Quote:
Originally Posted by jr131981
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.
|
And I hate to say it, but you sometimes have to let your partner handle things in his own without you swooping in to help him, even if it means they're put in a tough spot with a coach for a game. It's the only way some of these guys are going to learn to fend for themselves out there. By swooping in to save him like that, you teach him that someone else will always come and make it all better.
You're also taking away every ounce of authority that he had left. You might as well announce, "this umpire is clueless, and he needs me, the veteran, to fix everything for him." Don't do that. Teams listen to and respect our calls because we make them believable. They need to trust that each umpire knows what s/he should call, even if s/he doesn't. They need that believability. Swooping in to help a rookie umpire without
him asking you for your opinion takes all that away. Next time, put a sign on his back that says "Student Umpire" like we do with high school kids taking driver's ed.
I'm 34 years old, so I know people look at me as a "young umpire," despite the fact I've been calling games for 19 years. I had a partner try to pull that crap on me at a National a few years ago, specifically coming to talk to me about a call I'd just made in order to "make sure" I got it right. After the game, I made it clear that in no uncertain terms was he to never pull that s*** on me again. It comes off as "rescuing" a lesser umpire, and I wasn't going to effing having that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jr131981
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.
|
I understand and appreciate you wanting to "get it right," especially for the teams' sake. That's always a good goal. Just make sure you do it the
right way without throwing your partner under the bus.