[LIUmp]

You nailed it Andy. This is exactly what my umpiring group is....about 6 in 10 just care to collect their check and really haven't been properly trained, mentored, or supervised prior to this year. Very few of our umpires are "spring chickens" to boot.

I tread lightly when dealing with the training of these guys, as most don't really care to hear much and just look at it as a day they have to sit around and listen to someone else talk and they go only because it's mandatory. We have lost a lot of work due to some of these guys and their work ethic and rules knowledge, so at this point, and in this economy, I want them to understand how important it is to go out and give your best. If we want to keep the leagues we have and reclaim those we've lost, we need to be better. Period.

I'm fighting a very uphill battle, but I'm one of our "spring chickens" and I'm determined, for the good of the game and the players, to do my best to help us all get better.

Yes it does make sense to break them into years of experience, as that is not subjective. However, there are guys, many of them to be exact, who have 10+ years experience, who are just as weak as those with 1 year. And they need to hear the basics just as badly as those new guys do. Like nyssoblue said, the inexperienced guys have clean slates, and easy to break habits.

A few of the guys in my association who are UIC's got together and "rated" the umpires according to ability level recently. I was thinking that we could just make it look "random" and split them up according to ability level, so the guys who ARE stronger umpires do not need to listen to basics and can work on the more advanced topics, while the weaker guys can get the basics.

For some, it will be in one ear and out the other. And they will argue that they aren't getting big tournament games. The reason is, and they will be told, that their umpiring skill level is not meeting that standard yet. Hopefully this will work.

Any thoughts?