Peter, Peter, Peter....

[JRutledge]

Originally posted by GarthB


Let's see. I posted: "That is what the debate was about: doing the job you're supposed to be doing and not someone else's job."

And you posted: "did not know we were debating whose job was what, etc."

Well, now ya know.

I did not realize that this post was started by you. And I did not realize that the initial conversation was started by you as well. I thought w_sohl made the original post and I thought that Rich started this one. So I guess that makes you the one that started this debate.

Originally posted by GarthB
Please take the last word.

Your post is just another example why we are having a hard time trying to keep guys umpiring. If this is the attitude of a "big dog" no wonder most of us see no reason to get to the D1 and pro levels.

Peace

[DG]

Way too much bull here for me to absorb. I keep track of innings, but not score. The indicator I like to use has a thumb wheel and counter for innings but not score, so it is easy to do.

[JRutledge]

Originally posted by DG
Way too much bull here for me to absorb. I keep track of innings, but not score. The indicator I like to use has a thumb wheel and counter for innings but not score, so it is easy to do.

But wait a minute, you are not suppose to use those either. Have you not learned anything from these discussions we have here.

Peace

[DG]

Originally posted by JRutledge

But wait a minute, you are not suppose to use those either. Have you not learned anything from these discussions we have here.

Peace

I know I should bow to the all knowing, but I will keep my indicator, and it will keep track of innings with just one push of the thumbwheel, just once per inning. Don't seem like much to me.

[Rich]

Originally posted by DG

I know I should bow to the all knowing, but I will keep my indicator, and it will keep track of innings with just one push of the thumbwheel, just once per inning. Don't seem like much to me.

Have you ever used one of those +POS indicators that only has BALL/STRIKE/OUT and doesn't have Ball 4, Strike 3, or Out 3? Couldn't use anything else these days -- I'm so used to the fit in my hand.

There are reasons why we don't use indicators in the field, but I agree that it is such a tired discussion I don't have the energy for it.

The main reason we don't have enough umpires is that high schools schedule baseball games without realizing that umpires (and parents for that matter) have to work during the day. Many good umpires I know don't work much school or college ball -- they prefer to keep their day jobs and wait until the summer season when most games start at a reasonable time, like 6PM.

Now that DST is here and it doesn't get dark until 7:30PM or so, schools still start their games at 4PM. How many more qualified umpires would there be if games started at 5PM instead of 4PM or 4:15PM?

The pool of baseball umpires will always be smaller because of this. I will take varsity basketball games up to 100 miles away (actually worked one game in Illinois last season 112 miles from my house) but baseball? I hesitate taking COLLEGE BASEBALL games that far away. The games start too early and last too long for me to be traveling that far from home. I'd just as soon work a HS game close to home, which is what I usually do.

[Edited by Rich Fronheiser on Apr 19th, 2004 at 09:18 AM]

[mcrowder]

It's been asked a couple of times, "What's the harm" in knowing the score. I'm sure that for most of you big dogs and many of the medium sized dogs - there is no harm. I don't know what sized dog you all consider me, and frankly it doesn't matter.

However, as someone in charge of several "little dogs", I'd prefer that they NOT follow the score, inning, etc. My reasoning - I don't want there to be any tendency at all to make a call differently, or focus any less, or hustle any less, simply because of the score or the inning. And say what you will about the quality of the umpires that might allow themselves to become a little less diligent, a little less focused, in a blowout or late in the game - but this WILL happen to some people if knowing the score/inning is an issue.

I'm sure that each of us, individually, feel that we, ourselves, would never change the way we do our jobs based on the score or inning. But can you honestly say you don't know (or haven't seen) someone who might?

[scyguy]

I may be new to this discussion board but this Tim C guy is a real character. Officials need to stick together, there is enough grief from others. Most of us learn from these forums, but do not come here to be degraded.

As far as knowing the score or even using an indicator as BU, I very seldom know the count, inning or score when I am the BU. As PU, I know the count and outs, but little more. (watch it guys, that is a loaded statement).

To each his own, right. Feel comfortable, do your job.

