[tcblue13]

Originally Posted by Dakota

Not being an innovator in the field of umpire mechanics, I just do what I am told / taught as best I can.

However, one of the long-standing criticisms of ASA umpire mechanics is the lack of individualism - "robots" is a term you hear from time to time.

Is it possible this trend toward individual preferences on the part of the NUS / national clinicians is a reaction to that criticism? Is it possible this move toward individualism is not reflective of a loss of control from national HQ but rather a purposeful national direction?

Just wondering...

The lack of individualism in terms of being an umpire would be a good thing. If you are a coach and you see two "people in blue" walking on to the field and you could care less who they are or who has the plate because you know that their mechanics will be consistent, your job has just gotten easier because you can concentrate on coaching.

I am doing men's modified ball now (NSA) and there is no consistent mechanics for the BU and that is driving me nuts. "Whatever works for you" is a cruddy way to manage that aspect of the game. Some guys work inside, some outside. Some work on the left side of 2B with runners on 2B and 3B and others will work the right side. About the only thing that is consistent is that they absolutely don't want fed mechanics at "C position"

I guess if you want individualism, Look to Lt. Frank Drebin for your called 3K mechanics.