Line in the sand

[JRutledge]

Originally posted by NSump


First, I have worked basketball and hockey and softball, so I too have worked many sports.

The DIFFERENCE is that in basketball you have a technical foul, in hockey an unsportsmanlike conduct penalty, soccer has the yellow card. You have many different tools to use.

You are right in basketball I might have a T at my disposal, but it does not mean it is the only thing I can use.

Originally posted by NSump
Also, coaches are not ALLOWED on the field/ice.

And I know many football officials that give a coach and opportunity to get off the field before they take action. And I definitely know basketball officials that allow a coach to get back into the coaching box and they tend to get a message.

Originally posted by NSump
But, these sports have felonies too. A coach throws a water bottle on the ice - done. A coach throws a basketball on the court - done.

Felonies are different based on level and area you work. I am just suggesting that everyone does not see this as a felony. And those that do not, if you just eject a player over this, you might have to eject more than that player. So you better be clear as to what is acceptable in the area you live. I know umpires that would think you have no "conflict resolution skills" if this is the ONLY OPTION in your bag of tricks.

Originally posted by NSump
As far as the coach barking from the dugout, I deal with it. The difference is that often what is said is not heard by many in the stands. If the remark is loud and he is cursing, he may have a shower coming quickly.

But why is coach "showing you up" about balls and strikes, which you claim is so much an offense (it is but there is context in this discussion) and a kid drawing a line is another? If one is bad and the other is the same thing, why not eject them all for even daring to question you on this topic? I guess I am not understanding the hypocracy in your argument.

Originally posted by NSump
So, generally speaking, I deal with verbal remarks differently than I do visual ones. When someone is showing everyone what an a** I am, he is done.

I had one confrontation like this and not a single person knew the batter did anything and no one knew that I struck his behind out on a pitch that was outside. The situation was dealt with and the kid got the point. It did not happen again and I got my point across.

Originally posted by NSump
BTW, do you keep the guy in the game who tells you that "you are horsesh*t" and only you hear him?

This is not the same thing. If I write a report on an ejection and I quote those words, no one misunderstands my actions. If I eject a kid for drawing a line in the sand, I have to hope they understand all the idiocracies of baseball history, what the pros think about it, what they might have heard from NCAA instructors and take my word for it that this was "showing the umpire up." I can always back up the first one.

Peace

[NSump]

Originally posted by DG
This post has reached 5 pages, and going nowhere. Let's end it, and go on to something more interesting...

DG:

Actually this post has gone far beyond its original intent. It has opened the door to look inside how we manage real situations.

Why has it gone 5 pages? GAME MANAGEMENT. That's why.

Game management is something you cannot learn in a classroom. You can only learn it on the field. The goal, or what should be the goal, of these forums is to increase the knowledge of those who use it and be a better official from them.

This thread is far more important thatn catch and carry, balks or any other inane subject about rules. This is what separates umpires.

So, while you can't teach game management, you can give the new umpire some tools and some guidance. Similar to teaching specific mechanics and positioning, you give the rookie umpire some specific guidance to help him "get through" the early years and allow him to establish himself. IMHO, being "assertive" or a "red ***" early in your umpiring "career" will benefit you.

So, I will teach them to use the ejection as a tool to keep control. As they mature as umpires, they will need to use that tool less and less for two reasons. One, they will be better umpires. But more importantly, they will have established themselves as no-nonsense umpires. Here, I rarely eject any more. It is not that I have changed my "standards", but rather my reputation remains. Many players still think I "throw a lot of guys out."

That deterant has saved me a lot of grief lately.

Blaine











;

[Carl Childress]

Originally posted by NSump

Well Carl, it has served me well enough to last 23 years here in Nova Scotia. Heck, even got me to 10 Nationals. Golly, you were even going to invite me to work the NBC regionals in Texas.

In fact, my whole philosophy is outlined in my five part series, The Thumb http://baseball.officiating.com/x/article/2440

Have a lovely evening.

Blaine Gallant, AKA NSump
[/B]

Blaine: I see you've reverted to your old self, ignoring emails and calling people "stupid" who disagree with you. (grin)

You were responsible for my being a clinician in Nova Scotia on the Victoria Day weekend. You were in my clinic. Therefore, my philosophy of game control is well known to you: Control the coach (with as much redass as you think necessary), and you won't have trouble with the players.

You did not reach the heights you did by being redass. You got there because you call good. At the nationals, coaches and players -- you told me -- are generally very well behaved.

Have a nice day. And stay out of Quebec City.

[Edited by Carl Childress on Apr 25th, 2004 at 11:05 PM]

[David Emerling]

Originally posted by NSump

DG:

[snip]

So, I will teach them to use the ejection as a tool to keep control. As they mature as umpires, they will need to use that tool less and less for two reasons. One, they will be better umpires. But more importantly, they will have established themselves as no-nonsense umpires. Here, I rarely eject any more. It is not that I have changed my "standards", but rather my reputation remains. Many players still think I "throw a lot of guys out."

That deterant has saved me a lot of grief lately.

Blaine[/B]

As an experienced umpire, would you handle a situation differently if the participants weren't aware that you are a seasoned veteran?

