Umpire Blackballed

[Tim C]

Awright, I read all the posts above . . . it took awhile since my lips move when I read.

I do not want to sound anything like Peter Osborne but there is an issue here . . .

I support a definitive blackball system. As an ex-assignor I want all types of feed back on the performance of my crews. While a blackball is a rather severe rating it still has value.

I also want to make sure you all saw that I noted after being blackballed in my local that you head back VERY soon to catch the coach when his team is on the road.

Now let me explain WHY I think blackballing is acceptable with limits:

Not all umpires are good.

Not all umpires can handle all levels of games.

Not all umpires can handle all types of people.

Not all coaches are bad.

Not all levels of ball can be called correctly by all umpires.

Not all coaches can handle the attitudes of all umpires.

Umpires need to be evaluated. Umpires need to be controlled by their local group.

I have always said, "I don't want to work someplace that doesn't want me to work there!"

I have said that becasue I don't need another distraction. I don't need to know going in that my skills are not accepted.

The knee-jerk reaction of "by God, nobody is going to blackball any of my umpires!" does no good for anyone.

I have been blackballed ONCE in my life and it has lasted for 26 YEARS. One day one of us will die and the conflict will be over.

BTW, I DESERVED to be blackballed by this coach.

[Bfair]

Rog, sometimes it's not how many bad occirrences, but the content of those occurrences.

Let's take the case of McPherson, an old Scotsman sitting at a pub with a younger lad. He comments to the lad, "the worrld's a crruel place, lad. If you look out that window to the east you'll see a fine house. I built that house with me own sweat, haulin everry piece of lumberr and pounding everry nail. But when I walk down the strreet do they point at me and say, Look, therre goes McPherrson, he's a housebuilderr? No, lad, they don't !!"

"And if you look out the window to the west you can see that pierr. I built THAT pierr with me own sweat, haulin everry stick of lumberr and poundin everry nail. And it can withstand ANY storrm. But when I walk down the strreet, lad, do they point and say, Look, therre goes Mcpherrson, he's a pierrbuilder? No, lad, they don't !!"

"But let me tell you, lad, you F___ just one goat........

Now, Rog, depending on the severity of previous issues and how hard you try, you can't dump a problem you've had in the past, regardless of how much GOOD you've done since. Unfortunately, sometimes you'll run into those who hold a mistake on you forever, even minor ones. Then you'll find some who find fault with your mistake even though they don't hold the same mistake on their buddy.
That's what I call the McPherson Syndrome. That's life, though not always fair.

[Warren Willson]

Originally posted by Drifter
I wasn't going to go into this but I will. Blackballing umpires, if done for the correct reasons, is a gift to the umpire association. You can't hide a bad umpire for long.

Example. Two years ago, an umpire was assigned to a playoff game and got the plate. I was in the stands, out of uniform, to do a later game. For no apparent reason, this guy, called a runner out while rounding third after a home run. The third base coach shook his hand as he rounded the base. When the inevitable riot started I left the stands and hid behind the concession stand.

My point is that these two schools were like the 14th and 15th schools to blackball this guy. He couldn't get any more assignments, he was running out of schools. Justice was served, and the association, which rarely has enough umpires to double cover all the games, didn't have to make a move.

Vern

Ok, Vern. IF the blackballing is done for the "right" reasons THEN as Tee also points out, it can be a valuable tool for the assignor in assessing his troops.

That notwithstanding, the fundamental principle is STILL wrong, IMHO! My point was that most players and most coaches seldom IF EVER have any real idea what makes a good umpire. It's simply not their job to know that. Your guy in the example above made it VERY obvious the time you saw him and probably did the same for the 14 or 15 times before as well. Was there any attempt after the first two or three red lines to get this guy some additional instruction or watch him and critique his performance? Was he EVER helped to improve his game?

What about the times when guys were blackballed for no good and discernable reason? Were these attempts to manipulate the system? Were they coaches who simply had no idea that the umpire was actually doing the right thing? I like Tee's idea of giving these guys the away games, so the coach gets to see the guy again, as a sort of chance to recant, and also knows the umpire has his assignor's support (barring a litany of continued screw ups of the like you mention).

We can pull up all sorts of anecdotal evidence for one side or the other. The bottom line is that, justified or not, this is a system that allows the coaches and teams to influence by exclusion the proper selection of officials, and in so doing leaves much room for manipulation of that system to the coach's and his team's advantage. Surely there is a better way, if we really look hard enough.

