Gang:

I am doing a little research for an upcoming article. You may have seen a preview of the debate "Big finger v. calm dismissal"

Without getting into my article too much, here is my very pointed view of this.

When it gets to the point that you need to toss a guy, don't be shy. Use the BIG FINGER and make sure everyone knows he is gone.

Doing so sends two messages.

1. YOU are in charge. Not the butthead who you just tossed.

2. More importantly, it sends the message to everyone else that certain behaviors will lead to the same fate.

Thoughts? Comments? When would a "calm ejection" be worthwhile (I can't remember ever doing it, so help me here!)

Generally, I agree. Especially with a seasoned umpire who practices good game management. When it becomes necessary, you need to let them know that you are in control of the game. I imagine this always applies to players. But if you are looking for an exception, how about a coach who is being tossed with his pitcher who just threw at the batter. If the coach (especially a respected one) has to go by mandate, but he has been trying to control his team, I see no reason to embarass him.

Nsump, when I was doing "little sprout" ball, our theory was that we ejected the youngins with the "calm ejection" and saved the fireworks for the jerk coach/manager. Our thinking was to save that little tyke a bunch of embarrasment and ego shattering.

Now, as I have moved up to doing games for thems that shave, there is no "calm ejection" in my ball bag anymore. Perhaps those "big finger" ejections I see now are those little buggers who we protected in youth ball??

Bob

Like a fine wine or a beautiful woman, they both have their places.

The heave-ho is beautiful when a player/coach manager crosses the line, is loud and overbearing. There is little point to calmly dumping a guy who is engaged in an F-bomb laced tirade. Eject and walk away...get the game going once the mope is out of earshot.

That said, I've also ejected coaches who actually asked if they had been ejected. I would say yes and they would say that I 'didn't make the big point to the exit'. I would ask if they wanted me to do it or just let them leave with some dignity. On those occassions, the cause was enough to warrant ejection but not enough to escalate it to hystrionics. "Coach, are you done?" Yes. "Okay, then hit the shower, because I agree." No finger pointing or dirt kicking needed. If the others have to question what happened to the coach, then it was a pretty good job of rage control. Sometimes the coach wants to get run and needs the big heave to rally his team. Sometimes I comply and other times I say, "Carl, (or whatever his first name is) You're done here and I won't let you do this to the game. Now get off the field before this costs you." You may not be able to do this and this is not appropriate for all levels of baseball, but it works for me. I treat them with respect 99% of the time and work hard to earn theirs. Without fail, we both know if we've crossed a line.

A while ago, I posted a note on dealing with trouble. I received a couple of responses that said that they like that I alluded to police officers handling arrests. In other words, maintain control, ask questions and escalate your response in direct correlation to the threat that is perceived. Keep your voice low, that makes the other guy look like the aggressor, maintain eye contact (you are in charge after all) and communicate your beliefs. Just because the coach comes charging out spitting and steaming doesn't mean the guy is going to get run. Be aware that your response is even more critical than his. The NCAA has some great video on handling situations. In most cases, Yeast compliments the umpires on their restraint. He even says that the umpires may have been justified in ejecting the offenders even though they didn't. That is not a candyass, that is a pro in NCAA blues.

Dump him how you see fit; the Olympian arm throw or the simple wrist flick are both appropriate and preserve your authority. Use them well and hopefully not often.

Well put, WWTB. I whole-heartedly concur.

Would that be after he's guilty of interfering and you call "Obstruction!"?

[/B][/QUOTE]
Yes, there are several scenarios where even an out of control coach, who's having a bad day, could get a short "Time to go home, coach, let's do this with no big deal, I respect you to much to make you the center of a scene." [/B][/QUOTE]

I can't envision doing this - I don't eject very many people, and when I do it's because of the "scene" they've made. Even the ones I respect (for the most part) know that if they are dumped by me there will be no doubt in anyone's mind they've been dumped. I don't want to give the impression that "Gee, coach, you're a nice guy but you've stepped over the line a little so I'm going to have to, um, let you go for today...but I'll still respect you in the morning..."

JJ

JJ:

Agreed. The problem with those who "quietly" dump the coach is twofold.

