Quote:
Originally posted by BJ Moose
WW... what the hell is going on?
I did not make a single false statement. You post and analysis that says I am 0-3? You are 0-3. Everything I posted was true.
You want to get on here and actually say that EVERY SINGLE time a coach objects (in any way) to your safe-out call he is ejected?? Did your credibility just drop to zero?
You actually want to claim that you can EJECT a coach for the reason of "Bad coaching". AFter a botched hit and run, I can call TIME and say, "You! Your DONE! and write in my report I ejected him because he called a hit and run at a bad time??
Did your credibility just drop to less than zero?
YOu know I don't usually do this... My post was sensible, logical, true, and reflective of real world situations. YOu chose to rip into three areas... but what is most amusing is that you were wrong on all three.
Medication?
|
Moosie, Moosie, Moosie. Talk about not being able to see anyone else's point of view! I didn't realise the moose was a myopic beast? (BIG grin)
1. Your post suggested, by contrasting the words SHALL and MAY where they don't even exist, that an umpire could see an offense and elect NOT to punish that offense. That's 0-1, Moose. It isn't our job to be judges of the seriousness of a specific offense. If we see a CLEAR OFFENSE (not some maybe he did, maybe he didn't) and the rule says it is illegal and offers a specific penalty, then we HAVE to apply the rule. There is no "MAY" about it! That is what is required of the umpire by OBR 9.01, Moose. An example I had was where an ex-umpire turned coach, and a very good friend, was coaching a team of tangle-footed under 14's in a Regional B Division final. It was a very proud moment for this guy, getting these kids all this way on sheer hard work and dedication. During the game he tried to make a 2nd visit to his pitcher with the same batter at bat. He was emotional at the time because the game was on a knife edge, but he still went out despite 3 or 4 vehement warnings from me. When he reached the mound I ejected him. That is what the rule required, pure and simple. He had to leave the area and couldn't even hang around to see his kids get across the finish line. My feelings for him, the emotion of the situation and what would be the consequences of my actions didn't enter into the equation. He didn't speak to me for a week after, but eventually he came around and conceded I had no choice. THAT'S the point, Moose. No choice!
2. Your post said an umpire can't eject for offenses such as "wearing an ugly hat or bad coaching". That's 0-2, Moose. The umpire CAN eject for such things, but they wouldn't necessarily be the final reason given in any ejection report. I even gave you a specific rule reference for the "ugly hat" case [OBR 1.11(3)], which you simply ignored. Now let me tell you that if the "bad coaching" involves instructing a pitcher to throw at a batter, then I'm ejecting that guy in a NY minute! I would probably call it something else like unsportsmanlike conduct, but it would
still be "bad coaching" at the root of that ejection! Moose, I was simply pointing out that your blanket statements should NOT be taken at their
face value.
3. Finally, your post implied that umpires could and should accept a certain amount of objection to their judgement calls before ejecting. Oops! There's that 0-3 call, Moose. There is NO requirement for the umpire to accept ANY objection on judgement calls. In fact, Rule 9.02 is pretty specific that such objections shall NOT be tolerated! Yet, here you are claiming that umpires have to sit there and take it when the player, coach or manager starts arguing the judgement call? No, Moose. Baaad Moose. (grin)
Moose, the whole tenor of Pete's post was him wondering whether it would be MORE CONSISTENT for players, coaches and managers if we umpires just applied the rules as required, instead of each choosing to put our own little spin on such matters. You've come out as the chief advocate for going the Moose's way. I've come back and pointed out how that conflicts with the rules you're supposed to uphold. You claim you are advocating a REAL LIFE approach. I say that if you do that then you are part of the problem, not the solution. What you are advocating is BAD for consistent application of the rules, AND for maintaining discipline and order on the playing field, which is one of the umpire's chief responsibilities [see OBR 9.01(a)]
Moose, I do NOT have a huge ejection record. I average 1 or at most 2 per year in total, across 2 different leagues and 2 different 6 month seasons. People seem to know that I apply the rules strictly but fairly, and they still manage to have lots of fun. I have even been told by a representative of my UDP that comments have come in to them from players and coaches as to how I'm a good umpire because I'm prepared to listen to their point of view, give a decision and then move on. Does that sound like I'm a hard a$$, Moose? That said, I apply the rules as I have suggested in these posts, and my games are shorter on average and have far less controversy than many of my colleagues. I say my approach keeps MORE players, managers and coaches in the game because they all KNOW where the line is for EVERY GAME. In your games, Moose, my guess is they'd have to wonder whether your antlers are itchy today and whether they can go "this far" or get away with more depending on your mood.
Now, Moose, if you STILL think you haven't made "a single false statement" then I'm at a loss to understand your perspective and we'll just have to A2D. I think my credibility remains intact, if that was ever really on the line here. Unfortunately you have chosen to focus on extreme examples ("
EVERY SINGLE time a coach objects (in any way) to your safe-out call" and "
botched hit and run, I can call TIME and say, "You! Your DONE!"), rather than dealing with the meat of my objections to your approach. Looks like you need a high-flyin' Rocket in your life to bring you back down to earth, Moosie babe! (grin)
Cheers.
[Edited by Warren Willson on Dec 21st, 2000 at 06:56 PM]