Rating Systems?

[GarthB]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

In our state this is not at all true. In order to give a rating in our state it has to be done online and the rating has to come with a lot of questions. The IHSA also records if the team loses or wins. They found that the difference between winning and losing was a matter of decimal points. So there was no big difference in a rating from a winning coach and a losing.

Now in our state everyone makes the playoffs (only football you have to qualify for the post season with regular season record). So if they are screwing good officials and umpires, it could come back to haunt them. So I do not think there is much incentive to consider the umpire as the reason you lost a game. As it relates to baseball, we see a lot of the same coaches over and over and they might not agree with a call but they have a history of what you have done over the years or season.

Now I am not suggesting that this applies the same in other systems or other states, I am just stating that they have found this is not true as it relates to our system and we have had a rating system for almost 10 years. I know I liked it better than the previous system when coaches picked umpires they liked or knew and did not have any accountability to who was good and why.

Peace

In an association I belonged to in the past, coaches rated umpires. We found that umpires who had ejections or game ending close plays were rated lower than the other umpires. This occurred to the extent that some D-1 umpires were rated several points below JV umpires working their first varsity games.

Thankfully my current association is more enlightened.

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by GarthB

In an association I belonged to in the past, coaches rated umpires. We found that umpires who had ejections or game ending close plays were rated lower than the other umpires. This occurred to the extent that some D-1 umpires were rated several points below JV umpires working their first varsity games.

Thankfully my current association is more enlightened.

This is the problem the San Diego HS association has. The coaches get to choose which umpires get to work their playoff games. If a close call, whether correct or not, goes against them, they keep that umpire off their playoff list. Or if they are a real jerk, and they get ejected by certain umpires who don't put up with their crap, they only choose the umpires that are weak and let them get away with anything. They really love the umpires who brown-nose them between innings and before the game.

Just go there and do a professional job, don't kiss their butts, and they forget all about you at playoff time. Except the teams that don't make the finals. They always seem to have you on their preferred lists.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by GarthB

In an association I belonged to in the past, coaches rated umpires. We found that umpires who had ejections or game ending close plays were rated lower than the other umpires. This occurred to the extent that some D-1 umpires were rated several points below JV umpires working their first varsity games.

Thankfully my current association is more enlightened.

Let me make this clear, our system of ratings is not a local association issue. This is an IHSA system. The IHSA assigns all playoff games not a local assignor. The coach’s ratings are mixed in with Certified Official/Umpires to come up with the same percentage. Coaches can only rate during varsity contests and they can rate you as many times as you work a varsity game for that school. Certified Umpires can only rate you once per year. The coaches/umpire ratings only count for 5 points total (if you in the 90 percentile of all umpires in the entire state) in a 30 point Power Rating system where other things are factored in. And (you heard this here first) they are going to add another 5 points this coming year for the frequency of attending camps along with another category that gives you 5 points for attending a Level 2 (3 Man in baseball and basketball) or 6 hour clinic in basketball for example. So most umpires/officials in our state worry about 5 points which we cannot control and most of the points in the power rating are almost totally in our control (percentage of varsity games, promotion level, open book Part 1 Exam just to name a few). And it has been proven that losing coaches rate umpires/official only percentage points apart from each other which it is not that big of deal. And the Sports Administrators that do the assigning for all playoff contests can make decisions outside of the power rating if they choose to. So things like what you have done while they were watching you might play a much bigger role than what your actual power rating is. You can help yourself or hurt yourself by what you do when observed. I cannot speak for other places, but we worry waaaayyyyy too much about something that is not going to really make that much of a difference. So if you are 90 percent in your coaches/umpire ratings and you are just an "X" as an umpire, you might not get an opportunity that a "C" umpire will get and they are in the 70 percent range.

Peace

[Steven Tyler]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

This is the problem the San Diego HS association has. The coaches get to choose which umpires get to work their playoff games. If a close call, whether correct or not, goes against them, they keep that umpire off their playoff list. Or if they are a real jerk, and they get ejected by certain umpires who don't put up with their crap, they only choose the umpires that are weak and let them get away with anything. They really love the umpires who brown-nose them between innings and before the game.