How about we get assignors to do their jobs for a start? I know those guys can't watch every umpire every game. In the associations where they can't assign two guys per game for lack of numbers then they're pretty well in the doo doo unless they can find a way to swing a double team every so often. For the rest, what about using partner evaluations to highlight the guys who might need to be watched and perhaps helped a little in their process of development? I know from experience that this can work well, if you pick the right partners. Our Umpire Development Officer has 2 or 3 guys whose evaluations he can trust to be fair and informed, and he rotates them through the partners who need watching. It works. League feedback has the whole standard in our association rising dramatically over the last few years.

It is my belief that far too many associations, and the assignors they appoint, simply turn their charges loose without ever really looking at their progress in a game situation. Fitting names to roster slots takes over as the single most important task. That's not fair to the coach's or the teams they are given and it's not fair to the guys themselves because they have no measure of their progress outside of perhaps some annual clinic.

This red lining can't be the ONLY way to achieve the weeding out process or flag guys who might need further development. It is far too open to abuse. It didn't appear to be working in the case in your example. The guy had 14 or 15 prior blackballs and STILL was assigned the plate in a playoff? Gimme a break! He should have been looked at come Hell or high water LONG before it got to that stage!

Cheers,

Warren Willson

[Edited by Warren Willson on Nov 21st, 2000 at 03:55 PM]

[Warren Willson]

Originally posted by Hayes Davis

Warren,

This is not totally correct. The NFHS is the governing body as to most high school sports played througout the U.S. However, officiating is usually based upon contracts between officials associations and geographical/league/conference entities. Each is a separate contract and may or may not include the right for a coach to "blackball" or "red line" an official. There is no national authority relating to this matter.

Thank you for that advice, Hayes. Of course, I was referring to the "NFHS system" in general and NOT specifically to the NFHS as an organisational body. Whether or not individual contracts formalize the right for coaches or schools to "blackball" or "red line" a certain number of umpires, I believe the overwelming practice is for assignors or associations to allow coaches and schools a limited number of these "choices" as a customer service. I also know there is "no national authority relating to this matter". I was simply referring to the systemic imbalance in favour of this practice.

Cheers,

Warren Willson

[GarthB]

Warren:

As you dig the foxhole, make room for me.

I won't go as far as you, even. No assignor, association, or league, worth his or its salt, should ever, EVER need something as drastic as a blackballing policy to provide input, or assist in anyway, in the evaluation of umpires.

That's akin to waiting for a heart attack to evaluate your cholesterol level.

Sheeeeeeeeeeeesh.


GarthB

[Tim C]

There can come a time in any relationship where a divorce can become necessary.

While I am certainly not high enough in my local group to impact this issue I can speak as an experienced umpire.

Garth, there are people who just can't get along . . . we have a customer (oh, I know that rings of Peter) and if a system is in place you cannot evaluate that sytem from the outside.

You have every right to feel as you do . . . make all the value judgements you want . . . but there are people that feel different from you and they are the AD's, administrators, and even State Representatives of leagues.

I will pass into the sunset on this issue simply agreeing to disagree.

Thanks for the discussion Garth!

[GarthB]

Apparently my previous post was misunderstood.

I do not disagree with what Tim C has said in his most recent post. He is correct. I do not take issue with him on these points and I do not mean to attack anyone's opinion.

My disagreement in this issue is not with the symptoms, nor the disease. It is with the cure.

I believe that when assignors and evaluators do their job, there is no need for the practice of "black balling". Black balling puts power in the wrong hands, and that, I believe, is always dangerous.

The power to assign and evaluate should belong in the hands of the associations, not the coaches.

Black balling is an extreme measure used far too often in far less than extreme cases. We do not amputate arms when a finger is broken. We attend to the finger.

And, like Tim C, I understand that there is room for disagreement in this and nearly every issue. My intent in this post is not to press that disagreement, but, hopefully, to better explain my original position.

I shall join Tim C, now in his ride into the sunset in regards to this issue. (Hey Cisco, wait for me.)

If anyone would like to discuss it further or change my feeble mind, feel free to contact me via email at [email protected]

[Edited by GarthB on Nov 22nd, 2000 at 02:01 PM]

[Rog]

Ol Jeb is a tak'n his hound dog and a go'n a hunt'n; but, before he does he's a want'n ta jaw a piece with ya'll bout the great input and heartbeat'n discussion on this issue.
Now ol Jeb's only burr on his situation lends to Garth's statement:
"My disagreement in this issue is not with the symptoms, nor the disease. It is with the cure."
Ya see, that kinsa waz the case fer poor ol Jeb, seems the matter was a done deal and ol Jeb never know'd what, why fer or how comes it cames to be!
Be that as it may, ol Jeb is off with his best rabbit dog an a hunt'n good ol bugs bunny - cause wez gots some goods track'n weather, 2 foot + of that thar white stuff
and a mores a come'n.
Ya'll have a good Thanksgiving; and, ya'll come back now - ya hear!

