Quote:
|
Originally Posted by mcrowder
You warned him. What is a warning for? If you cannot follow through on your own warnings, you are carpet, and word WILL get around amongst the coaches. Ignore/Inform, Warn, Eject. Not warn, warn, warn, warn, warn, warn, eject. A coach gets ONE "Coach, that's enough" or "Coach, we're going to play ball now." 2 minutes is ridiculously long for a discussion with a coach - 10 is amazingly unheard of, we should call Guinness.
|
I completely agree. The thing that stuck out most for me is that "three specific warnings" were issued. That's at least two too many.
In my opinion, a warning is only warranted when an ejectionable violation has not yet occurred but seems likely to occur if not redirected. If the warning is not heeded, then he's gone. But in this example, the coach could/should have been ejected earlier whether or not a warning was issued (he physically touched the umpire).
One of my pet peeves is players/coaches who think they can get away with anything until they get a warning. I've tossed guys for swearing at me, and they then go ballistic and demand that they were entitled to a warning. They're not. If they haven't crossed the ejection line, I may issue a warning, but if they've gone too far, it's good night.
But I can sympathize with you, Pat. Assuming you're a relatively new umpire (as am I), one of the school-of-hard-knocks lessons is learning where to draw that ejection line. I'm still learning it. And it's much easier to sit here and analyze someone else's situation after the fact.