As long as you umpire in the same region, where your reputation was established, that works fine. But what about umpires who travel to areas where nobody knows them, or they call a tournament game for an out-of-town team?

I help coach both a fastpitch softball team and a baseball team. Both teams do a significant amount of traveling. For the most part, I'm dealing with umpires I have no idea what kind of experience and reputation they have. I don't know if it's their FIRST or TENTH year as an umpire. I can pretty much guess by their style and demeanor, but that isn't always the best indicator. I've seen lazy veterans with poor mechanics and rookies who do just about everything right.

There is no way of knowing what to expect should you challenge their authority.

David Emerling
Memphis, TN

[Edited by David Emerling on Apr 26th, 2004 at 01:07 AM]

[GarthB]

Originally posted by Carl Childress

I see you've reverted to your old self, ignoring emails and calling people "stupid" who disagree with you. (grin)

[Edited by Carl Childress on Apr 25th, 2004 at 11:05 PM]

After rereading Blaine's post, I fail to find anyplace where he refered to anyone who disagreed with him as "stupid."

Can we stick to what is really being posted?

[JRutledge]

Originally posted by GarthB


Can we stick to what is really being posted?

All the names you call me, the insults you try to give to people when the discussion is never about who is a "real" umpire and who does the things you like. And you want someone to stick to the what was posted?

You really are a piece of work.

Peace

[NSump]

Originally posted by Carl Childress

[/B]

Blaine: I see you've reverted to your old self, ignoring emails and calling people "stupid" who disagree with you. (grin) ....

Therefore, my philosophy of game control is well known to you: Control the coach (with as much redass as you think necessary), and you won't have trouble with the players.

You did not reach the heights you did by being redass. You got there because you call good. At the nationals, coaches and players -- you told me -- are generally very well behaved.

[Edited by Carl Childress on Apr 25th, 2004 at 11:05 PM] [/B][/QUOTE]

First Carl, I never called YOU stupid. I said to teach a new umpire three choices in this situation is stupid.

Second, the clinic here was for experienced umpires. Also, if the guy is drawing a line on me, his coach already has failed in his duty. I am moving to the dark side this year (doing some coaching). I guarantee the kids will know (and the parents will too) what is and isn't acceptable behavior. This will not happen on my watch.

Regardless on how "good" I call, being a redass at times is necessary. Often arguments are not as much about the call, but over frustration. Still, it needs to be dealt with. Heck, if arguments were only over bad calls, why would *I* need to eject! LOL

[NSump]

Originally posted by David Emerling
As an experienced umpire, would you handle a situation differently if the participants weren't aware that you are a seasoned veteran?

As long as you umpire in the same region, where your reputation was established, that works fine. But what about umpires who travel to areas where nobody knows them, or they call a tournament game for an out-of-town team?

[Edited by David Emerling on Apr 26th, 2004 at 01:07 AM] [/B]

No difference. Same action, same response.

Generally, at National events, the players and teams are well behaved. BUT, last year, the heat must have gotten to the Men's teams in Windsor.

We had two situations that called for immediate action and both were met with ejection. They both happened to the crew I was with and *I* wasn't the ejector!

1. Bottom of 7th, relief pitcher in, his team up 2 runs no one on. The pitcher is being an a** and there has already been a "gathering" around the mound once. Pitcher is arrogant. He strikes out a batter for out two, raises his finger to say, "we're #1, and points to the player he just struck out." The team at bat wants to kill him.

So, PU could let this go (we have one out left) and hope we get out of there fast. BUT, he dumps him immediately.

In the ensuing discussion with the coaches, the message is sent - bullsh*t like that will always be met with an ejection.

2. Quarter-final game, I am on 3rd. I call a balk. Pitcher grumbles about getting a warning, yada, yada. Then boom, someone from their bench (1st base side)is tossed. Apparently, he voiced his displeasure about my call. U1 had the pleasure of the ejection. This was in inning #2.

Later that game we had lots of bangers, another balk and there was a real close call at 3rd in teh 2nd extra inning. Some grumbling, but nothing that would get them ejected. The standard had been set.

[Carl Childress]

Originally posted by GarthB

After rereading Blaine's post, I fail to find anyplace where he refered to anyone who disagreed with him as "stupid."

Can we stick to what is really being posted?

Why not re-read the first post of this thread?

[David B]

Originally posted by Carl Childress


Therefore, my philosophy of game control is well known to you: Control the coach (with as much redass as you think necessary), and you won't have trouble with the players.

I agree with that philosophy, but it has to be established first. In our area most all of our officials use that same standard for the coaches, however, when we get "out of towners" like we are now with state playoffs going on, you run into all kinds.

However, as has been stated, it doesn't take long to let them know what will and won't be tolerated.

As far as locals this weekend, F2 batting and disagrees with called strike. Before PU could say anything, coach has called time and takes a long time to discuss with F2 how badly his behavior could affect the rest of the day. (their team was scheduled to play again that night in loser's bracket game with the same umpires)

A good coach (trained by the umpires) can go a long way in these type of game management situations.

