Quote:
Originally posted by Tim C
Chad said:
"I have been umpiring 8 years . . . "
I think we need to be careful when we use resume builders like this statement.
Example:
Umpire "A" has worked two years of t-ball, two years of Coach pitch, two years of LL Minors and two years of LL majors. That is eight years.
Umpire "B" went to professional umpire school and worked two years of minor league baseball, four years of high school varsity baseball and then two years of NCAA D1 baseball. That is also eight years.
Which umpire would mostly likely be the better source of information about umpiring?
Tee
|
If the umpire seeking information only works youth ball - I can see where Umpire "A" may have more to offer since he has more experience in that area.
Here's why - Firstly, more concentration has to be placed on unusual things that can happen. Because they are much more likely to happen in a game between 12-yr-olds than 25-yr-olds.
Secondly, certain hard-nosed techniques don't work very well with kids. For instance, when working a game with 12-yr-olds, I
may make a quick comment to the pitcher that he needs to come set longer. If he were 25-yrs-old, I would just balk him without warning.
But, in general, you're right. I think Umpire "B" would probably have a lot more to offer about the technical interpretation of rules, but not
necessarily, since rule knowledge is the one thing that actually *can* come from books, study, and discussion. Umpire "A" may be a student of the rules for all we know. He
may be able to go toe-to-toe with Umpire "B" in the area of rules knowledge.
Umpire "B" will probably have some more advanced game management techniques and has had an opportunity to hone those skills on the larger diamond.
According to your stated progression of these two hypothetical umpires, I'd have to say it's apples and oranges. One is probably better at what *he* does whereas the other is better at what *he* does. And, let's face it, both are in two totally different baseball worlds.
David Emerling
Memphis, TN