Just go there and do a professional job, don't kiss their butts, and they forget all about you at playoff time. Except the teams that don't make the finals. They always seem to have you on their preferred lists.

And you speak so highly of your former association. Sounds like sour grapes to me. Get on one side of the fence and stay on it.

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by Steven Tyler

And you speak so highly of your former association. Sounds like sour grapes to me. Get on one side of the fence and stay on it.

I wasn't talking just about me, Junior. I've worked plenty of top level playoff games. I started working the CIF playoffs in 1989, and did not have a HS season without playoff assignments through the 2004 season. Don't speak of which you don't know.

I was saying the WAY IT IS in that association. No sour grapes, as I got plenty of great games while there. Unfortunately, this is EXACTLY the way it works here. And sure, I've been requested by many teams too, and often these teams don't make it into the top playoff games (or even make the playoffs). The point is, these games are not given out by merit, but by what a coach thinks is good umpiring (i.e. puts up with his antics).

And for the record, the HS association does not make the rules as to who chooses the upper level playoff assignments. The California Interscholastic Federation makes the rules, and they give coaches a "request list" to fill out, and trust me, many a great umpire has been left off these lists due to not kissing coaches' butts.

I just took you off the list to see what cutting remark you would make to me. It's really a shame that all you can do is insult others. Really speaks highly of your intellect.

Back on the list.

[soundedlikeastrike]

"I would give my left arm to have a guy who knows what he's doing come out and evaluate me. I would be glad to pay someone who knew how to umpire to evaluate me, since that will help me get better. All these ratings and catagories do is give you a bad reputation when it comes time for tournament assignments."

I can help here, I know how to evaluate, and would be honored to have the opportunity to come evaluate you and any others that would would fly me out and pay me to do such. Though since I would be away from home, my fees would be much more than my current association's "mileage only" for eval assignments, say 1/2 pay of the level I'd be evaluating.

Let me know, I would of course need a least a weeks notice to make arrangements with my real job. And our season is wrapping up, with one more big weekend on 6/16 and 17, I am avalable after that.

As a former board member of our association, we reviewed many coaches evals and if they aren't subjective and detailed, you know the ones, "this guy sucked" or "learn the rules" or needs a "stike zone" we would contact the umpire get his/her thoughts on the game and usually wind up deleting the eval, or just gleaning off the useful areas.

As someone else posted, we see a remarkable number of losing coaches submitting evals, with 99% being poor evals, while the victors submit very rarely.

[jkumpire]

I saw some of my HS ratings posted today. It is an embarassment.

I won't share everything I saw, but this year I did one HS JV game. I got the call an hour before the game to sub for another guy, I show up, do the plate, the losing team gets beat 15-0, and I get a 2 on a scale of 1(bad)-5(good) from the losing coach. the team won like 4 games all year, and dollars to donuts he ripped every umpire in every game he lost. Last time that ever happens.

I applaud my state association for trying to make a better rating system and a more objective way to rate officials for tournament assignments. it is a hard job. The problem is unless you use objective standards like test scores and trained umpires to evaluate people, no rating system is fair to the umpires. Coaches just cannot evenhandedly evaluate umpires, or frankly officials in any sport.

[Cub42]

I find it ironic when any state association or umpire group rely on evaluations by coaches for ratings or assignments. First of all, think of the questions and comments made by HS coaches during the course of a game. " The hand is part of the bat", " But he held the ball for 3 seconds, that means it's a catch ", and I think everybody's favorite," Can I appeal that/ Get help". The point here is most HS coaches have no clue about the mechanics we use, and most are oblivious to the rules.( Example: Break up 2). Most of the successful and respected coaches, if they have a problem with a particular umpire, will call the assignor and let him address the issue. I think evaluations can be an effective tool when used properly. The college group I am in, I think is a good example of how it can be done properly. Our president retired from on the field this season. He will come out, unannounced and observe and take notes. Then after the game he holds a session with the crew, and goes over what was done well, along with areas that need to improve. Veteran umpires, and umpires who have moved up to Pro ball or D I should be utilized to improve things.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by jkumpire

I applaud my state association for trying to make a better rating system and a more objective way to rate officials for tournament assignments. it is a hard job. The problem is unless you use objective standards like test scores and trained umpires to evaluate people, no rating system is fair to the umpires. Coaches just cannot evenhandedly evaluate umpires, or frankly officials in any sport.

