Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Reed
If you really don't want to answer any questions about the ejection, notice that you aren't required to state a reason for the ejection. So you can make it even shorter.
But why on earth are you unwilling to answer some questions about the ejection? Of course by rule the player will have to sit out a game, but depending on the severity of the action, the AD may want to take additional action. In fact, quoting from the link yawetag provided, "The MHSAA will request that the administrations of the schools involved conduct internal investigations and voluntarily take punitive or remedial action."
|
First of all this is a silly policy. You should never have to speak to someone that is not in an official capacity to understand the role of an official. Even if he answers the question I am not sure what that has to do with the policy, which is why I said this is a silly policy in the beginning. The only people Mark should be discussing the ejection with is the state association (MHSAA in this case) or the assignor.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Reed
I would expect that the AD would like to know whether the ejection was automatic or if additional bad behavior aggravated the offense. He'd probably like to get a sense if the F-bomb was a single event or an escalation of profanity. He undoubtably knows that umpires vary widely in their tolerance for profanity, and in which words an umpire considers to be profanity. I suppose that the AD would like to have a short discussion to get more color than is likely to be included in the ejection report. He can then compare that information with the account that the player and coach provide, and decide what additional punitive or remedial action is needed.
|
That might be true, but I they do not need to have that conversation with the umpire/official in question. And certainly not asking questions of what is the personal policy on ejections. If there is an inconsistency in the application of usage of language, that that up with the state or the assignor to get umpires trained better to follow a set policy or standard.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Reed
And in this case I suppose that, justified or not, he suspects the ejecting official is an a**hole who won't even answer a simple polite question. He'll probably decide that no additional action is required.
|
Who cares what the AD thinks? I know I do not. I work for the assignor that happens to send me to that school. If the AD has a problem with my job, take that up with the assignor and if the assignor thinks I am not doing a good job, I will not be back. Most smart ADs I know do not get involved in that kind of thing as that is what the assignor is to do, hire the best people for the job.
Also I did once eject a coach and the Principal called me the next day. It was not my requirement to call anyone at the school, but that situation I did have a conversation because it was clear that the Principal was trying to figure out if this person was fit for a job at a public school and setting an example. I was not asked or it was not implied that I was not doing my job. This Principal just wanted to know what the rules were for the ejection, not making value judgments of the decision. BTW, that coach was later released from his job and one of the reasons was repeated incidents from what I understand.
Peace