Civility

[NFump]

What's it like to get a taste of your own medicine there SA? Oh, by the way, I can't hi-jack your posts. I merely offer a counter point of view. T'would appear that you can't handle it as you have now resorted to name calling.

[WhatWuzThatBlue]

From Blue Lawyer:
Sarcasm is a highly sought skill? I disagree. Most folks value a sense of humor, and sarcasm has a place in humor. When abused or overused, just like anything else, it becomes tedious, isolating and ultimately, ineffective.

I don't use sarcasm anymore than is required. You have recently joined us and missed many posts that did not involve the AMLU. My hot buttons are get the call right, malicious contact, expected call and balks. I have written thousands of words of support, clarification and assistance. I still teach clinics and pride myself on preparing newbies for the real world. In those clinics, we use confrontation and sarcasm - JUST LIKE ON THE BALL FIELD. They are effective tools and skills, depsite your view to the contrary. Sarcasm is not part and parcel of a sense of humor-it may be a defense mechanism or malicious.

What you see on David E. Kelley TV shows is not what being a lawyer is about. (edit for brevity) There are jackasses in my profession, to be sure, and maybe more of them per capita (good Latin, eh?) than in other professions. My frame of reference on this is limited; I have been a lawyer, soldier, politician, sports official and a blue-collar factory guy in my life. By far the biggest number of self-important blowhards per capita is in the political field.

Again, you should have read my message about A2D. You are justifying your position yet again. I never compared your career to a television show. Stick around long enough and you'll find that amateur umpires have vast differences in the way we treat the job. Name any rule, mechanic or uniform code and you'll find that not everyone is in the same boat. We've debated the acceptability of white shirts, enforce the batters box rule, be considered independent contractors, accept MiLB assignments, work as a volunteer etc. Each of us is in this for our own reasons. If you need any more evidence of this, read the strike threads again-they go back eight months. Again, A2D, but don't try to sell me on the need to sing Kumbayah. I was in a fraternity long ago and I truly bonded with those guys. But, we'd go to conventions and find brothers from other chapters that I wouldn't have spit on if they were on fire. Their idea of brotherhood was get drunk, get a brand and humiliate. Sure, they were 'family' - the same way chimpanzees are related to homo sapiens.

I am interested to know where to draw the line in the name of "Me, Myself and I." If your partner boots a call, you know it and the aggreived Coach comes out and chews his a$$, do you leave your partner twisting in the wind? At the postgame do you say, "Man, you sucked on that one. But you made me look good. Thanks."? Do you pirate assignments? Do you run down your colleagues to coaches, other umpires, ADs and assignors? Maybe that attitude and execution works where you are from. Around here, it is a recipe for limited assignments.

That's fair...you clearly didn't read the post that explained how we are supposed to excel while supporting our crew mates...but you deserve an answer to the query. I have no compunction about giving a brutal post game eval to one of my partners, I accept and expect the same. I have been involved with situations that had me leave a partner to fend for himself. (Pre-game he told me he does not allow check swing appeals. Okay, enjoy that red ***.) I've had partners who told me that they won't come to me (PU) on a swipe tag at first even when straightlined. That's good to know - I'll get some popcorn and be sure to ask that you are removed from future assignments. If the assignor values my opinion enough to ask, I will do a disservice to carry an official that isn't ready for a big game. I worked at a very high level and teach countless clinics. If you don't know how I feel about you then we haven't worked together. Read more and you'll find that my feelings about knowing your role and that the game is bigger than any umpire are long held. Conversely, if you are an excellent umpire and worthy of support, I have been known to call assignors and heap praise your way. I have handed back assignments to ensure that younger umpires get the chance to experience really big games. After a game, if you made me proud - I've got the first couple rounds. Like I wrote, if we've worked together, you'll know what I think of you. You're only as good as your last call and knowing that will make you better.

It depends. I have bad games, even after years of experience. I expect my partner to tell me so. What I don't expect is for him to disrespect me and preen his feathers. I have sometimes felt like I have had to carry my partner when he is having a bad game. But you know what? I look bad, too. We look bad. It is no fun to work baseball when you as a crew are not having a good game.

There is a fine line between being able to accept criticism and give it; that line also exists with praise. I don't mind a guy preening when he deserves it. We've had threads that asked us to describe our worst call/game. I've participated and humbled myself at the altar of the OF. You keep making judgements based on very limited observation.