Originally posted by GarthB
Apparently my previous post was misunderstood.

I do not disagree with what Tim C has said in his most recent post. He is correct. I do take issue with him on these points and I do not mean to attack anyone's opinion.

My disagreement in this issue is not with the symptoms, nor the disease. It is with the cure.

I believe that when assignors and evaluators do their job, there is no need for the practice of "black balling". Black balling puts power in the wrong hands, and that, I believe, is always dangerous.

The power to assign and evaluate should belong in the hands of the associations, not the coaches.

Black balling is an extreme measure used far too often in far less than extreme cases. We do not amputate arms when a finger is broken. We attend to the finger.

And, like Tim C, I understand that there is room for disagreement in this and nearly every issue. My intent in this post is not to press that disagreement, but, hopefully, to better explain my original position.

I shall join Tim C, now in his ride into the sunset in regards to this issue. (Hey Cisco, wait for me.)

If anyone would like to discuss it further or change my feeble mind, feel free to contact me via email at [email protected]

[bluezebra]

Hayes:

You're correct. I've worked FED in football, baseball, softball, basketball and volleyball, and have NEVER seen a reference to redlining. That's strictly a local matter. In the associations I've been a member of (assignor for two), a valid written reason had to be given to redline an official. We don't allow coaches or a.d.'s to tell us who to assign.

Bob

[rex]

As an old saying goes "If it's important, enough, write it down". Otherwise it's just talk (whining).

rex

[Drifter]

What about the times when guys were blackballed for no good and discernable reason? Were these attempts to manipulate the system?

Warren Willson

[/B][/QUOTE]

I'm an older, probably more confident (arrogant) umpire. I call a wider strike zone that a lot of young guys who call pitches strikes when they actually hit the black. Are you saying that a high school coach would redline me because he has a "control" pitching staff in an attempt to cash in on a young official's unwillingness to call the outside pitch...?

I guess it's possible, but I don't think I've ever run into a coach who was that devious...or that smart.

Vern

[David B]

Last year our association did something new and let umpires choose which schools they wanted to call.

In other words, we could blackball schools that we didn't want to have to put up with.

I thought it was great. There are several coaches who no one really wants to be around because of their continual whining and most of the veterans liked being able to say I don't want to go there.

We have one school that is one of the best teams in the state every year; they are usually one of the top ranked teams in the state, and have won four championships in the last 10 years. However, their coaches constantly whine, their fans are horrible, the police have to be their every time they play because of unruly actions towards umpires, opponents etc.

Most all of the veteran umpires chose not to call there last year and it was great. The coach was stuck with young umpires in their first five years etc.

I ran into the coach on the road and he asked me, "you haven't been to our place this year, what's up?". I didn't tell him we just don't choose to call at your place, but I was laughing as he told me some of the things that have been called on them this year with the young umpires.

What goes around comes around.

Thanks
David

[Warren Willson]

Originally posted by Drifter

I'm an older, probably more confident (arrogant) umpire. I call a wider strike zone that a lot of young guys who call pitches strikes when they actually hit the black. Are you saying that a high school coach would redline me because he has a "control" pitching staff in an attempt to cash in on a young official's unwillingness to call the outside pitch...?

I guess it's possible, but I don't think I've ever run into a coach who was that devious...or that smart.

Vern

Yeah, that's what I mean ... or what about the reverse? I've got a young umpire who calls a tight zone, but my pitching staff struggles for control and NEEDS the bigger zone AND the outside pitch to go their way. My batters can handle that bigger zone as well as any others. So ... would I red line the younger guy with the "rule book" zone and hope YOU turned up for our games in future? You bet!

Maybe the coaches are just way smarter where I come from, but I honestly don't think so. Give 'em credit, Vern. Coaches will take what you give 'em and then some! If it ain't illegal and it gives them an advantage, they'll find out about it and use it. And even some times if it IS illegal, but they think they can slip it by us. (grin)

Cheers,

Warren Willson

[Edited by Warren Willson on Nov 25th, 2000 at 06:16 PM]