First, if the coach has gone far enough to get dumped, he has usually done something to either embarass you or show you up. for that, he det's the big finger. I have never understood why any umpire would "quietly" dump comeone who has come out to make an *** of you.

Secondly, if nowbody knows he is gone, that sends the message that the behavior os OK....which by the ejection you have said it isn't.

BTW, this all pertains to men that shave. I agree that youth kids can be ejected with far less vigor. However, everybody still needs to know why the little **** is gone.

Finally, about the Yeast videos. I am a big fan of controlling the situation before it gets to an ejection. We can do a lot to calm a situation. BUT WHEN IT GETS TO AN EJECTION, then it needs your full effort.

Blaine

JJ,

I know you and respect where you work. Let me ask you a question; have you ever dumped a coach who was in the dugout? No one can see him red-assing you, so why use the demonstrative ejection? He wins and you look bad.

I proffer that a simple point at him and index finger flick is all it takes. He'll come out and everyone will know that he must have crossed the line somewhere. You remained cool and because you left your mask on, no one can read your lips. I know that you've seen this.

[Edited by WhatWuzThatBlue on Dec 5th, 2005 at 10:22 PM]

If i have known someone for years and they still don't know how to handle a baseball game, it is about time that i did some public lessons. Coaches should never be ejected except for two cases:

1) the rules warrant it (pitching at batters, etc.)
2) they have undermined the game

number 2 can be taken quite broadly, but it is not meant to be so. Clearly it is worth more to the players as well as a coach to be given a chance to control themselves.

just my two cents

Even if the coach is in the dugout, I am demonstrative when I eject him. I want everyone, not just him, to know that he's crossed the line. If I try to do a "subtle" dump, the perception is that I would like him to "quietly" leave. He never will (leave quietly). I'd rather have a "show of force" up front on my end, so he'll know if he comes out for a piece of me he'll know I'm not intimidated by him.
Unfortunately, ejections are seldom neat, clean, and quiet. It would be wonderful to just use one finger and wave him gone...but I missed that class in "The Dark Arts".
JJ

The coaches and players should all know where the line is in regards to ejections by the time they reach the big diamond.

In my games, if they come charging at a crew member from the dugout or a coaches box, they're gone. Period. I'm not shy about how I let them know either. If they can't show me respect and learn to argue without crossing the line, then why should I show them respect when it's time for them to go.

Also, if it becomes personal or profane, they've worn out their welcome for the day, possibly more than that if they have to serve a suspension.

I don't eject often, but when I do, it's done the same way. I give em' the hook and walk away. If they follow I expect my partner to come in and walk their rat butt away.

Tim.

Fair enough, JJ, I suggested that there is a time and place for each ejection. Maybe I've been fortunate enough to see a few of each over the last few years. I hate to admit that I like the heave ho better, but the less dramatic one is refreshing.

Thomas,

Maybe it's egomaniacal to eject early and often for inappropriate behavior, maybe it's not. Each of us has his/her own criterion we use to guage when an ejection is warranted.

To me, it's not a matter of being shown up as much as it is a matter of a known breach of protocol. The coaches insist on a high level of professionalism from umpires. I expect the same thing from them. They know where the line is, and they're the ones who decide to cross that line. It's always been my belief that we don't eject coaches, they eject themselves.


I don't see the need to be the nice guy and eject with any soft soap. I think it's best to be firm and definitive. You don't need to make a spectacle of yourself when you eject someone, but you still need to send a strong message so that someone else will not have to clean up after you the next time this guy decides to cross the line.

Tim.

You are debating with someone who thinks umpires should wear white.

I hope that I'm doing this correctly, I like this question. I have a young son who likes to be, well, a young monster. There are times when I have to yell and times I have to gently urge him to stop. The same applies on the field. WhatWuzThatBlue said that the situation dictates the response and I agree. I don't eject more than a couple a season but they earn them. I used both methods this year. The quiet way, as you put it, was the result of a coach saying that he was irritated by a few calls I made in the field that game. He wouldn't leave but wasn't swearing or making a spectacle of himself. I gave the the ultimatum that I was going to tell his pitcher to get ready and if he was on the field after that he could just head to the bus. He refused to move so I told him that he was ejected, wrote it on my gamecard and announced it to the other team. He walked away mumbling about never seeing anything like us. But- he walked away and kept going all the way to the bus. His assistant later told me that he had been ejected six times that year.