You understand nothing about the way I think, because again, you didn't ask. And I am not stating that you should tell me I'm a swell guy. I am stating that telling me I'm an idiot is unnecessary. And is "confrontation is part of the game"? Really? It can be, but that is no reason to be confrontational. My experience tells me that if I go into a game looking for a fight, I'll find one. And this board is not a game. As much as some would like to, we can't ultimately eject anybody.

That comment wasn't meant to be taken personally. I didn't find it necessary to paranthetically write (royal 'you') but apparently I should have; relax. Confrontation is certainly part of the game. Every call makes half of those present angry. Few umpires go into a game looking for a battle - most of us are keenly aware that we will be a target out there. Every umpire school and clinic I have ever attended taught confrontation awareness. I've never called a perfect game and that is why I keep coming back. I'm going to blow some calls and take the pipe for it. Some of it is gamesmanship while other times personal. Being a veteran of more years than I want to admit, I've learned the difference.

I am not afraid of words, WWTB. I am sometimes disgusted by them, much in the same way that I am not afraid of roadkill, but I find it unpleasant and disgusting. With all due respect, WWTB, what you and I have (and what I see with your "dialogue" with other members of this board) is not "discourse". It's you spoiling for a fight, looking for confrontation, asserting your superiority in every aspect of umpiring and turning every argument personal. That's not discourse; it's diatribe.

It's funny, you can write a disagreeable tome and it is not meant to be a diatribe, some would call that hypocritical. I am not spoiling for a fight any more than you are in need of a good smack down. What all discussion boards have are opinions. When you adamantly defend yours, I am entitled to adamantly punch holes in it, if I'm so inclined.

Have you spent much time before the bar? Opposing views are often passionate and heat of the moment comments tend to rock the boat. Of course my opinion is personal, that is classic redundancy. The very definition of discourse if the verbal exchange of ideas. I'm sorry to inform you that we may agree to disagree and still have a discourse. Is the word 'debate' more palatable?

Finally, if you truly don't believe that ego has a role in umpiring then I suspect we don't umpire the same level of ball. I have spent too much time and energy to not know what I am capable of or not. I was fortunate enough to have been asked to work a level of baseball that most amateurs only dream about. Hard work and knowing the right people made it happen. I earned the right to a feeling of accomplishment and if that offends you that is too bad. I embrace the newbie and am more than proud to help anyone who asks. I accept criticism of my officiating and often admit mistakes to my partners. I've offered contrition here and have bet on the wrong horse many times in life. However, until you've walked in my shoes and accomplished similar feats, you don't get to question my justification.

You implied that I treat others poorly. I am not afraid of those who build glass houses. I have tangled with the best and worst of them. Some recognize that it is not personal and are mature enough to move on. Others are probably just as hard headed as I am and I recognize that we won't share a fountain soda any time soon. That's okay with me...I'm not here to win the laurels of this board. Sometimes I embrace being the Devil's advocate. Whether you love me or hate me, I respect your right to enter a debate. I have only asked that you be prepared for challenge and able to retort effectively, as they are desirable umpire skills. If the topic becomes heated, recognize it for what it is...words on a blue and white screen. While they may disgust you, be mature enough to look away. If you don't want to see DaVinci Code or listen to Howard Stern, don't. But, tugging on Superman's cape invites confrontation.

A2D

[SAump]

Quick, put a LOCK on it.

[SAump]

Originally Posted by NFump

What's it like to get a taste of your own medicine there SA? Oh, by the way, I can't hi-jack your posts. I merely offer a counter point of view. T'would appear that you can't handle it as you have now resorted to name calling.

Stay on topic: this one isn't about a rising fastball or a carelessly thrown bat. Will you be posting anything about civility, indulge in an opinion or stand on a limb?

My first post, acknowledged BL attempt to establish rule and order.
The post started off with BIgump, PWL, SDS, JRUT and Windy.
That gang was famous before YOU ever joined UP with them.
I don't go around the jail cell pretending to be a TRUSTEE.
I couldn't stand reading what the INMATES had written.
I know some of the history here but I ain't talking.
Can't wait to read what you got?

[BigUmp56]

Originally Posted by BlueLawyer

Tim:

I'm working with Alan Roper on Thursday.

He's a good guy and a good blue.

Strikes and outs!

That's great. I have no doubt from all the things I've read Alan write that he's an excellent umpire and individual. I hope the two of you will give us a report back on how things went.


Tim.

[BlueLawyer]

"You" as you used several times in your posts, in response to me, is personal. So don't try to tell me in one breath that "it wasn't meant to be personal" and then use the second-person pronoun. Viz, your sarcastic remark "Have you spent much time before the bar?"

