Quote:
Originally Posted by mbcrowder
jr - even in the ridiculous extremes (which you must admit were WAY beyond what actually happened to you), finish the game, go home, don't work for the guy again. Eventually he'll chase everyone off and have no one to work for him, or will piss off enough TD's or HS's that no one asks him to schedule their games for them. In your case, you should have never gotten anywhere near thinking of walking off - and your insistence that you were right to do so tells me you might get there again. Don't. That gets around - and regardless of circumstance, I'd be reluctant to schedule someone that left the field mid-game because they didn't like what was going on ... EVEN if they were right.
That said... you say there was no protest. Why were you talking to ANYONE not on the field then? You guys need to work on protocol. First - YOU should have never let a 2nd coach anywhere near the discussion. Second - after PU talked to coach, he should have either made a ruling and moved on (ON HIS OWN) or talked with you and the two of you make a ruling and move on. If a coach doesn't like it, he has the magic word to use and THEN you bring in external help - don't EVER EVER EVER do it on your own. If he doesn't use the magic word, play ball.
|
point taken from the 1st paragraph.
i admit i should have stopped the OC from approaching the PU. but the PU wanted to involve the TD right away instead of first discussing the situation with me.
one of the reasons why the assn wanted me, among other ASA umps, involved is bc their umps arent very good. my partner that day had already blown a few rule interpretation calls and quite frankly i dont think he knew how to remotely rule on this situation, which probably was his rationale for immediately involving the TD. hes good at making judgment calls, just not as good with rules as he could be.
but all in all, i appreciate the discussion. if i knew i was 100% correct in my threatened actions, i wouldnt have posted for others to critique. while i can see how one would read this and think i was insistent that i was right, heres what pretty much verbatim what i told the PU and TD after the TD pulled some ruling out of his *ss, the 4th male batter has not come to bat yet, correct? there is no rule saying a female cant sub for a male, correct? if the team subs a female in for the male thats due up, there wont be 4 male batters in a row, correct? so why are we punishing an action that hasnt occurred yet? even after agreeing with me on those questions, another ruling was going to be invoked. then after the UIC was conferred with an offered his ruling, the OC asked me if that was a rule, i replied there is no rule that calls for the ejection of the batter due up, and furthermore there is no rule saying once a player is ejected, the team has to play with 9 on defense and an 'auto out' on offense. once the PU said thats what the UIC wants, i told him, if thats whats going to occur, theres no need for me to be here and i will leave.
to me, its not a matter of me being right, its a matter of the integrity of the game being right.