I agree with the demonstrative dump, given the need to be clear about behavior that is over the line. Most of my ejections would fall in this category. However, last season I had a good D3 team getting killed by a poor team. The better team also had their AD in the dugout, so the coach couldn't misbehave and therefore he needed to make us to do something. I was the base ump and after a close play at second the offending coach calmly came out to me in CF, hands in jacket pockets with the "I'm just here to talk" expression. But when he gets there he says, while looking down at the grass, kicking it "you two really suck today, why don't you just give your fees back and go home". He wanted me to over-react first, and from CF no one has heard us so to all present I would look like the agressor with a big heave, so then he could do his nutty thing. I just say with my hands behind my back "sorry you feel that way, and by the way you don't have to watch anymore, you're gone". Reply "so long as you know you suck", reply "so long as you know you're gone". Off he walks, end of story.

One of our finest internet umpires, HHH, has covered this sitch very well:

1) If you are determined to toss the offending party, after quiet , private discussion, tell him/her they are gone in such a way as to get the troll to become unglued.

2) Then, give him the big send-off. Most people who view it will think you had no choice.


This has worked like a charm for me numerous times, maybe it will work for you.



Doug

Sure that was an option done it before, but what worked for me here was having him have to go back to his AD and tell him he was done...

His High Holiness.

Thomas,

If you were to umpire here, the correct answer would be:

Should, hardly
Do, never
Optional, absolutely not!

Navy blue for HS (as the Fed rule dictates)
Lt. Blue Collegiate Style (red,white,blue trim) optional for non-HS games.

White shirts are for the Good Humor Man.

Supe.

I agree completly with this.

I too, have had coaches say, "that was the nicest ejection I have ever seen." Drawing attention to yourself is more of a self ego problem, than a demonstration of professionalism.

In my early years, I actually thought everyone had come to watch me umpire. Boy, do you grow up, when you find out that your just another "BLUE" out there.

I have had my share of "Big Fingers" over the years but, it's more enjoyable watching them trying to figure out how to rattle you, and losing.

Does an umpire only get to wear white until his first ejection, then he has to wear ivory or off-white?

Always include that I gave Peter that name in an email circulated in the listserv UmpiresTalk.

He liked the pejorative so well, he has turned it into a commendation.

How he did that is a mystery to me!

ACTUALLY, Carl gave Peter the name "His Holiness", which Peter loved. He signed his posts HH. When this board opened, and Peter tried to register, HH was already taken as a moniker, so Peter added the third "H" making it His High Holiness.

And that's the truth.

And that is the rest of the story
 

Not quite, but close.

Originally, I altered my name to HisHoliness without the space in the name in order to compete with the the buttsnuffler who stole my identity. It then became confusing to the reader to determine whether His Holiness or HisHoliness was posting. Furthermore, there were a couple of posters who objected to the use of the same name as the Pope. One of them was you, Garth. Furthermore, I got a private email expressing the same concern with my blasphemy and, in a rare moment of sensitivity, I inserted the High as in His High Holiness. There it has stuck for over 5 years although I did once consider a promotion to His Humble High Holiness.

BTW, I was told at the time, in the same email from a source on UmpireTalk who objected to my blasphemy, that the buttsnuffler who stole my identity was someone who T. Alan had nicknamed "King of the Snufflers." That person never had the stones to take it on as a moniker. :D

Peter

Re: And that is the rest of the story
 

Not quite, but close.

While I never enjoyed your moniker, or in those days, much of what you posted, I didn't consider it blasphemy. I don't consider much as blasphemy and it's not a word I throw around lightly. Like Carl, I was both confused and annoyed with your ability to turn it into a positive. As you know, I've long since gotten over that.

I was the one Tee dubbed "King of the Butt Snuffler" for my defense of Carl against some charges made by some at McGriffs. We all know what became of McGriffs.

