Quote:
Originally Posted by kylejt
Easy now, fellas. WP is in agreement with the procedure of benching the kid, instead of the EJ. There's just no current mechanism for it.
So what's the beef with dumping the manager who tries to roll you? Would it be better to just eject the player instead, which in most people's opinion, is way too harsh? So the umpire is trying to be nice, and keep the kid from having to stay home for the next game, and the manager tries to take advantage of it? Well gents, that's pretty unsportsmanlike.
If the next guy wants to play that game, I guess that kid wasn't actually sick/injured/benched after all. He was ejected.
Next.
And not that it's ever come to that. I've only had it come up a couple of times over the years. The managers were appriciative of having that option, and thanked me. Nobody in their right mind wants to eject a little kid over this, 'cause that's who does this sort of stuff. It's not HS kids, or other teenagers. It's 9 year olds. Ejecting an 9 year old for stuff like this will sour his baseball experience, and that of his folks. No need for it.
|
I agree, WP says to eject him. After all, that's how you, as an umpire, bench a kid.
The coach isn't rolling you, because there is no "mechanism" for permanently benching a player other than ejection which you did not do. You, the umpire, are the one breaking (well, ignoring) rules. Maybe you should eject yourself?
Philosophically, I agree that ejection for this at this age is harsh. I also have a problem with baseball not having an intermediate step before ejection like the yellow card in soccer. However, this is a change that has to be made at a much higher level than the umpire on the field. Your way is just a renegade umpire ignoring the rules.