What methods do you use when asst coaches (normally when they are the base coach) try and argue with you in a civilized manner? I know asst coaches shouldn't be arguing, but i constantly find myself accidentally talking to them like they were the head coach.

What is your normal dialogue with asst coaches? Have any good tips on how to handle them?

Thanks!

-Bossman

If an assistant wants to talk about a call, I will say, "I can't talk to you". Then I walk away from him, if I can. If he STILL wants to talk he'll do it as a fan because he will be ejected. That's happened once a season for the last few years.
If an assistant says "Hi", I'll say "Hi". No more, no less. I try to be civil to that extent, but we never CHAT about ANYTHING. NCAA assistants - and their head coaches - know those prescribed gound rules, so the ejection (when it happens) is never a surprise to either of them.

JJ

In "serious" [you might say Real(tm)] baseball, Tee's approach is the best way. Assistant's are there for their players, and the umpire's [ideally and in theory] don't know they exist. If anyone's talking, it's s'posed to be the skipper. In my area Real(tm) baseball is College, HS Varsity, Legion, and District [or above] summer tournaments.

Since I'm in a fairly small community, everything else is rec ball and pretty "familiar": in which case, a low key comment or question, posed in a civil, reasonable manner, will receive a civil, reasonable, SHORT response - whoever it comes from. I do not "argue" about baseball with children, Assis't. Coaches, or spectators - at any level.

If an Assis't even starts to argue, I tell 'em: "Look, if your skipper had a problem with the call, he'd be out here." Usually shuts them up. Of course, I also am well known in my area as a "take-no-crap" umpire who has, in the past, confirmed the self-ejections of miscreants: in wholesale lots, where necessary.

You gotta deal with the culture you are working in: if you can manage it [it's the accepted and expected mode of behavior/ interaction], then "Assis'ts don't exist" is a lot easier on the umpire. Otherwise, some discussion may be expected/required by the prevailing culture, but NEVER tolerate "arguments" [demonstrations of active displeasure or delaying the game] by players or assistants: what you MIGHT take [up to a point] from the Head Coach/ Manager earns a warning or EJ from anyone else.
[edited 'cause the "word nanny" didn't like an abbreviation]

[Edited by cbfoulds on Dec 30th, 2005 at 08:53 PM]

Carter, where have you been counselor? Happy New Year and it's good to see your thoughts again. Don't kill me for the billable hours harangue on the other thread! ;)

Tee, JJ and cb nailed this one. Assistants are there for the players. Some of them are nice and want to make your life easier, but tehy are usually the exception rather than the rule. Like a co-worker who gives you a civil greeting, question or response, treat them accordingly. I usually don't let them ask questions about the game or calls. If he wants to know how my wife and children are, I may oblige and even reciprocate. In NCAA ball, those coaches may actually be able to impede your career. Some of them fill out the ratings forms and have the boss sign 'em. Even for high school ball around here, the assistant coach may be the brains behind the brawn. But, he's still the assistant and I can't remember the last time I ejected one. By the time they get up, the head coach has told them to sit down or is leading the way.

As far as the original question goes, help steer an assistant coach away from your partner. Try to head him off or get between your partner and him. If your partner knows what he is doing, he is walking away and the agressor is obvious to everyone. When both are out there barking at him, escort him away from the fray and let your partner handle the head coach. Do not put your hands on him and don't let him do that to you. You both have a job to do and the kids need a few more "that wasn't you" or "pick out a good ones".

I might have a civil discussion with an assistant for 10 or 15 seconds, but if he wants to argue a call, I'm not interested and will tell him so.

Why bother? Just tell him that you discuss situations only with the head coach and walk away.

I agree, Rich. It saves you having you explain the call again to the manager when he comes out for the discussion. If it's important enough for the team to discuss the call, then it's important enough for the manager to take the lead himself and discuss the call.

With that being said, here's a video clip showing an NCAA umpire discussing a call with a pitching coach after a call on the half inning.


http://web1.ncaa.org/web_video/baseb...5/20050513.wmv



Tim.

I sympathize with your comment about accidentally talking to the assistants. I do, too. One thing that may help is the new Fed rule that requires the head coach to attend the plate conference. If they send 2 coaches, and the manager is not well known to you, asking which one is the manager may put them on notice that that's who you'll be talking to. (Off topic a little, we have one head coach who hasn't attended a plate conference in 20 years. His senior status has let him push the envelope farther than most. He'll hate this rule.)

