Quote:
|
Originally Posted by lawump
Exactly...the team's front office official (i.e. the team's President in the that story) says, "everything's going great. The replacements are doing just as good a job." (to paraphrase). Of course he would say that, he's clearly on the managment side of the MiLB/AMLU debate. His immediate boss, and the person he represents, is the team owner(s) who will have to pay the umps more. I haven't seen one team or league President (or team owner) say anything different.
However, in the same story, his own on-the-field manager says, (to paraphrase again) "No one should worry about the replacements, but we need the regulars back." Of course, he won't say anything bad about the replacements ...he's worried they'll read what he says because he still has to deal with them every day. But, there's no hiding that he clearly states that he wants the regulars back.
Seems to be that's another story of an on-field manager, coach or farm director saying we need the regulars back, despite what the person who signs their paycheck thinks.
|
Let's be fair! If managements positive comments about replacements are going to be disregarded because of their financial motives, then let's be sure to disregard the on-field managers remarks because he certainly has a vested interest in making nice to the regulars. No manager wants to be on the wrong side of the regulars when they finally come back.
Once you start justifying a position based on cynicism and conspiratorial thinking remember it goes both ways.
When I make a call on a banger I predictably have half the players, coaches and spectators thinking I'm a great umpire (for the moment anyway) and half think I blew the call. I really believe that most on either side of the call truly believe they're right. They saw the action and interpreted it for the outcome they desired. A runner can be out by 8 inches and the offensive team will truly believe he was safe.
This is exactly what's happening in this debate. Those with a vested interest in the regulars succeeding in their strike are going to interpret all action on the field as bad umpiring by the replacements. Management on the other hand certainly will tend to view things slightly different. Those without a dog in the hunt may be able to be a bit more objective.
I certainly hope for the best for the regulars. Unfortunately, if their success depends on the failure of the replacements I'm afraid they won't be too happy with the results. I'm with Justme on this one, there are many more than 220 capable umpires out here willing to work at the current scale. Supply and demand is an economic reality, not a theory that can be easily discarded.