Handling Asst. Coaches

[umpduck11]

Originally posted by GarthB

But, Tee, what if the civil defense alarms were going off and the Fiji, who had just delcared war on us, air force was flinging nuclear weapon tipped missles at Portland and the assistant coach at first base had the only key to the bomb shelter and had all the known remaining food and water and wouldn't let anybody in unless they talked to him first. How about then, huh? Huh, wise guy, I bet you'd talk to him then.

This rates as one of the funniest things
I've ever read! How appropriate. TY, Garth.

[WhatWuzThatBlue]

Originally posted by GarthB

I don't know what that's in reference to. It isn't raining where I am currently enjoying my vacation.

If you read my post you know that I was not commenting, despite what Arizona Pete and Dave Davies assumed, on my opinion of assistant coaches. I was commenting on how our alleged attorney umpire had to resort to the an argument of the extreme and using strawman arguments to attempt to support his position. It reminds me of how junior high students and many politicians attempt to justify their position.

I'll be happy to give you my opinion on assistant coaches if you really want it.

That's okay Garth, I think we all know what you will write. I tried to write something similar - I usually ignore coaches (head and assistant) unless they can be of assistance to the game. I imagine that you probably have developed a similar tact.

I believe that Pete's point was that TAC wrote in "Black and White" on this issue. Few things in this world are absolute. Pete provided one absurd and a couple of plausible situations where an assistant would be worthy of more than a head nod. You dismissed it as buttressing his contention and I agree that the cardiac arrest was a bit much. However, he did make a valid argument about allowing these coaches to help make your job easier (injury to you) or that they may be acting civil and demand the same. Telling others to never entertain assistants is about as old school as saying that you will never confer with a partner in order to get the call right.

Times are changing and umpires act very differently then they did years ago. I used to give what I received on a college ball field. Now, the assignors and evaluators tell us to avoid confrontation and have a partner get in the middle of it. It used to be a badge of honor to F-bomb a coach and then dump him. Now, you'll get dumped if you do it. The fact is that old school mentality has little room on the ball field anymore. I know, I'm feeling older and older watching these young guys do their thing.

The one comment that TAC made that made me laugh - that assistants don't have access to him. Unless he's wearing invisible UA, I don't know how he does it. When I set up outside the baseline, the home team assistant has to run by me every inning. I'm pretty sure he sees me. If he says hello, I'll probably say it back.

[JRutledge]

My God guys. Who cares what some of you do in these situations? If you want to talk your ear off to assistant coaches, talk your damn ear off. If you want to ignore them and act like they do not exist, do not look in their direction. This has to be one of the dumbest arguments I have read in some time. You are all arguing over something that no one can tell you what to do in the first place.

-------------------------------------------------------

Pete,

I understand your point of view but I know it does not mean a hill of beans to me what you think about this issue. If you feel it is arrogant, then you have a right to your opinion. Tim also has as much right to his opinion as you do. Your use of the most extreme examples was not at all the point that Tim was trying to make.

When I officiate I do what makes me happy. I do not do what others do just because they think it is a good idea. I learned a long time ago if something I hear from someone works for me, I use it. If it does not work for me, I throw it out. This is one of those topics that the advice is not going to fit everyone's taste.


Peace

[WhatWuzThatBlue]

Jeff,
Is it an extreme example that an umpire might get hurt and an assistant asks you if you want an ice pack?

A coach hasn't senn you all year and he greets you and asks where you've been umpring. Is that an extreme example?

We've already talked about the heart attack and he knows it is just as stupid as saying that you should never talk to an assistant coach.

That's called being courteous, even in the Chicago suburbs.

[WhatWuzThatBlue]

Tim,

I did not say YOU WERE STUPID, I wrote that saying that you should never talk to assistants is stupid. You are very adept at finding fault in others' words, this was not one of them. If you are offended then I apologize, but it was not intended. You should know better than to put words in my mouth.