I think there is a small link missing in the replies. So far, some very established umpires have all been consistent - basically, if an assistant tries to argue, it will not be tolerated at all. That part is definitive. But how about conversations that are not argumentative. Tee, when you say assistants don't exist, are speaking with respect to arguments only? What about one who between innings asks, "Tee, if they had appealed last inning, would my runner on 2nd have been out for leaving early?". I expect that's OK, but I'd like a little feedback, because one of my all-time favorite argument/ejections started that way, and I still laugh at how I got suckered into it:

Between innings. Coach: You look like you've been doing this a long time. [me: about 10 years] Coach: you obviously know the rules. [me: thanks.] Coach: Your positioning is good, too. [me: thanks.] Coach: You seem to take pride in your work. [me: thanks.] Coach: So how in the hell did you miss that tag at 2nd?

Mike

Around here, most Varsity Assistant coaches
are the JV head coach, and we do quite a few
JV/V two game dates. Quite often this contributes
to the JV head coach forgetting that he's no
longer in a position to come discuss whatever
he wants with you, when the Varsity games is
going on.

I would've been laughing as I tossed him.

I've been watching this and usually agree with trying to ignore someone who is trying to be a distraction. But you said that you would ignore all assistant coachs no matter what they said or did. That is the most mindless sentence I've seen written on these pages.

1- You've just been hit by a pitch and it hurt. In between innings the assistant asks if you want some ice or need anything. You ignore him and walk away...nice role model for the players and fans.

2- The assistant coach sees a ball fly into right from the game on the next field. He yells to you that he needs Time and you ignore him because assistant coachs don't exist, period.

3- The head coach is having chest pains and you are the closest adult on the field. You ignore him because you are too cool for civil relations. You only talk to the head coach. If it was important he would be out there.

4- The assistant coach apologizes for the rude behavior of his head coach. You walk away because you give what you receive.

5- An assistant comes out to question a close play at the plate. His head coach was in the bullpen getting the next pitcher ready to enter the game. The head coach couldn't have seen the play and the assistant wants to know what happened since the ball is on the ground. You ignore him, dust off the plate and say Play. You don't acknowledge assistants.

6- The assistant walks by you on his way to first base and says hello. He hasn't seen you in more than a year and asks how you've been and if you took some time off. You ignore him because you are above talking to assistant coachs.

You are providing horrible information to this board. Your arrogance is contemptible. Umps like you give us a bad name.

From the Fed ump manual: Be firm but not overbearing; courteous, but not ingratiating; positive, nut never rude; confident but never cocky; friendly, but not companionable; calm but alert.

I may have been wrong about you. You are so freaking clueless about reality and have to either set up straw men or exaggerate to the absurd to be able to argue that you may, indeed, actually be a lawyer.

I can't fathom anyone but a LL umpire not understanding Tee's post.

Thanks for the FED ump manual quote. I throw that away as soon as it arrives, so I wouldn't know how to act without your help.

Hey I agree with him.

Somebody is providing the board with bad info.

Wait just a second Garth B., you sound like you believe what he said too. Aren't you the same guys who tell other umps not to say that something will always or never happen? He said that he would NEVER talk to an assiatnt - that would be NEVER! I did not set up straw men, I gave him reasoned responses to his absolute conviction. As preposterous as a heart attack is I also provided a simple greeting and question. Why is the play at the plate so impossible for you to imagine?

You've joined in this attack just as before. Instead of arguing the facts you choose to berate. That is one of the reasons I left the practice of law. People like you take things personally and act juvenile. Look at each point and see how Tim C. said he wouldn't talk to them. defending his statement is almost as bad as your personal attack.

Okay...okay...put down the big sticks, guys.

I've long gone after those that speak in absolutes. I recall bob jenkins reminding someone to "never say never or always" when speaking about rules. A few guys jumped in and said that a male umpire should always wear a cup when working the plate and we all broke up.

I read TAC's post and it looks like he was saying what most crusty old vets think but few of us actually tell newbies. Pete in AZ likewise made some good points. There are always reasons to speak to an assistant coach, trainer, waterboy or score keeper. His cardiac arrest example was ludicrous but proved that we shouldn't use absolutes when making statements.

TAC has put in his time and knows why it is often pointless to entertain the queries of the assistant from hell. Garth's defense of TAC was noble but it did drift into the personal attack zone. Both of them know that most assistant coaches are good at fungo hitting and butt kissing. Remember the assistant in Bull Durham - the mouth goes a mile a minute but the brain is in park.

