Swinging and getting Hit

[LDUB]

Originally posted by Dave Hensley
Assuming the owners of Officiating.com are economically rational people, it would astound me to learn that they condoned or supported the idea of trying to run the Little League umpires off of this site.

Because, after all, they need the eggs.

What is better for business, attracting people with no knowledge, or retaining the current quality posters? Which are more likely to suscrible to officiating.com or buy the BRD? Because isn't that what really brings in the "eggs".

[GarthB]

Originally posted by Dave Hensley
The lament about the proliferation of Little League umpires reminds me of the old joke about the guy who goes to a psychiatrist and says "Doc, you gotta help us. My brother thinks he's a chicken!" The doctor replies, "That's reflective of a serious mental disorder, you should bring him in to see me immediately." To which the man replies, "Well, I would Doc, but you see, we need the eggs!"

While I understand this "Official Forum" is free to use, it is, nonetheless, a part of Officiating.com which is a subscriber-supported, for-profit enterprise. Assuming the owners of Officiating.com are economically rational people, it would astound me to learn that they condoned or supported the idea of trying to run the Little League umpires off of this site.

Because, after all, they need the eggs.

The people "lamenting" don't need the eggs.

The people who set this site up initially have changed their minds. They do need the eggs. And that is understandable, lamentable, but understandable.

[LMan]

how many 'serious' umpires would buy a membership (if they havent already) to Officiating.com if they were reasonably confident that a screening process such as was described would significantly improve the post quality of this forum?

Those are your real eggs

[Carl Childress]

Originally posted by David B

I have to agree. Having participated on many of the other boards for the last several years, its refreshing to read what umpires might be questioning about the rules.

It waste a lot of time dealing with obvious rules that anyone could look up in any rule book if they just would take the time.

I have to disagree with you, David. And with Tee.

Every umpire can improve, both self-image and application of the rules, by listening to/reading "stupid" questions.

Be honest. When someone posts a question that seems trés simple, our (my!) reaction is: "Gosh, I know that. Why doesn't he?" The teacher in eighth grade American History asks: "Can anyone explain why George Washington was not the first president?" One or two hands will shoot up - and explain when called upon that GW was the first president "under the constitution of 1787."

The students who already knew the answer don't "learn" anything. But their self-esteem is not shattered either.

In every learning environment, there are those who already know the material, those who have a guess, and those who haven't a clue.

Think about it: I took American History in junior high, went back to the course (in two semesters) in high school, and took the required two semesters of American history as part of my basics at college. I learned material in every course even though by college I already knew the facts.

I have a suggestion that would solve everybody's problem. We get one of the elementary questions: As soon as someone answers it correctly, everyone else can drop the thread. For example, this thread would have been two posts long under those guidelines.

Motcoach asks the question, Coach JM answers correctly: end of story. Those who know the answer feel superior, and those who don't will learn.

Increasing self-esteem is one reason.

There's a second, possibly more important reason; i.e., building a list of questions with "obvious" answers helps us train beginning umpires. (And coaches)

Over at eTeamz, there's a great little collection compiled by Jim Booth called "The Myths of Baseball."

So, I'll make this offer: Submit to me ([email protected]) your collection of "stupid questions." We'll build our own list. I'll make it a free article on the paid site, refer to it frequently, and update it periodically.

Of course, most of our list will echo Jim's, but our explication and explanation will differ. "Ideas" can't be copyrighted, and we naturally would give Jim credit for that idea.

Increased self-esteem ("Hey, I know that," as my hand shoots into the air) and explaing to candidate umpires that they should look for a coach to say this ("And here's your reply"): Strikes me those are certainly reasons enough not to shoo away all the beginners. (And remember, not every beginners is LL. Some are Pony, Babe Ruth, Mickey Mantle, etc. - grin)

BTW: Youth ball features rules based on OBR, but each organization has its own quirks. That, for me, is sufficient to keep me interested. Someone has suggested a BRD for Youth Ball. We're mulling it over.

[DG]

Good luck on that BRD for youth ball. Up until about 2 weeks ago I worked for a 13-15 league that said they played Babe Ruth rules, and FED, where Babe Ruth did not apply, plus they had their own set of league rules that were often contradictions to one or the other. So it is up to the umpire to figure out that we can have a FPSR because FED has it, and Babe Ruth does not mention, but 2 trips to the mound in the same inning causes pitcher removal because Babe Ruth has this rule, unless of course the league rules are completely different. Holy cow!

[TBBlue]

Originally posted by DG
Good luck on that BRD for youth ball. Up until about 2 weeks ago I worked for a 13-15 league that said they played Babe Ruth rules, and FED, where Babe Ruth did not apply, plus they had their own set of league rules that were often contradictions to one or the other. So it is up to the umpire to figure out that we can have a FPSR because FED has it, and Babe Ruth does not mention, but 2 trips to the mound in the same inning causes pitcher removal because Babe Ruth has this rule, unless of course the league rules are completely different. Holy cow!

