[BlueLawyer]

WWTB: here are my points. Again.

1. I can disagree with you without being disagreeable. I can disagree with your call without thinking you suck as an umpire or as a human being. I can disagree with your internet post, and say so, without engaging in character assassination. I can disagree with you without calling you names, questioning your ancestary or in general telling you that you are the biggest idiot ever to don a mask.

2. We (officials) are all in this together, to some degree, greater or lesser. My fellow blues are my competition, true. But before that they are my colleagues and my teammates. If they succeed, to some extent, I succeed. If this wasn't true, I'd throw my partner under the bus every time he booted a call and say something to the effect of "You're right, coach. He really does suck. I can't believe he's working this level of ball either."

If you don't think this is family, I have genuine sorrow for you.

Criticism is indeed the path to better officiating, and therefore, ultimately, better competition. Criticism should be constructive to acheive its intended goal, however. "Zega, you should have been deeper at C to see the play better. Here's where you need to be," works much better than, "Zega, you suck. That's something I would expect from a University of Arkansas grad. Quit umpiring now and save us all the embarassment of you being on the field. I hope you law better than you ump, or you're going to starve."

"I'm in it for me. Only me. Period." That attitude will lead to an awfully lonely and unfulfilling career. IMHO.

Strikes and outs!