If nothing else, I'm known to question the status quo. So, with apologies to Simon and Garfunkel for
the title of this post, I'm doing it again.
The current trend is that plate umpires are taught and expected to
use the "hammer" on strike calls.
The mechanics are below.
Perfectly fine, but I prefer the "point" and
here's why.
I have a degree in computer science, and so I have a bias
against ambiguity in language. For example, in JavaScript
(and other languages), the plus sign can be used for addition or concatenation,
depending on whether both operands are numeric or at least one of them is a
string. This ambiguity or double-meaning
of the operator symbol only causes trouble. Why not use the period for
concatenation? But I digress…
My point is that I don't like signals having two different
meanings, and the "hammer" can mean either a strike or an out call. Why does this matter?
I mainly umpire youth baseball, so let's consider the young
batter who may have just moved up to a level where a dropped third strike
allows the batter to become a runner (with first base unoccupied or with two
out). He may be new to the rule and just
learning. Now look at the hammer
mechanics again, if used on a dropped third strike.
First he hears the strike call, and then he may look
straight back to the umpire and see the hammer, especially if there is a good
and deliberate delay between the verbal and signal. Once he sees the hammer, he may interpret it
as an out call, curse his fate, and not run.
Yes, it's his bad, but our signal isn't helping matters. And yes, the proper mechanics tell us to
follow the strike call with a safe sign and a verbal "no catch" or
something similar, but by that time the batter would have lost the valuable
split second (and mental edge) needed to vacate the batter's box before an easy
tag by the catcher.
Now, if the same batter turns to the umpire after a dropped third
strike and sees the "point," there's no confusing the signal with an
out call, and so he may realize that he's entitled to run even before we give
the safe/"no catch" call, and may vacate the batter's box in time to
force a throw by the catcher. And if he
doesn't, and the catcher applies a quick tag, I can use the hammer to signal
the batter out without it looking like I'm just repeating my strike three call.
When the catcher does catch the third strike, or if first is
occupied with less than two out, I can use the point followed by the hammer to
call the batter out.
Also, to clarify, when I use the point mechanic, I keep my
eyes forward as I point with my right hand toward the dugout area. I'm not turning my head and facing the dugout
while I make my call (as shown in the graphic to the left), which I realize can lead to problems. And I don't think it can ever be confused
with a "did he go?" mechanic on a check swing, where I would use the
left hand instead and point directly to the base umpire, not the dugout. And nobody has given me any grief about using
the point, but I just seem to be in the minority of umpires who do.
So, I'm just wondering, why is the point mechanic being
phased out? Your thoughts?
For the hammer to be done correctly, the voice and the mechanic should be done at the same time. This helps with any possible ambiguity -- plus it just plain looks better.
ReplyDeleteIMO, Too many guys that use the point rather than a hammer do look where they are pointing rather than concentrate on what's going on in the field and keeping their head focused on that runner(s) on base.
ReplyDeleteJust my thoughts.
I use the point but as has been mentioned I keep my eyes square to the field unless the bases are empty !
ReplyDelete