Not a bad idea at all Carl. I worked a few weeks after HS season in a "league" that had 4 community fields represented. One played Dizzy Dean, one played Pony, one played straight OBR with safety modifications (similar to AAU, but not affiliated) and one didn't know what they were playing by, so the visitors rules applied. It was bizarre. They did all agree to play Dizzy Dean for their end of season tourney. You will have quite a few customers for a Youth Ball BRD.

[LDUB]

I thought this website was for sports officials of 12 various sports. Not a place where uneducated coaches come to ask simple rule questions which could be solved by them reading the ORB on the MLB website.

[Carl Childress]

Originally posted by LDUB
I thought this website was for sports officials of 12 various sports. Not a place where uneducated coaches come to ask simple rule questions which could be solved by them reading the ORB on the MLB website.

Isn't that the attitude what gets Tee into trouble when he rails against "LL umpires"? If the only people who get to post are those who already know the answers....

[GarthB]

Originally posted by LDUB
I thought this website was for sports officials of 12 various sports. Not a place where uneducated coaches come to ask simple rule questions which could be solved by them reading the ORB on the MLB website.

No. This site is intended to help a business generate revenue. How that revenue is generated is the question and the latest answer seems to be by attracting and accepting the largest possible audience. Often that leads to designing for the lowest common denominator. But hey, it worked so well for the public school system.

[GarthB]

"Isn't that the attitude what gets Tee into trouble when he rails against "LL umpires"? "


Trouble?

[LDUB]

Originally posted by Carl Childress
Isn't that the attitude what gets Tee into trouble when he rails against "LL umpires"? If the only people who get to post are those who already know the answers....

I am not against anyone asking questions. Which way to I face when I dust off the plate? That is a question that a guy getting ready to call his first game might not know. And I don't believe that this is covered in any books, so the only way that guy is going to learn the answer is by asking someone, either online or in person.

I always thought that was different than a coach asking for an answer that is straight out of the rule book. If the original question was asking the defenition of "passed" in determining if a runner is out for contacting a batted ball, that is a decent question. You will never figure it out by just reading the OBR. But dead ball strikes are not hard to understand if you just read the book.

Garth is right. This forum is just used to feed money to Officiating.com. I have no input over how this website is run, so if you want to encourage coach questions, go for it.

But as I have said before, For some reason, motcoach does not strike me as a guy who will be buying an Officiating.com membership. Some people who post on this board hold grudges. A few months back, some posters refused to buy the BRD because they had to give an email address. If they are driven from this board because of "bad" posts, that is just another bad mark against Officiating.com to them.

As Garth said, this board is used to help generate revenue for Officitaing.com. The more posters you get to the forum, the more people who will visit the website. But as more and more bad questions are posted, certain posters will be driven away from the board.

I am not a marketing guy, but I would think you would like to market your product towards people who would be willing to purchace it. I bet there aren't a lot of snowblower ads down in Texas.

Officiating.com has a choice, they can use their forum to retain a client base who are in to sports officiating, or they can try to attract as many people to the forum as possible, many of which who are coaches and fans, which in turn will drive away some of the sports officials.

I would assume the officials would be more likely to buy books about officiating than the coaches and fans.

[Kaliix]

As I've said before, you guys who don't want simple questions asked on this site should just not post to the thread. The first post answered the thread. Just leave it at that.

The more you post to the thread, the more you emphasize the thread. Some people just don't get it.

[LDUB]

Originally posted by Kaliix
Some people just don't get it.

You are correct, except you are the one who dosen't get it. This goes a lot deeper than ignoring a post every month or two. Eventually this board will be overrun with threads similar to this one. Go to eteamz and try and try to figure out which of the threads are not LL/coach posts.

I just checked eteamz, the first post on the list similar to this one, a post about a simple rule, and the second post is about if the batter's hands are part of the bat or not. Do you want this fourm to turn into that? At the rate this board is going, it dosen't have much time untill it is just another eteamz.

[Rich]

Originally posted by LDUB

You are correct, except you are the one who dosen't get it. This goes a lot deeper than ignoring a post every month or two. Eventually this board will be overrun with threads similar to this one. Go to eteamz and try and try to figure out which of the threads are not LL/coach posts.

I just checked eteamz, the first post on the list similar to this one, a post about a simple rule, and the second post is about if the batter's hands are part of the bat or not. Do you want this fourm to turn into that? At the rate this board is going, it dosen't have much time untill it is just another eteamz.

What aggravates me about eTeamz is that EVERY OBR post is ASSUMED to be small diamond, LL in nature. That day is slowly coming here.

[Russ]

I,m really confused about the distain for coach and/or LL generated threads.
When you register with this sight it welcomes those types of posters.
This sight is not really flooded with thread topics. How few threads a day would there be without these type?