Photos are fun to discuss, they give us something more to go from in starting discussions. So, without further ado, I'd like to start a series here, the Visual Daily Double, and post photos to facilitate discussions. I recommend anyone that cares to start one like this at anytime, go right ahead. Take a look at the reply box if you don't know how to program an inline image in HTML.

So, without further ado...

<img src="http://www.foxsports.com/photos/edmonds041001.jpg">

Has anyone else found that it is better to argue with your mask on? While it is on, you have a psychological shield between you and the arguer, so that it personaly affects you less, causing a greater degree of discipline and objectivity. Also, when the umpire needs to make an emphatic "that's enough" statement, he can take off the mask (making it clear that he's not threatening to use it to strike the arguer) and give a more meaningful warning.

Obviously, we're not going to put the mask on just to argue, but it would be good to leave it on when its already on.

P-Sz

I've never considered it. However, in our area the umpires and head coaches are generally on a first-name basis and the mask might actually get in the way of "conversation" like that in the picture. ;)

I really don't know
 

Maybe the reason the umpire left his mask on was to say, "We have a game to play and I'm not going to take the time to argue with you". IMHO, if he removed his mask, he would have opened the door for MORE complaining.

I would think that removing the mask would only escalate the situation, not defuse it.

I remove it
 

Mike,
I remove my mask for a discussion, but may not for a quick comment.
I mumble enough without that mask on my chin.
mick

I think the mask issue is in left field. If you know how to handle yourself, you know how to handle yourself-------with or without a mask. Masks may have been beneficial to Zorro and the Lone Ranger, but those are totally different issues---and I never saw them have to deal with coaches.

Steve

Spazzzzzzzzzzz
 

You're being Spazzzzzz again. And I had seen such a change.

You cannot possibly make any decesions from this photo. You assumptions have no basis of logic.

Warm up next time before you post.

Love and Kisses,

Re: I remove it
 

:) I appreciate the comment. I'm starting my first year as a HS umpire and only worked mostly 13-14 year old leagues last year (with a few JV Legion games thrown in later in the year) so my opinion may very well change so I don't count my opinion worth much.

I will remove my mask if the conversation has meaning. If it is to debate a called third strike, I will likely leave it on. In my mind, that signals that I'm not going to debate the issue.

And I too mmble t-- mch wthout the msk ;)

Now - that's a good post
 

I guess experience teaches what to do with the mask.

Over the years I have developed a tendency to ONLY take the mask off when I need to make a clear point. Example: if I call a hitter out on a called third to end the inning, I take my mask off quickly and walk directly away from the hitter.

I NEVER agrue with my mask on . . .

This is a pretty interesting thought. I would guess it would be considered raising the tension level as soon a a PU takes off the mask.

Re: Now - that's a good post
 

Great point for umps who don't already do this. I did a big tourney once and a partner noticed I stood there after the big "three". He told me I was begging for it.

Since then I handle it just like Tee. Say it, turn your back to him (not the play) and a few steps in the opposite direction tells him, "This play is over"

Just my opinion,

Steve

Good comments, all. I agree that perhaps removing the mask as suggested in my first post might not be such a great idea. I like Tee's comment about removing the mask after a strike three call to end the inning--it helps sell the call, and that's always good.

P-Sz

Leaving it on.
 

I think this might be a balls and strikes argument, if that is the case, leave it on. The only reason you should take of the mask is if you have something special to discuss or if you expect that conversation to be long. I have left my mask on when a player wants to debate judgement calls, but if I know it is a serious discussion about a rule or something that will take time, I take it off. I think this is a personal thing, but leaving the mask on in this situation as it appears it was appropriate.

In a conversation I once had with Durwood Merrill, he says to always leave the mask on during confrontation. He says taking the mask off is an indication that the conversation has escalated and someone is about to go. In his theory, he feels the mask on and the mask off are signals to players and coaches.

Arguing with mask on = "I'm putting up with this but not for long."

