As a long time coach and rookie umpire I still like the "keep the coach in the game philosophy". As a coach, there was nothing I hated worse than an umpire refusing to ask for help. I learned pretty early to treat the umpire with respect and formulate whatever question would lead the partners together. I totally agree with ignoring the charging, loud coach and have no patience for coaches that do not know how to ask for help even after it is explained in the pre-game conference. If the coach cannot call time, and approach at least somewhat calmly without shouting across the field then I believe we should listen. I used to hear the phrase "try to keep the coach in the game", "ask for help if the question warrants it" Now the phrases seem to be "don't embarrass your partner", "don't make another umpire have to throw him out later"
I still do not see what is wrong with a conference with your partner to defuse an emotional coach. I really don't care what the fans are saying: we deal with the coaches and if a conference will defuse the situation and keep the coach in the game I am in favor of having the conference. I disagree with this "it's my call, I saw it and am not going to ask for help philosophy" Yes, I've heard the don't make your partner the bad guy response. As a team on the field, if asking for help keeps the coach in the game, I do not care if my partner makes me the bad guy.
Many of the responses here are very helpful to me seeing how other umpires handle the situations, the sequence of asking the coach what his question is and examples of questions that warrant asking for help are great. Even though I disagree with the "don't ask for help", I abide by it since our association teaches that response when we know we've seen the play. imho
Of course as a rookie it could be argued that I do not know when I've seen the play
