|
I think it is unfortunate that some clearly fail to recognize that the attitude with which they walk onto a field is more often than not clearly evident to everyone else there. And that applies to players, coaches, and umpires. If you are in "confrontation mode" from the outset, it can do nothing but create a confrontation situation which is rarely a good thing. I don't know how you can possibly walk onto a field with the attitude all coaches are rats and all players are baby rats and not think it effects how you call a game and I would submit that it effects it in a bad way. Why the seeming prevalent belief that one must have this sort of attitude to correctly call a game? I just don't get it.
Personally I try to remember that the coaches have a vested interested in seeing the play the way the want to see it. It may be because it's part of their livelyhood, or an ego thing, or simply because his kid is on the team. Yeah, some coaches are a pain, but I really think the ones that are truly worthy of the rat title are few and far between unless I adopt the attitude that any question is an assault on my integrity which will escalate the confrontation. Got news for ya, it's not. They are doing their job just as I'm doing mine of being an impartial enforcer of the rules. If I begin to drift into the "this guy and all like him are rats" thinking then I can't see how impartiallity is possible.
So to end this long boring post, I'll simply relate a recent story about a coach coming out to question a call. He didn't like it, it cost him a run, but I gave him his say. In response I phrased my answer so that he clearly knew what I saw, why I ruled in such a manner and made it clear I didn't hold it against him. As he turned to leave, I heard this comment from the nearby stands (his side btw). "Wow, an umpire with a sense of humor. I didn't know we had any of those around here".
|