[JRutledge]

Whatever the exact reasoning is, to put on your chest that you do college baseball and I do not, is rather laughable to me and anyone that knows the process to become a college umpire. Because I know more people that bend over backwards to do a college basketball game and will travel much longer distances, doing that, than staying in their back yard to do a HS game. And whether the game starts at 4:00, 4:30 or 5:00 does not make that much difference. And if using a indicator, putting down the score on my own personal lineup card is going to hold me or anyone back, then so be it. Not that has ever been a hinderance for myself, because I have worked college games since my very first year of umpiring. And my first couple years I had a +POS card that had where I could not only put the score, but list conferences and other information about the games. I stopped keeping score for myself, because it became a pain when other issues where more important to me personally. But when I was doing it, not a single person knew unless I decided to tell them. If I ever asked, it was usually because there was no scoreboard and I was talking to a scorebook about subs and I would say something about the score and they would tell me. It was also not completely uncommon for coaches to try to get you to do another 2 or 3 innings, after the game was officially over and something that was not listed on the contract. So I always want to make sure of the inning, whether I have an indicator or not. But do not tell me what my job is or is not. This has nothing to do with what my job is, this is about things I want to know so I can umpire more effectively. It makes me feel secure, who cares what it does for you.

Peace

[Striker991]

You guys really didn't expect me to stay out of this one, did you?

Well, for those of you that don't know, I am a very small tadpole in a mud puddle, not even close to being a big dog in a small pond.

However, here is my comment anyway:

Scorekeepers are scorekeepers. The only things I want to know about the score are whether or not the game has been run-ruled and whether or not we are playing the bottom half of the last inning, and my scorekeeper will let me know those things. I do keep track of innings on my indiclickitator because I need to know when substitutions are being made. By the way, I only do youth ball. There are really no other reasons for me to know the score.

Peter:
You should know better. If you are anticipating, you are either 1.) not calling what you are seeing, or 2.) out of position for what is really happening. My training has given me the tools to be ready to move in accordance with the plays being made, not what we think will happen. I understand that higher level ball means that the expected play will more than likely be the play, but there is still a significant chance that it won't be. In youth ball, we all know that the expected play has a 50% chance or less (more likely less) of actually occurring. Be careful when you talk about anticipation. Some poor rookie ump is going to take this advice and will be pulling a baseball out of his ear. Hope your insurance is paid up.

Just my two 1/2 cents.


(Edited with apologies to Carl...sorry, all you big dogs look the same from my perspective in the puddle!).


[Edited by Striker991 on Apr 19th, 2004 at 01:10 PM]

[JRutledge]

Originally posted by Striker991


I do keep track of innings on my indiclickitator because I need to know when substitutions are being made.

I think this is the best point and one I did not make or consider in this conversation.

Keeping track of the inning helps in keeping the lineup card. Because when the coaches make a substitution or a position change with the pitcher, I can put down the inning and which half of the inning that took place. So when a coach wants to do something not allowed in the rules with substitutions or pitching switches, I have that information written down. I also do this for charged conferences. I can easily tell them the inning and I put down who was up to bat when they took place. Because if I just let it slide, it has happen when the coach debates whether they took one conference or 3 conferences. And at least in NF and NCAA, it can make a difference. Now keeping the actual score does not help much, but keeping the inning can help prevent problems with subs.

Peace

[Carl Childress]

Originally posted by Striker991
You guys really didn't expect me to stay out of this one, did you?

Well, for those of you that don't know, I am a very small tadpole in a mud puddle, not even close to being a big dog in a small pond.

However, here is my comment anyway:

Scorekeepers are scorekeepers. The only things I want to know about the score are whether or not the game has been run-ruled and whether or not we are playing the bottom half of the last inning, and my scorekeeper will let me know those things. I do keep track of innings on my indiclickitator because I need to know when substitutions are being made. By the way, I only do youth ball. There are really no other reasons for me to know the score.

Peter/Carl:
You both should know better. If you are anticipating, you are either 1.) not calling what you are seeing, or 2.) out of position for what is really happening. Just my two 1/2 cents.

Hey, I hope you can see better than you can read. Don't put me into the mix with Peter about changing mechanics. You have no way of knowing whether that's my position or not. All I said was, keeping score can hurt anything.

Anyway, I'm glad you put your 1 1/2 cents in.

[His High Holiness]

Originally posted by Striker991
Peter:
You should know better. If you are anticipating, you are either 1.) not calling what you are seeing, or 2.) out of position for what is really happening. My training has given me the tools to be ready to move in accordance with the plays being made, not what we think will happen. I understand that higher level ball means that the expected play will more than likely be the play, but there is still a significant chance that it won't be. In youth ball, we all know that the expected play has a 50% chance or less (more likely less) of actually occurring. Be careful when you talk about anticipation. Some poor rookie ump is going to take this advice and will be pulling a baseball out of his ear. Hope your insurance is paid up.