You and I have differed on umpiring opinions before. I can live with the fact that you believe that you should never talk to assistant coaches. Whether that says something about you or them, I'll leave that to the board to decide. I just find it funny that you can't admit that it is antiquated thinking. If an assistant coach is the first one to reach you after a foul ball knocks you loopy are you telling me that you will put on the Marcel Marceau act? Come on, admit that a pleasantry won't kill you and may even make you look more professional.

A.C.: "Hey Blue, good to see you. It's nice to see that we got a good umpire for a big game. Who's your partner?"
T.A.C.: (silence)
A.C.: "What's his name? I haven't seen him before."
T.A.C.: (walking away)
A.C.: "What is your problem?"
T.A.C.: (still playing Silent Bob)
A.C.: "I need the name of your partner so I can write it down in the book."
T.A.C.: (looking away)
A.C.: "Good Lord, you are an arrogant prick. I compliment you and ask for your partner's name and you ignore me. Now I know why my head coach says that you are the worst umpire in the area. I can't wait for him to retire at the end of the season. If you try that **** with me, I'll see that you never work a game in this conference."
T.A.C.: (ejection motion, followed by silence)

I can just imagine the ejection report. I dumped him because he wanted me to answer his question.

[Edited by WhatWuzThatBlue on Jan 2nd, 2006 at 10:35 PM]

[GarthB]

I can't believe this has become so complicated.

Windy, when I first worked D-1 I was told by a very experienced and senior partner, "assistants just don't exist. If they try to materialize, they are ejection bait."

He didn't add, "except if I'm having a heart attack", or "except if the head coach is shot by a jealous husband" or any other kind of exception. We were talking about umpiring. I knew what he was saying.

If you have the experience you say you have, then there is no need to play this continuing what if game. You know what is being said. If you walked on the field with Gus Rodriquez and he said, "assistants don't exist", you'd know what he was saying.

A little league umpire might have to ask,"what if". According to your resume, you shouldn't have to.

[WhatWuzThatBlue]

Originally posted by GarthB
I can't believe this has become so complicated.

Windy, when I first worked D-1 I was told by a very experienced and senior partner, "assistants just don't exist. If they try to materialize, they are ejection bait."

He didn't add, "except if I'm having a heart attack", or "except if the head coach is shot by a jealous husband" or any other kind of exception. We were talking about umpiring. I knew what he was saying.

If you have the experience you say you have, then there is no need to play this continuing what if game. You know what is being said. If you walked on the field with Gus Rodriquez and he said, "assistants don't exist", you'd know what he was saying.

A little league umpire might have to ask,"what if". According to your resume, you shouldn't have to.

[/i]Stop exagerrating, Mr. Benham. (Again, you have a problem with names, but I digress.)

There is no what if game going on. I've given you true examples and accepted practices of NCAA and PBUC baseball. You treat coaches and players with respect and uphold the integrity of the game. Acting like a prima dona is not in your best interest. The Golden Rule is a guiding force for most umpires. I guess I was wrong to suspect that you had common sense working for you. If you can't (or won't) answer a simple question from an adult then you shouldn't be on the field. Teaching newbies how to handle assistants that persist should have been the concern. I tried to do that and you have changed the intent of my message. Pete in AZ proferred the idea that assistants should not be ignored, an afront to TAC's sensibilities. We don't take soapy showers with them, but we certainly don't have to hide from them either. That is basically what TAC is saying. Like a four year old plugging his ears and closing his eyes, his assertion and your agreement are just creepy.

Your straw men philosophy seems to have blown up in your face. I don't recall any talk about being shot. Pete made a mistake, you pounced on him but are just as guilty of doing it to bolster your claims. I gave you more credit than this. I may have to rethink that decision.