Arguing with mask off = "Somebody's fixing to go!"

Review the Roberto Alomar spitting incident. The discussion begins with mask on. It quickly erodes when the mask comes off. This is just an example.

I think the mask is a tool for reading body language.

I've never tossed a manager.
 

ump24,
I think that also. And the reason that I remove my mask for discussion and hold it behind my back, is so the player, or coach, can see that I am not hiding behind it, and that they are talking with a real person.
mick

Re: I've never tossed a manager.
 

Good point, mick. At lower levels of ball I think the mask should probably routinely come off in discussions. There should be very few ejections and the focus is on learning and sportsmanship.

At upper levels (i.e. professional and college) rules knowledge and sportsmanship are assumed values. Therefore, players and coaches know what type of behavior is acceptable and unacceptable.

Taking off your mask at upper levels communicates a totally different motive than it does at lower levels. Great point mick.

Re: I've never tossed a manager.
 

Mick, I only agree with you if the discussion is a calm rules discussion. But if they want to argue judgement and debate with me, then the mask is going to stay on. And if I have to take it off, they have got a problem and it might be time for them to go. But if we are talking about the bigger kids and the more advanced levels, like a varsity or college level, I am keeping it on. But understand, this is very personal like other things in the game, so good people can disagree. I just feel that this works for me, not necessarily everyone else. And believe me, you are not wrong, it is just different.

Peace

Re: Re: I've never tossed a manager.
 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by ump24

Quote:

At upper levels (i.e. professional and college) rules knowledge and sportsmanship are assumed values. Therefore, players and coaches know what type of behavior is acceptable and unacceptable. Taking off your mask at upper levels communicates a totally different motive than it does at lower levels.

ump24,
"I see!", said the blind carpenter, as he picked up his hammer and saw.
If the manager is getting paid ... it's a different game.
I have never worked where there was a paid manager.
I wonder why it has to be that way.
mick

[QUOTE]Originally posted by JRutledge

Quote:

...if the discussion is a calm rules discussion. But if they want to argue judgement and debate with me, then the mask is going to stay on.

Rut,
I only discuss calmly. I never raise my voice.
I rarely get in an argument, cuz I'm always right... and I can live with that whether "they" can , or not.
mick

What about umpires who wear the "hockey style" mask? I've played goal before with that style mask, it's difficult to be understood from.

When do you take that off or would you? Just throwing that out, I wore that style once having borrowed it from a partner, hated it and regular mask. (+POS SUL)

Leave it on
 

If you leave your mask on during an argument (not a discussion that started and appears calm) the player looks the agressor. You look as if you are ready to go back to work and he is holding up the game. If you take it off, you appear to be on the aggressive. You took an action to continue the argument and demonstrated that to everyone in the yard. You are no on the aggressive.

Leave it on.

Re: Leave it on
 

I whole-heartedly agree with Tony.

In today's baseball, it is of utmost importance that we strive to attain body language which is completely and utterly non-confrontational. Anything which gives the appearance of aggression should be avoided. Removing the mask mid-argument is an example of aggressive body language.

The juxtaposition of a calm, cool, and collected umpire listening to the rants and raves of an angry coach gives us great power. Either the coach will realize he is the only one acting like a fool and calm down, or his support will crumble when he is finally removed from the game.

Anything we do which even gives a hint of aggression, like removing the mask mid-argument, moving toward a player, coach, or bench, or raising our voice will simply give fuel to fires of the supporters of the offender. Once the offender has been ejected, we need peace for the duration of the game. We are more likely to get that if only the initial offender looks utterly guilty. If we show even a hint of guilt, the problems of the day will have only just begun.

I guess what I'd say is . . .
 

I can't remember every REALLY arguing with my mask ON.

An umpire knows WHEN to take that cage off . . . I mean it would be REALLY rare to dump someone without first taking off your mask.

Now maybe I am just too Politically insensitive but . . .

