Umpire incorrectly calls 3 outs in an inning

[Strike2]

Is this any different than an umpire who loses the count insisting he's right despite everyone there knowing he's wrong? If an umpire says it's 3-2, it doesn't matter that the girl fouled off a pitch, took a strike looking, and then swung and missed. It's 3-2. (And lol at the idea of him deferring to the home team's scorebook)

If an umpire says there's three outs, if he feels like sticking with that, he can. It's a "point of fact," but if an umpire wants to make up facts, they can. They have. I see it more often than I should.

Establishing the number of outs is easy. Observers, even scorekeepers, don't always keep accurate track of a batter's count, but coaches and scorekeepers on both sides can quickly and unambiguously establish the number of outs. I've seen a single umpire momentarily confused and consult the Home scorebook. If the other team objected, they would need to produce their own for comparison. If I have a well kept scorebook, and especially if there are opposing scorebooks that agree, and the umpire won't budge (never seen it), I'm calling the TD/UIC over to discuss. I'd bet money on the outcome.

 

[Agcy]

There are several examples where the statement by an umpire (even appropriately affect what the players do:
- Umpire calls ball 4 on a near swing and runner at first starts walking to second - late appeal from catcher gets a strike call from field ump - can the runner between first and third be thrown out?
- Pickoff at third - maybe the field ump calls out and the runner surrenders (to be tagged again) but on appeal, the PU sees the tag missed - is the runner out anyway?

If the umpire said/did something (even though they shouldn't have) that players react to, they have the right to negate any advantage or disadvantage that they they erroneously created. I've seen TB where the field was emptied between innings before the scorekeeper had enough gumption to talk to the umpire and confirm with the opposing scorekeeper. Those ump's may be on their 4th+ game and the situations blur together. Better to keep it fair than to take advantage of an umpire's mistake.

 

[CoachJD]

Establishing the number of outs is easy. Observers, even scorekeepers, don't always keep accurate track of a batter's count, but coaches and scorekeepers on both sides can quickly and unambiguously establish the number of outs. I've seen a single umpire momentarily confused and consult the Home scorebook. If the other team objected, they would need to produce their own for comparison. If I have a well kept scorebook, and especially if there are opposing scorebooks that agree, and the umpire won't budge (never seen it), I'm calling the TD/UIC over to discuss. I'd bet money on the outcome.

Tournaments are a different animal.

My frame of reference is always high school ball where there isn't even a mechanism for protesting a game because the state association could not care less about the quality of officiating.

 

[CoachJD]

There are several examples where the statement by an umpire (even appropriately affect what the players do:
- Umpire calls ball 4 on a near swing and runner at first starts walking to second - late appeal from catcher gets a strike call from field ump - can the runner between first and third be thrown out?
- Pickoff at third - maybe the field ump calls out and the runner surrenders (to be tagged again) but on appeal, the PU sees the tag missed - is the runner out anyway?

If the umpire said/did something (even though they shouldn't have) that players react to, they have the right to negate any advantage or disadvantage that they they erroneously created. I've seen TB where the field was emptied between innings before the scorekeeper had enough gumption to talk to the umpire and confirm with the opposing scorekeeper. Those ump's may be on their 4th+ game and the situations blur together. Better to keep it fair than to take advantage of an umpire's mistake.

1) An umpire should not "call" ball 4. An umpire should say nothing, then appeal to the other umpire. If an umpire audibly yells "Ball 4" he probably should not grant the appeal, and if he does and a runner is put in jeopardy because of it, he should fix his mistake.
2) Why would the base umpire accept help on this play? If, for some reason he did (he really shouldn't), and the player is no longer out, just put her back on third.

 

[Agcy]

1) An umpire should not "call" ball 4. An umpire should say nothing, then appeal to the other umpire. If an umpire audibly yells "Ball 4" he probably should not grant the appeal, and if he does and a runner is put in jeopardy because of it, he should fix his mistake.
2) Why would the base umpire accept help on this play? If, for some reason he did (he really shouldn't), and the player is no longer out, just put her back on third.