You might want to read the thread about what is a good umpire. I didn't see any mention of a superiority complex pertaining to umpire/assistant coach relations. My resume doesn't end with D-1 baseball. I learned from some of the best in the business and know that ego is important but reckless arrogance on the field is a scarlet letter. I am talented enough to be able to ignore the balls and strikes chirping from the assistant. I don't ignore simple courtesies.

[GarthB]

Sigh.

My bad. I can't begin to express my disappointment. I was beginning to believe your resume.

You read no better than Petey. I'll type slowly.

Simply put, when I'm taking the field and my partner says "assistant coaches don't exist" I know what he is talking about. "What ifs" don't need to be discussed.

Apparently you need a fargin diagram.

When a D=1 clinician said: The first pitch of every game is a strike, I didn't need to ask "what if it takes dirt?" Apparently you would have.

As far as my previous example go, yes, by God you got it, I was grosssly making fun of the the idiotic stance of Petey. Good catch.

I wasn't giving Petey grief for any particular what if, I was giving him grief for asking ANY what if. My God, why was that necessary? When I hear a partner say either of the two remarks above, I just go out and work the game. I do what is called for in that game. I don't need a freaking survey completed to figure out how to do the game.

Do I need to make that any clearer?

And I had figured you for one who knew what ifs weren't necessary. I had you figured for one who knew how and when to be practical. I had you figured for one who really understood Tee's post. Silly me.

Tee was right, this is a WOBW. I had begun to think more of you. You've fixed that problem.

Go ahead, take the last word and once again read something into my post that isn't there. You can claim anything you want, I won't correct you or continue with this nonsense any further.

Good grief.

[Edited by GarthB on Jan 3rd, 2006 at 02:17 AM]

[WhatWuzThatBlue]

Originally posted by GarthB
Sigh.

My bad. Simply put, when I'm taking the field and my partner says "assistant coaches don't exist" I know what he is talking about. "What ifs" don't need to be discussed.

I wasn't giving Petey grief for any particular what if, I was giving him grief for asking ANY what if. My God, why was that necessary?

And I had figured you for one who knew what ifs weren't necessary. I had you figured for one who knew how and when to be practical. I had you figured for one who really understood Tee's post. Silly me.

Go ahead, take the last word and once again read something into my post that isn't there. You can claim anything you want, I won't correct you or continue with this nonsense any further. Good grief.

I don't need to read anything into your word, they do all the damage by themselves. Why don't "what ifs" need to be discussed? You've done it to others apleanty. If someone writes that a runner is always out if the ball beats him to first, you've been known to say things like, "Not if the fielder isn't securely holding the ball while touching the base." You are living a fantasy if you think that we haven't seen evidence of such posts from you.

Pete in AZ and I chose to point out how preposterous Tim's statement was. This forum is not designed just for veteran Oregonians. Many newbies visit and read the opinions. I simply pointed out the arcane nature of that way of thinking. I understand that you may have partners that say "Assistants don't exist." But we aren't taking the field and all of your "partners" aren't experienced umpires. My partners must be a little more professional because they don't express themselves so carelessly. Understanding the meaning of the message is one thing, ridiculing Pete for pointing out that the message may not be pertinent to newbies is another. I value good advice and TAC's message was improper for newbies. Those assistants may be a nuisance to you, but they can also be helpful to others. I've had coaches that sat on the bench drinking "coffee" while the assistant handled everything. I've also witnessed assistants that knew when to pull a head coach back from a one way ticket. In my experience, assistants are as valuable as they are hindrances. I treat each accordingly.

You keep bringing my experience into this and I'll chalk it up to anxiety or inadequacy on your part. If you took a current D1 schedule you wouldn't be so cavalier in your attitude about umpire behavior on the field. Most of us realize how important our appearance is. We don't jeopardize it with misplaced arrogance.

Your tit for tat about losing respect is getting old, Sidekick. If you feel it necessary to always demean instead of instruct, I can see why the "what ifs" confuse you.

[Pete in AZ]

Ouch!

I see no need to add anything further. The prosecution rests, your honor!