics to deal with it.
I hit the WAC and PAC 12 meetings. Both had interesting takes on the videos and changing foul to fair and fair to foul rule change and mechanics to deal with it.
I was disappointed in the 3-man half-swing mechanics change (PU must appeal to the ump on the open side, even if he is in the middle). The line ump has a perfect view of that, on any side of the batter. Maybe they'll go back to the PBUC way next year so they can change the CCA Manual. 
I also think they botched the "fix" of the definition of a catch. The new A.R. says:
"Only two circumstances may be interpreted as creating a voluntary and intentional release.
(1) When the momentum of the catch is complete; i.e., the fielder has reversed his direction and is running back toward the infield or;
(2) When the fielder is reaching for the ball to make a throw."
First of all, (1) has nothing to do with a release of the ball. And what about a fielder flipping the ball with his glove to another fielder? That is certainly a voluntary and intentional release, but according to the new A.R., it is not. I asked Tom about this, and he agreed that flipping the ball would be a voluntary release, but did not agree it was excluded by the A.R.
They are over-thinking this issue. A catch is defined by secure possession of the ball, firmly grasped by the fielder's hand or glove. If the fielder has control of his body and is firmly grasping the ball, it is a catch. There is no need to change direction. If there is a voluntary and intentional release of the ball, it is a catch, even if the fielder does not have control of his body at the time of the release. "Voluntary and intentional release" is unambiguous. We know what that is. The so-called clarification was unnecessary and didn't clear up anything.
There was a great video directly on this point. F8 makes a great lunging grab of a rocket to the LCF gap, staggers about 3 strides and hits the wall head first. The ball is seen rolling on the ground. In real time, it is a no-brainer no-catch. But when the video is slowed down and zoomed in, you can see the fielder reach into his glove and take the ball out just before he hits the wall. By rule, that is a catch. Tom said he showed the video to a bunch of MLB umpires, and they were split down the middle - even after seeing the blown-up slo-mo!
I also think they botched the "fix" of the definition of a catch. The new A.R. says:
"Only two circumstances may be interpreted as creating a voluntary and intentional release.
(1) When the momentum of the catch is complete; i.e., the fielder has reversed his direction and is running back toward the infield or;
(2) When the fielder is reaching for the ball to make a throw."
First of all, (1) has nothing to do with a release of the ball. And what about a fielder flipping the ball with his glove to another fielder? That is certainly a voluntary and intentional release, but according to the new A.R., it is not. I asked Tom about this, and he agreed that flipping the ball would be a voluntary release, but did not agree it was excluded by the A.R.
They are over-thinking this issue. A catch is defined by secure possession of the ball, firmly grasped by the fielder's hand or glove. If the fielder has control of his body and is firmly grasping the ball, it is a catch. There is no need to change direction. If there is a voluntary and intentional release of the ball, it is a catch, even if the fielder does not have control of his body at the time of the release. "Voluntary and intentional release" is unambiguous. We know what that is. The so-called clarification was unnecessary and didn't clear up anything.
There was a great video directly on this point. F8 makes a great lunging grab of a rocket to the LCF gap, staggers about 3 strides and hits the wall head first. The ball is seen rolling on the ground. In real time, it is a no-brainer no-catch. But when the video is slowed down and zoomed in, you can see the fielder reach into his glove and take the ball out just before he hits the wall. By rule, that is a catch. Tom said he showed the video to a bunch of MLB umpires, and they were split down the middle - even after seeing the blown-up slo-mo!
quote:Originally posted by dash_riprock:
I was disappointed in the 3-man half-swing mechanics change (PU must appeal to the ump on the open side, even if he is in the middle). The line ump has a perfect view of that, on any side of the batter.
I'm not so upset with this mechanic change for that reason as much as I love to be in deep B at all times with R1 only. Your view of almost every play at 2B is 1000% better than C.
Matt, where is Deep B?
In 3-man, with R1, I go to really Deep B, along the same plate-mound line as normal B, but about 3 feet short of the 1B-2B line.
okay, thanks.
quote:Originally posted by Matt13:quote:Originally posted by dash_riprock:
I was disappointed in the 3-man half-swing mechanics change (PU must appeal to the ump on the open side, even if he is in the middle). The line ump has a perfect view of that, on any side of the batter.
I'm not so upset with this mechanic change for that reason as much as I love to be in deep B at all times with R1 only. Your view of almost every play at 2B is 1000% better than C.
Ahhhh. But now the handedness of the batter....