Test scores???

Test scores are one of the worst ways to evaluate umpires. I have no problem if they are factored in some way, but test scores only prove someone knows how to pass a test. I have seen guys that are really good at passing tests only to wilt like a flower in a hard rain when the heat gets on. Umpiring is more than passing a test and more than just knowing the ins and outs of a particular rule. We also have to manage people and deal with conflict. Not every umpire knows how to do that very well and it shows when a player or a coach gets on them.

Secondly there is always going to be input from coaches about the job we do. When I worked my first D1 game recently I heard of the report that the coach said to my assignor. When I worked for the first time in a D2 conference I heard about the opinions of what the coaches thought of the job I did. You might think there is not "rating system" in place but the reality there is. At least with a set rating system you might know what goes into it. When you work higher levels you might not ever know what is said behind closed doors and you could be affected more.

Peace

[jkumpire]

Yes, I agree with you, testing is not a great alternative here. It is your praxsis that matters.

But as a point of fact, how do you determine fitness for umpiring, on the FED or NCAA level?

Here is the list as far as I know, in no order:

1. Evaluation by trained evaluators
2. Coaches' Vote
3. Umpires' Vote
4. Rules/Mechanics Testing
5. Tape Evaluation
6. Reputation
7. Written Recommendations
8. Random Chance
9. Senority
10. # of games worked
11. Other (#of ejections?, player evaluations? I don't know?)

We all agree #1 is best, then possibly #5 is 2nd best. What is #3 on the list?
IMO its testing.
You tell me.

[JRutledge]

Where is this list coming from?

I do not know what this has to do with our discussion.

Peace

[jkumpire]

JR,

Sorry, I thought that any list of ways to evaluate umpires was germane to our discussion, as alternatives to a coach's vote. Tersting is not a good way to do it, except maybe as a way to limit the pool of eligible people if resources are not big enough to evaluate a lorger group of people

If I am not contributing to the conversation I am sorry.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by jkumpire

JR,

Sorry, I thought that any list of ways to evaluate umpires was germane to our discussion, as alternatives to a coach's vote. Tersting is not a good way to do it, except maybe as a way to limit the pool of eligible people if resources are not big enough to evaluate a lorger group of people

If I am not contributing to the conversation I am sorry.

Calm down, I just wanted to know if this was a made up list or an actual list used by an organization. This is not about contributing to the conversation (of course you are doing that, this is a discussion board), this is about trying discuss is there a better way to do things. I am just contending that even if you have a list, coaches will still have input on some level. In my state their input is just a small part of the process not the entire process. My state makes it very clear they can consider many factors not in our power rating and they even make a list but suggest they are not bound by those factors. If a particular coach sends a specific report about an umpire, it might be a big factor based on what the administrator wants to do.

Peace

[jkumpire]

JR,

Spouse in Hospital, that might make it seem I am frazzled. I am calm. It's my own list.

Coaches should have only a little say IMO. In the states I work in, they have way too much say in the process.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by jkumpire

JR,

Spouse in Hospital, that might make it seem I am frazzled. I am calm. It's my own list.

Coaches should have only a little say IMO. In the states I work in, they have way too much say in the process.

I hope everything works out with that. Family members in the hospital are never an easy thing to deal with. Not fun times for sure.

I agree there are places that the coaches make all the decisions. That would be wrong in my opinion. Coaches should not have that much say as to who works and when. But they will have input in just about any system even if it is not clearly stated.

Peace