1) Your umpires don't say "Ball" as well as "Strike"? Even if they don't say "Ball", unless they say "Strike", players are going to assume it was a ball and move forward as such. Umpires don't usually appeal to the other umpire unless the catcher asks them too - they called it the way they saw it. That appeal can take some time if the coach is asking the catcher to ask the umpire.

Some PU will yell ball almost as loud as strike and that gets confusing. I've read to say ball loud enough for the batter and catcher to know what is going on and strike loud enough for all the infield to hear.

2) IMO, when pressed/appealed, any good umpire should be willing to ask their partner if that have any other information pertinent to the call. Otherwise they are just arrogant jamokes out there. "Just put her back on third" is the point I was trying to make. Thank you.

 

[Strike2]

Tournaments are a different animal.

My frame of reference is always high school ball where there isn't even a mechanism for protesting a game because the state association could not care less about the quality of officiating.

Understand. I've never seen a school ball game with anything less than a two-man crew. I've never even heard of BOTH members of a two-man crew not knowing the correct number of outs, much less be unwilling to consider what the scorebooks say. If an umpire pulled that kind of BS with the local coach who has there for two-plus decades, they'd never work another game at that HS ever again. It's astonishing that such a thing could ever be an issue.

 

[Strike2]

1) An umpire should not "call" ball 4. An umpire should say nothing, then appeal to the other umpire. If an umpire audibly yells "Ball 4" he probably should not grant the appeal, and if he does and a runner is put in jeopardy because of it, he should fix his mistake.
2) Why would the base umpire accept help on this play? If, for some reason he did (he really shouldn't), and the player is no longer out, just put her back on third.

An umpire will call Ball 4 and motion the batter to 1B if he thinks it's ball four. If he does that, it's a done deal and there should be no further discussion unless the bat made contact with the ball and the PU somehow didn't see it. Then it's just a dead-ball. I've seen PUs ask on their own initiative with a check swing on ball four, but the PU doesn't have to ask for help on a ball call just because the catcher or the coach asks...it's purely discretionary. In some cases, the "appeal" is pointless because the position of the field umpire offers no better view than what the PU sees.

 

[Greatdaytobeawildcat]

1) An umpire should not "call" ball 4. An umpire should say nothing, then appeal to the other umpire. If an umpire audibly yells "Ball 4" he probably should not grant the appeal, and if he does and a runner is put in jeopardy because of it, he should fix his mistake.

Some depends on rule set. Baseball is much clearer in all the rule sets.

However in Babe Ruth softball for example (which mirrors the NCAA and OBR baseball rules, but not HS), a check swing appeal can only be made on the call of ball, the plate ump must check with his partner, and "baserunnners must be alert to the possibility that the base umpire may reverse the call of a ball to the call of a strike, in which event the runner is in jeopardy of being put out by the catcher's throw. Also, a catcher must be alert in a base stealing situation if a ball call is reversed to strike."

USA softball doesn't have much to say on check swings, except that "umpires should only check with the base umpire if they are in doubt about whether a swing occurred."

NCAA softball: "On a decision regarding a checked swing, when asked by the catcher, the plate umpire must seek a decision from the appropriate base umpire. Such a request may be made only when the plate umpire has called the pitch a ball"

 

[Agcy]

An umpire will call Ball 4 and motion the batter to 1B if he thinks it's ball four. If he does that, it's a done deal and there should be no further discussion unless the bat made contact with the ball and the PU somehow didn't see it. Then it's just a dead-ball. I've seen PUs ask on their own initiative with a check swing on ball four, but the PU doesn't have to ask for help on a ball call just because the catcher or the coach asks...it's purely discretionary. In some cases, the "appeal" is pointless because the position of the field umpire offers no better view than what the PU sees.

Technically not a dead ball. IE: A runner at 2 could steal 3rd while the batter-runner is advancing to first.

I don't think I have seen a PU ask for help voluntarily. I have seem many times the catchers asks him to check after the partial swing.

 

[Strike2]

Technically not a dead ball. IE: A runner at 2 could steal 3rd while the batter-runner is advancing to first.

I don't think I have seen a PU ask for help voluntarily. I have seem many times the catchers asks him to check after the partial swing.

A foul ball is a dead ball. I've seen PUs check with the Field immediately, most recently in college games. If they weren't doing it on their own, they were reading the catcher's mind.