Just my two 1/2 cents.

What you say is true of youth ball, however all mechanics is anticipation of the the next play. The reason we don't stay in position A with runners on base is because we are anticipating a play at another base besides first.

I am 53. The players who I umpire have average age of about 20 and most of them are prime athletic speedsters.

Unlike the LL or Babe Ruth player, I have no hope of keeping up with them. At my level, I cannot afford the luxury of calling all of my plays from the working area. I need credibility on my calls and that means being somewhere in the vacinity of the play.

As a base umpire, I am fooled by the players about once every three games. That's a testament to the quality of the play as much as it is to my instincts. If the players screw up, a good coach will yell at them, not at me.

Example: Two weeks ago in a two man game we had R1, R2, and two out. The batter hit a routine grounder to short. This play normally calls for throw to first or perhaps a flip to second. From C, I moved over halfway between first and second and the shortstop threw to THIRD for a wacker of a play. I called him safe from 70 feet away. The coach yelled something like the following out of the dugout at his SS.

"If you want the umpire to make a good call, you have to play college baseball instead of Little League baseball."

I could have stayed in the working area and waited for the play to develop. I would get two or three steps after the release (college players fire the ball to first at 85 mph) not four or five steps like you can get in high school. All of my calls would be long distance.

Instead, I anticipate the play. As a result, I am 20-25 feet from the play and in a position to sell the call, see a pulled foot, swipe tag, or any other wierd stuff. That's the difference between a college umpire and a cookie cutter umpire. I talk about cookie cutter umpires in Part VIII of my series which the "On Deck" portion of this site says will be published on 4/28.

When my college evaluator sees umpires who constantly hang out in the working area, he knows that the has a high school umpire on his hands. He is looking for more than pro school knowledge in his umpires. He wants game awareness and game feel. One of the ways to get perfect game awareness is to know the exact score and exact inning.

Peter



[Edited by His High Holiness on Apr 19th, 2004 at 02:07 PM]

[Striker991]

Another reason I am not renewing my subscription to the paid part of this site...

The type of mechanics you are talking about may (and I only say "may" because I "may" not agree) be appropriate for the most experienced umpires that have trouble hobbling about the infield and can no longer apply the correct mechanics. However, do not forget that your audience, or at least 95% or better, is not at that level. The only thing you are trying to prove is that you think because you are such a big dog with God's experience on the field, that incorrect mechanics are the right way to do it. I'm calling BS, and that umpires should do it the right way, using the correct mechanics, to be in the best position at the right time.

To teach something so drastically different to this audience is wrong and on the verge of malpractice. No one is talking about the mechanics of positioning at the start of the play. If you are in "C" with a runner on 2nd, you aren't anticipating a play at 3rd. Your statement to anticipate by moving to where you expect the play to be during the play is opening up a whole can of worms, especially for newer umpires. Anticipate the play....next anticipate the outcome. What did you see on the bang bang play? Why, OUT! of course...that is what I anticipated. An even worse outcome is not quite getting out of the way of the 85mph (embellished? maybe..) ball because I was anticipating it going somewhere other than it did.

So, I guess what I am really saying is to do what you are teaching...anticipate who your audience is and teach appropriately.

I appreciate very much the people who have trained me and are training me, because they realize what my level is and understand what I should be working on. In other words, if my career goal were to be a rocket scientist, I need to learn the basics about chemistry first. To show me how to do hands on experiments with rocket fuel when I am in High School is only going to get me hurt.

[His High Holiness]

Originally posted by Striker991
Another reason I am not renewing my subscription to the paid part of this site...

The type of mechanics you are talking about may (and I only say "may" because I "may" not agree) be appropriate for the most experienced umpires that have trouble hobbling about the infield and can no longer apply the correct mechanics. However, do not forget that your audience, or at least 95% or better, is not at that level. The only thing you are trying to prove is that you think because you are such a big dog with God's experience on the field, that incorrect mechanics are the right way to do it. I'm calling BS, and that umpires should do it the right way, using the correct mechanics, to be in the best position at the right time.