However, I did not steal your moniker. If I had, I'd have used it. I'd probably also have gotten the history of it better. :D

This reminds me of a funny incident that happened to me in 1990. Between innings of a varsity game between two local powerhouses, the visiting coach, who knew me oh so well, came to me on the line between innings. He put his arm on my shoulder casually and said, "you know Steve, I think you're doing a hell of a job out here." At that point I was feeling pretty good about myself. Then he continued, "but you see that guy out there?" He pointed to my partner who was in short right center and said, "he thinks you're horsesh*t!" He cracked me up, and we had a good laugh about it.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by SanDiegoSteve

Quote:

This reminds me of a funny incident that happened to me in 1990. Between innings of a varsity game between two local powerhouses, the visiting coach, who knew me oh so well, came to me on the line between innings. He put his arm on my shoulder casually and said, "you know Steve, I think you're doing a hell of a job out here." At that point I was feeling pretty good about myself. Then he continued, "but you see that guy out there?" He pointed to my partner who was in short right center and said, "he thinks you're horsesh*t!" He cracked me up, and we had a good laugh about it.

I've told this story often, but new internet generations (two years or so) pop up, so....

In a state playoff competetion I opened behind the plate. The first pitch resulted in a lame bouncer to third, and B1 was out by a lot. I looked up to find the McAllen coach, Lupe Canul, breathing fire: "Get some help. That ball hit him in the box." I convinced him that any of the men who had seen it would have called it. "It's ain't an appeal play, Lupe."

He loses - on the road. The next night, I'm in the rocking chair when Lupe's choice for first-base umpire kicked a routine call. It was so routine, and coach of the team batting and his runner at second had already starfted for the first-base dugout.

Lupe finally got to Fernando, and they talked long enough for me to go for a hogdog and Dr Pepper. Finally, it broke up and Lupe went back to his dugout.

The plate umpire called "Play!"

Lupe called: "Time!" David threw up his hands - and Lupe started for me. For me? We're in the fifth inning, and I called one ball foul.

He arrives, puts his arm around my shoulders, and turned me to face left center. "Carl, I want you to know that next year I'm going to have aides."

Assistant coaches were all the rage at that time, especially in football.

"I think that's great. An extra coach can't hurt."

"Oh, I don't mean that. I mean 'aids,' like what I'm gonna get from the fucI*ing I'm getting from you and Fernie."

Then, he held me very strongly so I didn't collapse on the grass.

When I tell that story, someone also asks: "Did you eject him?"

I always tell the truth: "I asked for his autograph."

I saw Lupe last year at a select 12u tournament. I was calling the plate; his grandson was batting.

Lah, me.

Carl
 

Carl,

I read somewhere that you had retired from umpiring in 1996. Obviously you came out of retirement. When and why? Did you miss it too much?

Re: Carl
 

I retired so I could watch my grandson play T-ball. Then, Coach Harold Allen, a pitcher in the Astros organization, asked me if I would train the umpires for his Rising Star Baseball School leagues and tournaments.

I was yaking about this and that one evening, and the kiddos wanted a break. I started out of Building A, heading for Bulding B and the head when I heard Charley (his real name, not Jim Evans' Charley) say: "Well, he talks a good game, but I'd like to see him get his fat as* on the field and show us what to do."

So I did.

That doesn't sound personal to me. You said that you like to wear white and he said what most of us know. I haven't found a rule book or umpire manual that says this is okay. How is that personal?

Just my 2 cents. Thanks for reading.

Re: Re: Re: Carl
 

If I knew how to embed a photo....

Just hold it up to the screen - if it really IS big, we'll all see it! :)

JJ

PS Do you have a big moniter? ;)

Monitor. Is that what they call it in your neck of North Carolina? You don't hear banjos in the background, do you?

Maybe he wasn't referring to your computer screen? (grin)

Let's just say the moon is always full and has more crack than Harlem.

Garth: A simple Google search reveals:

1. New York is classified as an HIDTA or high intensity drug trafficking area. Of 89,323 felony arrests in Hew York City in 2003, 14,023 tested positive for crack cocaine. (Office of National Drug Control Policy)

2. Studies conducted in East Harlem, NY, reported 33% of crack users to be female; 91% of the population using cocaine were African American or Hispanic. (Medicine.com)

3. My last time in Harlem was in 1991. After a game at Yankee Stadium, we drove down Adam Clayton Powell Blvd. on our way to a meeting in mid-town Manhattan with Jim Evans, who had called the plate that night. He did a pretty good job. (grin)

4. I was last in Mississippi in 1960, registering black (we called them Negroes in those days) voters for the Kennedy/Nixon presidential election. We hoped most would vote for Kennedy. Perhaps they did, but Sen. Harry Byrd of Virginia, a segregationist Democrat, won Mississippi's eight electoral votes.