IF I was headed to the bench to quiet it down (mask off)
If I had a hitter RETURN to the dish to continue an argument about a strike call (mask off)
If I had a base coach head down the line to ask a question (mask on)

While I agree with some of what Jim Porter has said I think in "Big Boy Ball" you sometimes need to clearly establish that you are in charge (some could say, "Intimidate").

Re: I guess what I'd say is . . .
 

Tee,

I <b>do</b> work "Big Boy Ball," and my advice is for exactly that.

The old school where you were taught has gone the way of the dinosaurs. Intimidation is discouraged now. Welcome to the New Millenium.

There is no reason for an umpire to <b>establish</b> he is in charge. He is already <b>in</b> charge. Any "establishing" which needs to be done is now considered to be a weak approach. No need to establish something that is already given to you by the rules and by practice, custom, and tradition.

If you need to establish that you are in charge, then you are admitting that, at some point, you <b>weren't</b> in charge. That kind of loss of control makes for a lowered rating in today's baseball.

Sorry, but that old school approach is no longer recommended by any clinician worth his salt.


[Edited by Jim Porter on Apr 12th, 2001 at 03:02 PM]

There is a middle ground
 

I don't think it is necessary to be intimidating. I don't ever argue, since it is an exercise in futility.

I sometimes think it is polite to remove your mask when talking to a manager or coach. Same with sunglasses. Then, removing the mask is a sign of respect.

But there are times when you need to make a point. If the coach in the third base box is chipping at your strike zone, nothing makes the point of how the coach is treading on thin ice BETTER than removing the mask, taking a step or two towards third, and quietly yet forcefully stopping the chipping.

Removing the mask doesn't always have to signify something, either. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.

Rich

I'll go to your school.
 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Jim Porter

Quote:

"There is no reason for an umpire to <b>establish</b> he is in charge. "

Jim,
Yer singin' my song.
mick

Sung to the tune: "Clap On"
 

You guys just kill me. Now we have an extremely overrated discussion which appears to be crumbling and taking a personal vent. We even have old school versus new school. Amazing that umpires can't even agree whether to keep their masks on or take them off during an "argument." I sit here imagining all the guys on this list sitting there in front of their computers with their masks on just so they can argue with another internet umpire.

Mask on... (clap, clap)

Mask off... (clap, clap)

Mask on, mask off... (pause)

Mask on! (clap, clap)

Well,
 

Jim . . . let's put it this way:

I work my way (retired) and you work yours.

No one has ever confused me with someone who is politically correct.

Jim, in the dog-eat-dog world of upper end baseball, an umpire constantly is being tested. You re-establish your control over and over.

I will (would, I keep forgetting I am retired) keep taking my mask off ANYTIME I feel it is necessary. If you feel differently fine . . . that is why you umpire one way and others umpire different ways.

No need to nuke out at me Jim . . . I am still one of your admirers.

Re: Sung to the tune:
 

Hehe! I love it. Once I did wear my mask while using the computer...but we needn't get into that...

P-Sz

Re: Well,
 

Tee,

I didn't mean to sound like I was "nuking out" at you. I was just trying to make my point as clearly as possible. My apologies if you were offended.


Umpyre007,

I felt this thread became a much deeper discussion than a "mask on, mask off" debate. There's much value in the opinions expressed.

Re: Re: Well,
 

Perhaps, perhaps not. :eek:

Mask on or off
 

I work little guy ball. When do I remove my mask?

Chipping from the dugout or coaches box: 1st time, look over to acknowledge the intelligent conversation; 2nd, look over, "coach I can hear you"; 3rd time, Whip off mask, point at dugout, utter, rather firmly, "THAT'S ENOUGH"!! EJ is fast approaching.

Next:

Coach comes out to talk to me: Gently remove mask, if wearing re-entry shields (shades), gently remove them. Direct eye contact is good in a calm or rather spirited discussion. I don't wear shades, I need all the light I can get.

Works for me.

Dave Davies