Quote:
Originally posted by PeteBooth
...[snip]...
Also, was I correct in what I did or should I have kept my mouth shut and "bit the bullet"?
Pete Booth
|
Pete,
I can honestly say I've NEVER overruled a partner, so I won't address the first question. Instead I'll confine myself to the second one, which is quoted above.
NO, you were NOT correct and YES you should have kept your mouth shut and "bit the bullet".
There are a couple of important principles and issues involved here so please forgive me if I reiterate a them, if not for you then at least for the benefit of others.
I have talked about interpretation of legislation before, and I mentioned a concept of following the
specific in preference to the
general where there is an apparent conflict. That is clearly the case with this situation.
You have a
specific direction NOT to overrule or criticise your partner in OBR 9.02(c). You have contrasted that with a
general requirement to "get it right" that comes from the General Instructions to Umpires following OBR 9.05. Pete, the
specific always outweighs and overrules the
general in such cases.
NEVER overrule your partner without his request (except on one of Carl's 5 legitimately reversable calls - but that's another story).
The second issue concerns your responsibilities as an umpire. These are outlined primarily in OBR 9.01(a). You are charged with two (2) overall responsibilities:
1. Conduct of the game (in accordance with the rules)
2. Maintenance of discipline and order on the playing field (during a game)
These two responsibilities will often compete. If you want to know how to weigh them ethically and responsibly, you should be following my series on Umpire Ethics at
eUmpire.com starting on Monday last. It will help you to deal with these apparent conflicts in an ethical way.
The fact is that in overruling your partner you compromised responsibility 2 above in favor of a more rigid and uncompromising enforcement of the rules
as you saw them. Your partner disagreed, saying he saw a tag on the runner, and it was HIS judgement call. Whether you think he made the right call or not is NOT your decision to make. If he had merely misinterpreted or misapplied the rule, and a coach wanted to protest, THEN you could have discussed with him what to do. Once he claimed he saw a tag on the player, however, there was nothing you could do without his consent.
I will always maintain that responsibility 2 is far more important than responsibility 1, because of the consequences it carries. Make a hash of responsibility 1 and someone loses a game. No "biggie". Make a hash of responsibility 2 and people's health and welfare suffer. That IS a "biggie" in my book.
Now please, read my series on Umpire Ethics for a more detailed exposition and a set of guidelines, eh? (BIG grin)
Cheers,
Warren Willson
[Edited by Warren Willson on Dec 5th, 2000 at 09:40 PM]