[Rich Ives]

CC wrote: "We've filled many pages in discussing 'the accepted call,' the neighborhood play at second, the phantom tag."

There have been many threads over the years on these and similar subjects.

Example: One author wrote recently that a MLB umpire said that "a strike is when I call it and they don't *****". I would submit that this doesn't cover the gray area where the batter and catcher have different opinions,

Another example: Paid umpires, and most volunteer umpires, take it as a matter of pride and professionalism to dress properly. Keep those hackles under control. It's not limited to umpires. It's a philosophy that fits most of society. OTOH, one of the writers here quoted a D1 coach as saying that the creased pants only mattered up to the first pitch. I wrote that I don't care what you wear as long as you can "umpire".

A question on "accepted calls." Are they accepted because the participants think it's OK (or normal) or because they know they can't change it? Do they wish it would change? Same thought on neighborhood plays.

When a coach tells you he understands what you are doing is he really just avoiding confrontation and/or future bad feelings?

Umpires (except HHH) write about dumb coaches and of discussing them over a beverage after the game. (Coaches talk about the umpires too folks).

Some of you welcome evaluations by coaches. Some of you think they're not capable of accurately writing one. Does this reflect truth or aprehension?

For the most part though, what we have here and on the other umpire/rules boards is umpires debating with other umpires on all these issues.

So I would challenge Carl to get, and the participants to tolerate, articles by HS and D1 coaches on the subject(s) of how calls are made and games managed versus what they'd like to see - and if there is a difference. Find several in each category, from various sections of the country. Don't you really want to know - deep down inside?