Part 1 Test for All Coaches???

[WindyCityBlue]

Peter,
You wrote...

I cannot begin count the number of sub NCAA games where I have seen coaches bully or manipulate umpires into calls. Coaches whine and complain because it works on occasion. A good course in psychology wins more games than knowing the rules - at least at the lower levels.



I agree that knowing when, what and how to say things to coaches will help you in the long run. However, how can you argue with making the coach take the Part 1 test each season. As you know, a good test score does not equate to a good official. The same can be said for the coach. Most of us have experienced the coach that likes to test us. Either he is trying to see how we match up or he is trying to trip us up and put us on the defensive. Bullying is a whole different issue. We can end that very quickly.

I contend that a coach that actually knows the rules may not argue as much. There are always exceptions, but my favorite coaches are the guys that know the rules and understand my mechanics. They don't come busting out when I balk a kid, throw a bat out of the game or impose a ground rule call. They actually make my job easier.

I recognize that some coaches may wield their knowledge over a green official, but they will eventually meet their match. Wouldn't you rather have a coach that knew the rules rather than having to explain your calls all of the time?

[gsf23]

Originally posted by His High Holiness
I cannot begin count the number of sub NCAA games where I have seen coaches bully or manipulate umpires into calls. Coaches whine and complain because it works on occasion. A good course in psychology wins more games than knowing the rules - at least at the lower levels. [/B]

If an umpire is going to let that happen, then they shouldn't be out there in the first place.

And as far as weilding knowledge over a green umpire, if he/she makes a mistake on a rule interpretation, then yes, I am going to go out and get it corrected, no matter how green they are.

I also agree that coaches that do take to time to know the rules argue a lot less. I've only argued one judgement call in 12 years, and only argued a few rules interps. But that could also come from the fact that I did my share of umpiring before getting into coaching and still officiate in the off season.

[WindyCityBlue]

I ask you, which is more dangerous to the game...

a high school coach that doesn't know the rules and interps or the umpire who doesn't?

I recognize that there are many members that just LOVE doing freshman and sophomore baseball. Thank you for doing a job that would just kill me. Please understand where this comment comes from though:

Most underlevel coaches deserve the umpires they get.

I'm flattered, but I didn't make this up. It came from a speaker at a baseball clinic I attended many years ago. I'll never forget it.

Rather than view this as a put down, I embraced it as a challenge to get better and know more about the game than the guy making the line up card. It has served me well.

[bbump82]

Originally posted by WindyCityBlue
I ask you, which is more dangerous to the game...

a high school coach that doesn't know the rules and interps or the umpire who doesn't?

Windy, by far a coach that doesn't know the rules is more dangerous. The real question is to whom is he more dangerous?

An official who doesn't know the rules will only have an affect on a few games, a coach is teaching the kids the wrong way to play the game day after day at every pratice. I feel that this is certainly more dangerous (to the kids) that it is if I didn't know about the balk/shoulder turn revision for next year.

[WindyCityBlue]

Scott,

You are obviously too qualified to participate in the normal banter here. I dare say you are of Mensa caliber. The reason I opsed that question was to affirm my contention that it is important to get the coaches to the rules interpretation meetings and take the Part 1 test each year.

Why a coach wouldn't want to be aprised of the new rules, points of emphasis or updated mechanics is beyond comprehension. More importantly, since teachers are usually held to a set of standards, why wouldn't the coach be just as accountable?

As an official that has encountered both extremes of coaching knowledge, I would love to see a mandatory testing for all coaches. It is not important that the scores be posted or that we are even aware of a minimum for these men and women. The fact is, that if your Varsity Coach scores a 58 and his Assistants and Lower Level Coaches pull in 80's and 90's, there will be some teasing around the ol' rub down table! By their very competitive nature, we should see an improvement the next season.

To those officials that are afraid that the coach may know more about the rules and call them on it - shame on you! You should be happy to work on a field with competent coaches. Strategy and skill determine the game. Knowing all of the rules is just good strategy!

[gordon30307]

It can't hurt if coaches know the rules. What would really be nice is if coaches had an understanding of umpire mechanics. If they had a clue as to what our responsibilities are on a given play it might help them understand why a particular call was made. On a banger while they might not agree with the call at least if the official is in the proper position it might make it easier to accept the outcome.

