Those who rescinded their resignations did so because they were suggested to do so by those who never resigned in the first place. For the most part, there were three "groups" of umpires, for lack of better terminology. One group consisted of the ardent Phillips supporters, one group the opposite, while a small group of guys were kind of in the middle, wondering what they should do. Some of the old guard tried to convince them to stay united, while others tried to convince them not to go down that road. Understandably, several of these guys were young or new umps. Do they align with the longtime veterans, or do they align with those who felt some longtime veterans were a bit too arrogant and out of touch? I'm sure it wasn't easy.
The group of guys opposed to Richie's actions simply believed that the constant anti-management attitude wasn't helping their cause. They felt that trying to work with their superiors to improve umpiring altogether was a laudable path on which to embark. Those who were adamant Richie supporters felt otherwise. I'm not saying one group or another was correct--I'll leave that to history's judgment, or someone else's judgment.
My lack of sympathy is for those guys who, after resigning and refusing to see what was going on, years later complained about being out of a job. I suppose it was a big gamble either way, but in that case, the dice came up with numbers that didn't go their way.
For the record, I personally do not take a side as to whether the old guard or new guard was/is correct. I have friends involved on both sides, and this is one subject I generally don't bring up with them.
Having said all this, I still say Alderson's an idiot.
