"Gentlemen, he is out because I said he is out." ... Bill Klem

Here comes the throw, here comes the runner. A million things go through your mind in a few hundredths of seconds. Experience places you in position, your best 90 degrees to the play, all the time tracking the ball ... A clear tag before the runner's foot hit the plate.

"He's Out!" you exclaim, selling the call with the best of your ability. As you stand up you notice the ball rolling out behind through catcher's legs.

Same throw, same position but this time the catcher is moving up the line trying to snag the errant throw, make the tag, and completely obstruct your once clear view. The catch, well at least the attempt at the catch and the wild swipe tag as the glove smacks the runner. "OOOOOOOut!" noticing the ball never made it to the glove but is neatly concealed in the catcher's throwing hand.

Do you change your call? Should you change your call? Some arguments argue yes, some argue no, never.

Before entering into the should or shouldn't debate let's establish some potentially reversible calls: In each case let's also assume that it is an honest error, not some accident caused by rushed timing or being grossly out of position.

We are not discussing simple umpire error here also. Nothing an umpire says can detract from the correct call or the proper application of a rule. Several times I have witnessed umpires signal safe while exclaiming "Out". These are errors, maybe correctable, always blushable errors. We are examining situations where the umpire has made a clear judgment call that may, or may not be in error.

• On a close play you call the runner out but then notice the ball is rolling away.

• You signal a home run and notice your partner, the base umpire is suddenly attempting to stifle a foul ball call.

• None out with runners on first and third and you call "Infield Fly, the batter's out." The batter stops running and enters the dugout.

• On ball four the runner from first slides into second base being beaten by the throw from the catcher. The base umpire calls the runner out. The runner steps off the bag without requesting time and is tagged out, again, by the second baseman.

• You are watching a runner stealing second base when all of a sudden you hear the word "FOUL" come loudly from the plate. The runner lays up and is tagged. You look up in time to see the sign and hear the word "TIP."

• The runner goes for second ... U1 signals safe, U3 signals out! Who among us has not seen this classic World Series photo?

• On a dropped third strike the plate umpire calls "The batter's out!" The throw down to third is not in time to retire R2.

Do you live or die with the call?

There are of course errors created by plain bad umpiring, like the umpire who shuts down the play when he boldly calls "FAIR BALL." Several of the examples above are clear examples where poor technique and rushed calls lead to the wrong call.

These are the easiest calls to correct, however, they are the most likely calls not to be changed. Name a person who is not reluctant to have their mistakes laundered in public view? Umpires are no different. Even if you clearly know your call was in error should you reverse it?

Some calls are easy to reverse, if done quickly and with authority. "Out ... no, SAFE, SAFE, SAFE!!!!" The to-be-avoided "double-call" finds itself all the way from the sand lot to the professional fields. The obligatory visit from the coach is as much a part of the call as the call itself. You can even anticipate the conversation: "What was he Blue, out or safe?" The final line will always be the same: "At least make up your mind."

You cannot change a call if a significant period of time has elapsed. How significant? If after a few seconds you see that ball rolling away you will die with your call. The fielder had possession of the ball at the time of the tag, you had a valid reason for your call, where the ball ended up is of no consequence. The out will stand

Is their any situation where safe can become out? Is there any situation where foul can become fair?

The runner, going for home, slides and collides with the catcher: maybe he interfered with the catch, possibly he stripped the ball from the glove. Maybe the catch was off line and the catcher really moved into the runner who was diving at the plate.

This is one call you have to die with. If you signal and/or a runner safe, then he must remain safe. That does not mean you cannot subsequently eject the runner for unsportsmanlike conduct, but the run will score. If you call a ball foul at any time, that ball will remain foul with one exception. However, if you have called a runner safe, for any reason, I will maintain that the runner will remain safe with no exceptions!

When do we make the exception?

Finding situations when safe becomes out is not that simple, because they do not exist. Yes, there are numerous examples of a safe call becoming out but for another reason, for example: an appeal. There are many times when the out call becomes instantly safe. The opposite is not true.

We can all think of times where the umpires have figured critically into a game. The umpire who has stopped the play for no apparent reason, or called a "catch" when no one was even near the ball. The dropped ball, the out call on ball four. Allowing these calls to stand injects the umpire directly into the outcome of the game.

There is no such animal as the perfect game. It has never been and never will be pitched, called, officiated or played. Working to minimize error is the hallmark of the umpire and a sign of quality. Being humble enough to ask for assistance and correct a blown call is a sign of maturity. Knowing when to take the call and die with it is a sign of wisdom.

.... posted December 21, 1997

I want to start out without giving my opinion. Just facts.