Both Pete and TAC make valid arguments. There are times when civility with an assistant is a necessity. Be friendly to the coaches, not friends. Even assistants can earn a few points for helping me out with an irate player. Like TAC said, I typically ignore them unless they can be useful. I think that is what the head coach does too.

Do you have a reading problem, Windy? TAC did not say that. TAC said that he ignores them, period. His implication was that they are never useful.

What's your point, that I ignore coaches unless they are useful or that TAC is wrong to ignore them all of the time?

Like TAC, I ignore assistant coaches...UNLESS...they are civil and can assist me with a baseball related manner.

I happen to agree that most assistant coaches are as important as a missed bus. But, I also think that Pete was correct in stating that you are supposed to behave like a gentleman out there. If an assistant asks me if I want an ice pack for that shot to the thigh, I will politely decline and thank him for the thought. Ignoring him and walking away is a poor choice of behavior.

The new year has done nothing to soften your ability to debate without insults. You've shown us once again that your selective focus borders on stalking. That's a shame and a waste of time.

Appreciate the help WWTB but I can handle this one. As I said, TAC said something stupid...NEVER talk with assistants. I gave an example from the manual that shows how classless this is. I've been taught at every level to treat people fairly and not act superior. This is the issue I had and it is simple. Do not ignore those involved in the game just because you think you are better than them. That was and is my point. TAC confirmed that his statement and attitude are arrogant. I just told him that it was misinformed and abusive.

It also shows an argument that started between the BU and the 1B coach and ended with further discusison between the PU and the 1B coach.

But the short discussion with the pitching coach was harmless.

Opinions vary, but I am not going to avoid assistants, unless one wants to argue.

Avoiding them is one thing. Ignoring them, even when they are trying to be helpful is quite another. Tim C. is right to believe that an annoying, aggressive assistant should be dumped or ignored. Garth behaved like his best friend was just dumped. I don't get it; I thought he was older than that. I'm going to bed with a headache from those two.

Well, being from Huntington Beach and living that particular lifestle, I guess I am more laid back than some of you testosterone laced zealots.

My hormones no longer rage, which is a good thing.

I really don't care WHO comes out on me as long as the number is one. If approached, I will communicate with an individual on the field. I am never friendly, but am always cordial and business like. This doesn't necessarily make me right.

We are all individuals who handle situations differently. Some folks are not people friendly and can't handle civil conversations. Others are quite comfortable around others, regardless of whether it is on or off the field.

What is YOUR comfort level out there? That is what is important. How do you best handle YOUR game?

If T or Rich or Garth wants to run their games like Patton, that's Ok with me. That certainly doesn't lessen them in my eyes. And, I am sure that those guys don't have a problem with me running a game in a more laid back style.

This is a gnarly post. Later, Dudes.

Dave

Garth,

Is it all the rain you guys are getting?


WWTB

Early in my career, there was this assistant that would tell the base umpire a joke every other inning or so. I thought it was fun. After a while I began to realize I was more than likely being manipulated by this old timer. Once I learned the proper place to stand between innings as a base umpire that never became a problem again. Think how awkward and destrucive a situation that can cause if a whacker at first goes against that "friendly" coach who you have bantered with all game. If any of your jokes back to him were a little off color, he could select some lines to use against you. The humor alone could lead him into saying you don't take the game serious enough.

I try not to be a prick out there, but keep in mind it's probably about 40 against 2. By keeping affective communication lines open with all 40 participants you decrease your own effectiveness.

We all can choose to speak to whomever we choose. It's about keeping control of the game. Different games and individuals can dictate different levels of tolerance. Talk all you want, but when it comes back to bite you in the ***...

D

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.

Re: Hmmm,
 

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.

Well, now you've made me change my mind again. A real attorney knows how to read better.

My post was directed only at the juvenile use of exaggeration and strawman arguments in a rhetorically weak attempt to buttress bullsh1t. Tim's position had nothing to do with my post. The ability to read it, however, did.

Only if it were Doug Flutie as an assistant!


Tim.

all the garbage aside...
 

This video was great. Given that this was #6, how do I see the others?

Send me a personal e-mail if you would like, but I would really like to see the other videos in this series.

Oh, and I'm not an assistant; you can talk to me.
;)

Hey!
 

I think I found them:

http://www1.ncaa.org/membership/cham...005/index.html

Re: Re: Hmmm,
 

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

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. ;)

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

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.

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]

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.

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]

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.

Ouch!

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