Quote:
Originally posted by Rich Ives
Two points.
1) Most youth league umpires are not Wannabee NCAA or top FED umpires and have neither the time not inclination to be one. They just want to improve what they do for their youth leagues. And so what if there are thousands of the top dogs. Based on player participation numbers, there are probably 10 times as many youth league umpires as top echelon umpires This means there are a significant number of folks who are not at all affected by upper echelon hooey, and most don't care. His opinion, alone or shared, still represents a minority. (The notion that it has to apply to everyone is where the intolerant thought originates.) Which leads to
2) How sad it is that the top dogs don't, or refuse to, recognize this.
|
How sad that LL umpires have no inclination to move up the ladder. Even sadder is the fact that most LL umpires are incapable of moving of the ladder after years of learning bad habits in LL. As has been noted on this forum many times, after a while most LL umpires become untrainable for big boy ball because of years of developing bad habits.
Tee's opinion may be in a minority when it comes to all umpires if you count LL umpires as umpires. That's like saying that doctors are in a minority when it comes to health care professionals. That's true, they are a minority of health care professionals but their opinions are the ones that count when it comes to setting the standard of care for the health care profession. Judges are the minority of the law enforcement profession but their opinions are what count in setting the standard for the law enforcement profession. MLB and NCAA umpires are the minority of the baseball officiating profession but their opinions are what counts in setting the standard. Would it hurt LL umpires to follow their lead? It would certainly benefit those that ultimately decide they want to move up the food chain. Right now, they are locked into a ghetto forever.