To teach something so drastically different to this audience is wrong and on the verge of malpractice. No one is talking about the mechanics of positioning at the start of the play. If you are in "C" with a runner on 2nd, you aren't anticipating a play at 3rd. Your statement to anticipate by moving to where you expect the play to be during the play is opening up a whole can of worms, especially for newer umpires. Anticipate the play....next anticipate the outcome. What did you see on the bang bang play? Why, OUT! of course...that is what I anticipated. An even worse outcome is not quite getting out of the way of the 85mph (embellished? maybe..) ball because I was anticipating it going somewhere other than it did.

So, I guess what I am really saying is to do what you are teaching...anticipate who your audience is and teach appropriately.

I appreciate very much the people who have trained me and are training me, because they realize what my level is and understand what I should be working on. In other words, if my career goal were to be a rocket scientist, I need to learn the basics about chemistry first. To show me how to do hands on experiments with rocket fuel when I am in High School is only going to get me hurt.

I am in good shape for age 53. I don't hobble, use a cane, or need a knee replacement. I am 6 feet tall and weigh 185 lbs so I am not overweight but there are no umpires my age or even with 15 years of my age that I know that can keep up with with 20 year old athletes who have visions of MLB in their heads. It ain't gonna happen, that's reality.

Yet I am suppose to use pro school mechanics developed for 20 something pro school students.

The mechanics are guidelines, starting points if you will. The great umpire adapts them to his abilities, not the other way around. When I was a new umpire, I was not given the option of changing the mechanics; it was one size fits all if you wanted to move up. With experience, comes privileges. Now, when I do a non-standard mechanic, people, even my assingor ask why, rather than condemning it.

In pro school, the goal is to master the mechanics and look good. Getting the calls right is of secondary importance.

At my level, getting the calls right is of primary importance. If I have to modify the mechanics, so be it. There are good reasons to modify the mechanics for umpires of all ages, depending on the situation. The pro mechanics were developed for new umpires who did not want to think or could not think because of their lack of experience.

With regards to the readership, I don't know want the exact experience level is of the paid subscriber. However, I deliberately try to address subjects which no one else is addressing. As GarthB has pointed out, there are a slew of writers addressing the latest rules, Little League, and and a host of the basic subjects. A good magazine presents material for all levels of experience. I am proud that I am taking on subjects that no one else is taking on.

I would hope that the rookie umpire would read my stuff with an idea as to where he can progress. I fully recognize that he might not be able to put it into practice in a new umpire career.

In any event, if you feel that my ideas are dangerous and will lead to lawsuits, you should take it up with management so that they can fire me. It would not be the first, second, or third time that I have been expelled from an internet umpire organization for stirring the pot and preaching heresy.

You deliberately misrepresented my article when you mentioned anticipating the outcome of the play. I never advocate that and there is no connection between anticipating where the play will be and anticipating the outcome.

Situation for wannabe NCAA umpires:

Bases loaded, two outs, pro school mechanics call for the umpire to be in C.

My NCAA evaluator was watching a wannabe umpire in this situation. He was in C as called for. When the count went to 3-2, the wannabe moved. Pro school mechanics require him to stay in C. They make no allowance for the count or number of outs.

The wannabe umpire moved to B. The NCAA evaluator commented that this was an umpire that he wanted to know more about. He was somebody who the evaluator could see understood the game. Yet he had adopted a non-standard mechanic.

If you think about it for a minute, you will understand why B is a superior position in this situation. Too bad that more umpires don't think. I write with the idea of making them think, not with the idea of bowing down and worshipping the gods of pro school.

Peter

[Striker991]

To read what I wrote....

I specifically said in my post, "No one is talking about the mechanics of positioning at the start of the play." Many umpires, as you have stated and I actually agree with, feel starting in positions other than the "norm" are more comfortable and are affective, within reason. I don't think anyone in this thread is disagreeing with that either.

My specific point is purely anticipation DURING a play.

You, your very self said, "As a base umpire, I am fooled by the players about once every three games." If you let the play itself guide you to where you should be, you wouldn't be fooled at all, because you wouldn't be guessing er, sorry...anticipating. And, following correct mechanics, you would be in position to make a good call.

So I guess the umpires out there would have to make their own decision, right? Let's see, what are the choices? Follow Peter's instructions and get fooled once every three games, possibly being in the wrong place, making a bad call, or getting beaned once every three games. Or, following accepted mechanics, NOT anticipating DURING a play, and not getting fooled, because you are letting the play direct your movements.

You make the call...