5. Facts are not racist. There is plenty of crack in Harlem. And Houston. And Los Angeles. And even Seattle.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Carl Childress

Quote:

Originally posted by GarthB Quote: Originally posted by PWL Let's just say the moon is always full and has more crack than Harlem. Tell me, when was the last time you were in Harlem? On what basis what do you judge the amount of crack there? Are you as racist as you appear?

Garth: A simple Google search reveals:

1. New York is classified as an HIDTA or high intensity drug trafficking area. Of 89,323 felony arrests in Hew York City in 2003, 14,023 tested positive for crack cocaine. (Office of National Drug Control Policy)

Spokane, Washington was so listed in 2005.

2. Studies conducted in East Harlem, NY, reported 33% of crack users to be female; 91% of the population using cocaine were African American or Hispanic. (Medicine.com)

That bears repeating 91 of THOSE USING COCAINE...not, 91% of the population uses cocaine. By the way, Spokaen is 94% Caucasion.

3. My last time in Harlem was in 1991. After a game at Yankee Stadium, we drove down Adam Clayton Powell Blvd. on our way to a meeting in mid-town Manhattan with Jim Evans, who had called the plate that night. He did a pretty good job. (grin)

My last time was in 2005. My oldest son lives near there. Bill Clinton's offices are there. You'd be surprised at the difference since 1991. The racist stereotype doesn't fit.

4. I was last in Mississippi in 1960, registering black (we called them Negroes in those days) voters for the Kennedy/Nixon presidential election. We hoped most would vote for Kennedy. Perhaps they did, but Sen. Harry Byrd of Virginia, a segregationist Democrat, won Mississippi's eight electoral votes.

I'm proud you were there. I was but a mere child and only beginning to understand what I was hearing of those events.

5. Facts are not racist. There is plenty of crack in Harlem. And Houston. And Los Angeles. And even Seattle.

I never said facts are racist. I attempted to imply that suppostions are racist. Assumption of facts not in evidence based on race is racist. And, I believe, (I'm too busy with class to look it up right now) I said that the poster appeared racist. Based on what I have said above, I stand by that.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by GarthB
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Carl Childress

Quote:

Originally posted by GarthB Quote: Originally posted by PWL Let's just say the moon is always full and has more crack than Harlem. Garth: A simple Google search reveals: 2. Studies conducted in East Harlem, NY, reported 33% of crack users to be female; 91% of the population using cocaine were African American or Hispanic. (Medicine.com) That bears repeating 91 of THOSE USING COCAINE...not, 91% of the population uses cocaine. By the way, Spokaen is 94% Caucasion. And, I believe, (I'm too busy with class to look it up right now) I said that the poster appeared racist. Based on what I have said above, I stand by that.

Garth:

Now I think you'll admit you're over-reacting, finding racism where none existed. PWL's entire post heads this message: The "moon" he's referring to is my derrière; he's assuming that with age, one's butt cracks. I'm told that's not true of mine. (grin)

Yes, nobody thought I implied that 91% of the population of East Harlem smoked crack cocaine. But, let's extrapolate here:

On December 31, 2004, there were 2,135,901 prisoners in state and federal penitentiaries. Of those, 21% were drug related; that's more than 400,000 druggies.

Here's are some other facts: At year end 2004 there were 3,218 black male sentenced prison inmates per 100,000 black males in the United States, compared to 1,220 Hispanic male inmates per 100,000 Hispanic males and 463 white male inmates per 100,000 white males. (Prison Census)

Blacks make up 12.1 percent of our population; hispanics, 12.5. (US Census Bureau)

But of the two million prisoners, roughly 50% are black. (Manning Marable, Professor of History and Political Science, and the Director of the Institute for Research in African-American Studies, Columbia University.)

We all know the myriad reasons for the high concentration of blacks in prison; i.e., ease of conviction, poverty, despair, joblessness. We also know that the vast majority of crimes by blacks are committeed against blacks. There's no need for whites to arm themselves against African-Americans.

