I think that is the dumbest thing EVER taught for umpire mechanics... the home plate umpire covering third... when runners are on first and second.
Oh, I could probably think of at least one or two things that are dumber!
You got an umpire in between second and third already... why in the heck would the plate umpire cover third on a play.
Because the base umpire is supposed to be watching the play at first base and all of the trailing runners. If he's watching third, who's watching for obstruction or missed bases at first and second?
If the umpires stayed in their position... field between second and third base and plate around the home area....... then the plate umpire could have seen the pulled foot at first.
Keep in mind that the base umpire shouldn't just be planted in one spot between second and third. He should be gaining ground, distance and angle toward first for the call there.
If you think that the plate umpire should be watching first on this play, yet you think he should still be in the vicinity of the plate, then he is going to be making a long distance call from an inferior angle. And if he does move up the line toward first, he is abandoning the best position to make a possible call at home. If he moves out if front of the plate to watch first, then he is putting himself in the direct line of fire for any potential throw coming home.
I seen that same mechanics used in Columbus last year... plate umpire running up to third... ball over thrown and girl takes off for home .. throw.. play at home.. close play... and NO umpire there. He is still 3/4 up the third base line....LOL.
Then the umpire was out of position either because he ignored the standard mechanics or didn't hustle.
Standard mechanics tell the plate umpire to move up the foul line in fair territory, then cut into the diamond to make the call at third. If the ball gets past third, you return directly to the plate area, staying in fair ground and moving parallel to the line right back to the plate.
Umpire mechanics aren't just random opinions printed in a book. They are based on over a hundred years of the mechanics evolving and changing, designed to cover the most likely outcomes on most plays and provide the best coverage possible with a given number of umpires.
Sure, there are pros and cons to any mechanic. But the mechanics have been distilled over the years with that in mind. The pros and cons have already been weighed by those publishing the umpire manuals. There shouldn't be any need for each individual umpire to decide which mechanic works and which one doesn't.
Which do you think is most likely to cause the biggest problems in a game?
A) If both umpires are familiar with the same mechanics and stick with them, knowing which umpire is responsible for covering which plays?
B) If the umpires decide to deviate from the standard mechanics, switching coverages on a whim so that the responsibilty for calls will vary from play to play, using coverages that one umpire or the other may not be familiar with or has never used before?