[lawfiveguy]

I have been involved with sports most of my life. When I was a lifeguard I had to recert with a written and skills test every year. When I moved into soccer coaching I had to take periodic assessments and tests to keep my coaching license. As a USSF soccer referee I have to be assessed and pass a written and physical test each year to keep my grade. Further I have to pass Part II of the soccer test to referee post-season in Indiana. As a baseball/softball official my association madated that I take Part I each year at our AGM. The only time I did not have to take a test or show skill was when I was an assistant baseball coach. I think that not only in baseball, but in all sports the coaches should at least have to take the Part I test.

[WindyCityBlue]

gordon and lawfive...

You can move up to the front of the class.
You have shown outstanding judgement.
Gold stars for both of you!

[mick]

Originally posted by WindyCityBlue

Why a coach wouldn't want to be aprised of the new rules, points of emphasis or updated mechanics is beyond comprehension. More importantly, since teachers are usually held to a set of standards, why wouldn't the coach be just as accountable?

As an official that has encountered both extremes of coaching knowledge, I would love to see a mandatory testing for all coaches. It is not important that the scores be posted or that we are even aware of a minimum for these men and women. The fact is, that if your Varsity Coach scores a 58 and his Assistants and Lower Level Coaches pull in 80's and 90's, there will be some teasing around the ol' rub down table! By their very competitive nature, we should see an improvement the next season.

I agree. More knowledge by everyone (fans, teams, officials) will better any game.


In the last year, the Upper Michigan Athletic Committee requested, to the Michigan High School Athletic Association, that the Officials in the Upper Peninsula be excused from the requirement of participating in the yearly rules meetings as a requirement for those officials to be assigned to the state tournaments.

[I had to read that four times to make sure my understanding was correct.]
The MHSAA turned down the request.
mick

[WindyCityBlue]

You can come up front, too.
You obviously understand the importance of testing and evaluating. You get two gold stars!

[gsf23]

Originally posted by bbump82
An official who doesn't know the rules will only have an affect on a few games, a coach is teaching the kids the wrong way to play the game day after day at every pratice. I feel that this is certainly more dangerous (to the kids) that it is if I didn't know about the balk/shoulder turn revision for next year. [/B]

Have to disagree a little on that one. An official who doesn't know the rules will have an effect on not only the games they do, but on all the games that those teams have afterward. I am sure we have all heard a coach or player say, "They let us do that last game!" or "They didn't make that call last time!" All those comments can be attributed to officials who either didn't know or didn't do their jobs.

Now, if I am teaching an illegal pickoff move because I don't know about the balk/shoulder turn revision, and in our first game, you as an umpire, never call a balk because you don't know the rule either, will I keep teaching the move?? Of course I will because you have told me that it is legal by not balking my pitcher.

If a coach is continually teaching kids things that are against the rules, (such as pick offs or the such, not dirty things) that kinda says something about the officials in that area. If the kids were getting called on it, they would probably quit teaching it that way.

[Edited by gsf23 on Oct 27th, 2004 at 05:17 PM]

[mick]

Originally posted by Jim Mills

Mick, it strikes me as perfectly reasonable that the U.P. umpires would want to abstain from the (for many) two-hundred-mile-plus round trip to listen to what amounts to pabulum for anyone who puts forth even modest individual effort to stay abreast of changes.

Yeah, that is reasonable to not want to make a 200 mile trip for that. That's why MHSAA has meeting sites U.P. here 50-60 miles from everywhere. ;-)
mick

[DownTownTonyBrown]

Been away a bit...

I think as most of you have hinted or surmised, this raises the knowledge requirement for the official.

As officials, we should have been pushing the envelope to begin with. But now the coach is going to feel his knowledge is greater, that he is more ready to argue with his paucity of rules knowledge. Perhaps the officials that were sliding along on only a very basic rules knowledge are now going to have to increase their knowledge and be more prepared to defend/discuss.

Before, an official could simply act confident and the ignorant coach would acquiesce because he was 'unarmed.' Now that the coaches will be armed, the slacking official is either going to need to increase his rules knowledge or likely get ran over.

Overall, this is a good thing. Many are the officials that have been sliding along without diligent study... time to sharpen the saw.

Social skills will likely play a greater role in these more educated discussions too!

[PWL]

Originally Posted by WindyCityBlue

You can come up front, too.
You obviously understand the importance of testing and evaluating. You get two gold stars!

Front Row Joe.