First of all, for a discussion of calls that can be changed, see The Umpire's Why? Answer Book by Carl Childress, A Referee magazine publication. (Chapter 6)

Secondly, I submit the wording from Rule 9.05c:

... the proper umpire can always right a manifestly wrong decision when convinced he has made an error....The first requisite is to get decisions correctly...Umpire dignity is important but never as important as "being right"

Having pointed out these things, I attempt to give you my reasoned (I hope) opinion which does not take into account what the rules say. This is Joel's rule:

To me, the whole issue becomes one of integrity. There are purists out there who would argue that a judgment call can and should never be changed. Never, never, never they tell us, and they use rules, tradition and past practice to back up their argument. If you kick the call, you've kicked it and there is nothing you can do except get the next one right. Simple, and not very mentally or emotionally challenging.

I would argue that those umpires are hiding from personal scrutiny that they do not want to inflict on themselves. Yes, to err is human, but do not write it off so easily. Our biggest obligation is right there in 9.05c - get the call right. That may mean that we have to admit to ourselves and the whole world that is watching that we blew it. If that means change the call, then that is what you do. How else can we ever claim to have any personal integrity? How else can we reconcile our responsibility to the players and coaches and to our partners and regard ourselves as being honest and possessing integrity? How do we look at ourselves in the mirror the next day?

When we know that the call is wrong, it must be reversed. I am not saying to go to another umpire seeking reversal of a call. I mean if I make it and I know for whatever reason I am wrong. Free time must be given to both managers, and there should seldom be an ejection that arises from this type of play and the ensuing discussion, since I will do everything in my power to keep them in the game. I know what I am suggesting is contrary to what baseball teaches, and I know that the situations with baserunners and runs scoring will cause a great deal of grief, but ultimately we need to provide a fair chance to both teams to win and accord equal treatment to both teams by ensuring that we do whatever it takes to get it right.

Yes, it take guts - probably a lot more guts than saying I can't change it no matter what. I think that players will accept it if you operate by admitting and correcting errors.

That's my 2 cents worth.

Joel Balberman
Brantford, Ontario

"A person can succeed at almost anything for which they have unlimited enthusiasm."

I kind of live by the motto (which I made up) "An umpire cannot change the rules by accidentally saying the wrong thing." By this I mean, the rules must be followed despite the fact that you screwed up and made a call too soon or missed the tag, or contradicted your partner, etc.

On a close judgment call, yes, you do not change your call. That's a case where the tag is made the ball is not dropped and only a slo-mo replay can truly determine if the foot hit the bag before the ball touched the foot. The runner says the foot was in there, you say no. That's what you're out there for, to make the judgment calls.

However, if a clear error on the part of the umpire is made, if at all possible it must be rectified. The rules require us to get the calls right! Here are some of my thoughts:

If I holler out something that is factually wrong, and that announcement alters the play to such a degree that a runner or fielder fails to make the play he would have had I kept my mouth shut or said the right thing, or if he is somehow grievously disadvantaged, I'm killing the play. I call time and find a way to rectify the situation. There was an example of this that you actually described in your article. You wrote : "On ball four the runner steals second is tagged out...." That play actually happened in game 3 of the NLCS this year. Lofton was stealing on 3-2. It was ball 4, U2 called him out on the tag, Lofton gets up and off the bag hollers, "it was a walk!", they tagged him again. Big argument. Umps decided they blew it and put Lofton back on second.

Some of my own "highlights:"

1. R1 is stealing, the ball is a foul tip. I holler "FOUL!" too soon, a bite my lip. Runner slows down to go back, a rundown play starts on him. I killed it, I put R1 at second because, in my judgment he would have made it.
2. Ball is grounded to F5. He comes home to get R3 trying to score. Close play but R3 gets in under the tag. I yell "Safe!" F2 throws the ball to try and get R1, now caught between second and third. Then, F2 looks at me like I have two heads. I suddenly remember the base were loaded and it was a force. Since there were 2 outs the other runners were still running. I kill it. Put the other runners back on their bases, apologize to everybody, and changed the call to out. Out #3.
3. I am the base ump. Throw to F3 is wide to the left, he catches it off the bag. B1 manages to make it to first. I call "Safe" F3 complains, "I tagged him!" (I never saw a tag.) However, I check with UIC who is on the line. "Did he tag the runner?" I shout. "Yes he did!" UIC tells me. We have to make it Out.

Conversely, I've seen guys stand by clearly bad calls that should have been reversed. The ugliness of the arguments that these cases created are off the scale! An the stubborn umpire then makes us all look bad.

My feeling is that the lower the age level of play the more important it is to keep the complete appearance of fairness in the game at all times. Whenever, an umpire mistake confuses the players or alters the expected course of play, you have to nullify it and make thing fair.

Now, if you say the RIGHT thing and confuse people, that's too bad. Suppose the umpire sees the ball land just inside the line and hollers, "FAIR BALL!" and some runners think they heard "foul ball." Well, it was a fair ball! The umpire didn't follow expected procedure, but he was right! In this case, despite the confusion whatever happens has to stand.

Richard Siegel
Hillsborough NJ