Thanks
DAvid

[His High Holiness]

Thanks guys for the entertainment and thanks to the censors for not touching this thread until I had a chance to read it. I got to delay my Monday morning workload a full hour while I caught up on a weekend's worth of flames.

I guess the censors were late coming to work today.

Peter

[David Emerling]

Originally posted by NSump

No difference. Same action, same response. [/B]

Then why did you previously say:
So, I will teach them to use the ejection as a tool to keep control. As they mature as umpires, they will need to use that tool less and less for two reasons. One, they will be better umpires. But more importantly, they will have established themselves as no-nonsense umpires. Here, I rarely eject any more. It is not that I have changed my "standards", but rather my reputation remains. Many players still think I "throw a lot of guys out."

If using "that tool" will be "less and less" because "they will have established themselves as no-nonsense umpires" - why even make this point if the participants will get the same response for the same action?

I guess what you're saying is that the players will SENSE that you are a no-nonsense umpire and won't even TRY such a thing - knowing full well that a no-nonsense umpire would never tolerate such a disrespectful act. Is that it?

I think each umpire needs to establish his own set of tolerances for such things based on his personal temperament. I think it's alright to say that you should ALWAYS eject an individual for a certain act, as long as you realize that that is YOUR personal criteria. Another umpire might have a completely different set of "rules" for ejections. What works for him may not work for you - mostly because you are two completely different people.

For instance, I will not always eject a player or coach for foul language. I'm sure some umpires have a standard rule for ejecting under those conditions. I wouldn't be too quick to fault such an umpire. Personally, I consider the age of the individual, the specific word that is used, and whether anybody else heard it.

A loud, "You're an a&%hole!" will always be an ejection. It's personal and particularly foul. He's gone!

A loud, "That's bullsh*t!", in an adult game, will probably not result in an ejection. The word isn't all that bad, especially in an all-adult context, nor is it personal.

A player's under-the-breath expletive is almost always ignored by me, especially if it is clearly done in spontaneous frustration. I'm not so sure I would allow a 9-yr-old to drop an F-bomb, however.

My point is that there is no reason for umpires to try to standardize their ejection criteria the same that we try to standardize our application of the rules. Everybody understands that ejection criteria is a personal thing for an umpire ... almost like his strikezone. Coaches, fans, and players tend to accept the fact that a particular umpire might have a wide strikezone, or, that he likes to call 'em low. Just the same, they will recognize that some umpires are much quicker to pull the trigger for certain infractions whereas others might show more tolerance.

The key is that each umpire should know himself. An umpire's demeanor, mannerisms, professionalism, and all the little things he does during a game (even his body language and the way he looks) tend to send a subliminal message.

There is something inexplicable about how one umpire's seemingly slack tolerance will NOT backfire on him whereas another umpire's tolerance for a similar act DOES.

Trying to establish Rules for Ejections is often a misguided effort.

David Emerling
Memphis, TN

[bob jenkins]

Originally posted by His High Holiness
Thanks guys for the entertainment and thanks to the censors for not touching this thread until I had a chance to read it. I got to delay my Monday morning workload a full hour while I caught up on a weekend's worth of flames.

I guess the censors were late coming to work today.

Peter

Not at all. The participants in the thread were mostly well behaved, so there was nothing to delete.

[tiger49]

In Rec Adult ball I would keep him around but get my message out to him really clear. First call time and walk out and clean the plate right over the line. As I am going back behind the plate I will metion to him "He's lucky to stay around because he was nice enough to show me where the corner is". In adult ball he usually confirms that he is ready to go by continuing the conversation or just smiles and has a giggle.

In all other levels of ball he should just continue to draw the line all the way to the showers.

[Tim C]

"Tee did what he always does. Erases his posts to try to hide the evidence."

Rut, nothing that sinister in what I do.

After all I understand how the cut and copy portion of the site works. I have obviously read through all the posts and now that my information has been copied and inserted into other posts. Since I have been on this baseball portion of the board far longer than you I know exactly how it works.

On all the web based umpire boards I delete my posts after a certain period of for my own reasons.

Nothing I said has been hidden (the evidence) and the points that I have made will certainly be made again.

Rut, you have made it clear several times that baseball umpiring is your least favorite sport to officiate.

You have said the High School Season is just a fill in until summer basketball programs start.

I just think you like to argue and there is nothing wrong with that . . .

And I do agree with Rut on one key point he made somewhere in this thread . . . baseball umpires are like no other sport officials . . . we argue amoung ourselves over the strangest of issues.

Tee

DISCLAIMER:

All thoughts, ideas and words in this post are considered the intellectual property of the writer and should not be copied, sullied, or incoherently reacted to. Proper paperwork has been filed with the Library of Congress top protect these right and any use, reproduction or transmission of these words without the written consent of the author is forbidden.

Any Oscars, Emmys, Nobel Prizes, Grammies or other awards for these posts will be spilt evenly with all other posters who show the proper respect and acknowledge the great wisdom of these words.

Respectfully,

Grabbem, Screwem and Cheatem Attorneys-at-Law
For the Literary Estate of T Alan Christensen