All I'm saying is: Extrapolation from every statistic I can find,

<b>there's a lot crack in Harlem.</b>

Also: PWL may be racist. But one can't tell from what he said.

At a Martin Luther King memorial service recently, a black professor wanted to show that <i>everyone</i> in the United States is racist in one way or another.

Paraphrasing: Imagine you're a white person walking alone in the inner city after midnight. You see approaching you a band of five blacks dressed in hip/hop style. What goes through your mind?

Now, imagine you're a black person and the same thing happens to you.

I'll tell you what went through <i>my</i> mind:

a. I don't have any business out alone after midnight in a big city, regardless of what color I am.

b. The same fear that would cross my mind (white/blacks approaching) is the same fear I would feel if five whites, hip/hop guys were showing up. That's because:

c. People out that late are up to no good, regardless of their race. And if that's so...

d. What store was I headed to burgle?

I think, pending more evidence, you've misjudged PWL.

See, he was making a crack (pun intended) about me. I'm the one who should be p1ssed. (grin)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Carl Childress

Garth:

Now I think you'll admit you're over-reacting, finding racism where none existed.

It's really quite simple, Carl. The poster used a black stereotype for humor. I said that appeared racist. I don't feel that is over-reacting. I feel the same way about all race-based humor.

As for your statistics....unemployment is higher for blacks than whites. Does that excuse stereotypical humor based on blacks being lazy or shiftless?

Texas is among five states that lead the nation in dropout rates. ("Locating the Drop Out Crisis", John Hopkins University 2004) Does this justify humor based on dumb Texans? Okay, maybe that one does.

I think, pending more evidence, you've misjudged PWL.

I think those using race stereotypes as humor present the appearance of ignorance or racism. In PWL's case you might be right. Perhaps it isn't racism.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by GarthB

Quote:

Originally posted by Carl Childress Garth: Now I think you'll admit you're over-reacting, finding racism where none existed. It's really quite simple, Carl. The poster used a black stereotype for humor. I said that appeared racist. I don't feel that is over-reacting. I feel the same way about all race-based humor. As for your statistics....unemployment is higher for blacks than whites. Does that excuse stereotypical humor based on blacks being lazy or shiftless? Texas is among five states that lead the nation in dropout rates. ("Locating the Drop Out Crisis", John Hopkins University 2004) Does this justify humor based on dumb Texans? Okay, maybe that one does. I think, pending more evidence, you've misjudged PWL. I think those using race stereotypes as humor present the appearance of ignorance or racism. In PWL's case you might be right. Perhaps it isn't racism.

I take it you don't watch the black comedians on HBO.

Well,
 

I live in a nation where the largest selling "rap" artist is white and the best golfer is black.

Go figger!

T

Re: Well,
 

And ain't that great?

Tiger once described his ethnicity thus: "My father is half-black, one-quarter American Indian and one-quarter white. My mother is half-Thai, half-Chinese. I consider myself multi-racial, a "Caublinasian."

Colin Powell, the son of multi-racial Jamaican immigrants, responded: "In America, which I love from the depths of my heart and soul, when you look like me, you're black."

[Edited by GarthB on Dec 7th, 2005 at 01:00 PM]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Carl Childress

Quote:

Originally posted by GarthB Quote: Originally posted by Carl Childress Garth: Now I think you'll admit you're over-reacting, finding racism where none existed. It's really quite simple, Carl. The poster used a black stereotype for humor. I said that appeared racist. I don't feel that is over-reacting. I feel the same way about all race-based humor. As for your statistics....unemployment is higher for blacks than whites. Does that excuse stereotypical humor based on blacks being lazy or shiftless? Texas is among five states that lead the nation in dropout rates. ("Locating the Drop Out Crisis", John Hopkins University 2004) Does this justify humor based on dumb Texans? Okay, maybe that one does. I think, pending more evidence, you've misjudged PWL. I think those using race stereotypes as humor present the appearance of ignorance or racism. In PWL's case you might be right. Perhaps it isn't racism. I take it you don't watch the black comedians on HBO.

That's a whole 'nother onion with many, many layers. Best saved for another time.

PWL made a comment that he may or may not have intended to be racist.

Some read it and thought it was.

Some read it and thought it was not.

Best to let it lie at that.