Quote:
Originally posted by cmcallm
HisHoliness? God himself? PLEASE...
As I have said in other threads, in all clinics and camps I am involved with as an instructor, I stress that whatever mechanics you are presented with, from whatever source, they should be taken as GUIDELINES, and not as rules set in stone. Find something mechanically that works for you, and then work it to death! The more things we can do mechanically that we don't have to think about, the better we will be able to focus on the play and the call. That's why we don't get "good" at balls and strikes until we've looked at a few hundred thousand! That's why we also stress getting instruction and suggestions and critiques from as many sources as you can in an ongoing umping career. Something you don't know may be a better way fpr you!
|
CM,
I agree with you.
Except when it's evaluation time. If we have the luxury of loosening the mechanics guidelines, then great! Otherwise, we'd better stick to the book else our ratings will drop.
I don't know about you, but I want those post-season assignments. In order to get them, when
my evaluators are concerned, I need to do what
they expect me to do. I suppose I wish I was lucky enough to have evaluators who would let me loosen the guidelines a bit. But I don't.
There is one board that I know of whose members police themselves. They rate their partners. That's another example of when we should stick as close to the book as possible. I don't want my partner turning me in because I moved to deep "B" with the bases loaded and the infield in.
Anyhow, you're right for the most part. But we need to be careful. There are some dictators out there who require us to do what they want, and not necessarily what works best for us. And until we play their game and eventually move up to where we're calling the shots, those guys hold our futures in the pen that writes on the evaluation sheet.