13 years, WWTB. I am an accomplished trial and appellate attorney. What you call "argument" or "debate" I call ad hominem attacks. Sure, she's a prostitute and a crack addict. That must mean she is not a credible witness and that her eyes are bad. Objection, irrelevant. Sustained.

"Have you spent much time on the diamond?" If a coach asked you that question during an argument, I have a dollar bet it would get him dumped.

Are you a lawyer? You speak with such authority about my job to the point where you condescend to me about that, just like you do to me and eveybody else on this board about umpiring. Before you tell me I misread/didn't read your post (which seems to be a common tactic whenever you get caught in a fallacy), go back to your post on this board about how lawyers routinely screw each other to win the case/get the fee/become a judge. Then tell me "That wasn't meant to be personal. You just know I meant in general. You know. Like everybody in your profession is a backstabbing, soulless bloodsucker. Nothing personal."

And when you tell me you aren't a lawyer, but COME ON, everybody knows that they are sleazy backstabbers, I will tell you that is intellectually lazy at best. It's just like saying COME ON, everybody knows all umpires are blind, on the take and have an IQ ceiling of 80.

Again, you win. Your articulate defense of treating others like the gum on the bottom of your shoe because, well, you're BETTER than they are has convinced me.

Forget the post and the thread, WWTB. Your world, G. I'm just livin' in it.

Strikes and outs!

[NFump]

Originally Posted by SAump

My MO is well known.
I'm just learning about yours.
My guess is you are an ole hand in the business.
You really are desparate to believe this sad attemt in SAvility.
You're stalking me like a POST whore who RAN OFF her best customer.
If you feel you have driven W-WWTB away from the site, I guess you can focus all your energy on SAtire for the time being, anyway.

Start your own thread and invite me in.
Or continue to follow me around like a lost pup.
I'll show UP just to keep you from HI-jacking every other post I make.
If you want a list, go back and bring up some of my past conversations.
I'll enjoy the RETURN trip.

YEAH BOY! That post sure is on topic and very civil. Anyway.......ow...ooo....stop......you're hurting my feelings......I might not ever post here again. BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!

A post whore? Lost pup? BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

See how civil I'm being. I'm keeping my and giving you the (pppphhhhtttttttttppppp !)

[WhatWuzThatBlue]

Originally Posted by BlueLawyer

"You" as you used several times in your posts, in response to me, is personal. So don't try to tell me in one breath that "it wasn't meant to be personal" and then use the second-person pronoun. Viz, your sarcastic remark "Have you spent much time before the bar?"

13 years, WWTB. I am an accomplished trial and appellate attorney. What you call "argument" or "debate" I call ad hominem attacks. Sure, she's a prostitute and a crack addict. That must mean she is not a credible witness and that her eyes are bad. Objection, irrelevant. Sustained.

"Have you spent much time on the diamond?" If a coach asked you that question during an argument, I have a dollar bet it would get him dumped.

Are you a lawyer? You speak with such authority about my job to the point where you condescend to me about that, just like you do to me and eveybody else on this board about umpiring. Before you tell me I misread/didn't read your post (which seems to be a common tactic whenever you get caught in a fallacy), go back to your post on this board about how lawyers routinely screw each other to win the case/get the fee/become a judge. Then tell me "That wasn't meant to be personal. You just know I meant in general. You know. Like everybody in your profession is a backstabbing, soulless bloodsucker. Nothing personal."

And when you tell me you aren't a lawyer, but COME ON, everybody knows that they are sleazy backstabbers, I will tell you that is intellectually lazy at best. It's just like saying COME ON, everybody knows all umpires are blind, on the take and have an IQ ceiling of 80.

Again, you win. Your articulate defense of treating others like the gum on the bottom of your shoe because, well, you're BETTER than they are has convinced me.

Forget the post and the thread, WWTB. Your world, G. I'm just livin' in it.

Strikes and outs!

I can tell you are a lawyer, you have a gift for twisting words. When you can't agrue effectively, you can call names and then say, "I'm taking the ball and going home. The field is yours." I didn't disparage your job, you did a fine job of it yourself.

You put words in my mouth and that is another sign of weakness. I never indiacted that I treat my partners like 'gum on a shoe'. My partners at the D1 level have been with me for years. We support and chastise each otjer when appropriate. If you feel the need to be coddled and to do the same for others, again it is apparent we don't work the same levels of ball. My reputation mean little when I blow a call. I've had coaches that I've known for years chew me out on the field and then go out for dinner a week later. I can handle sarcasm, confrontation and criticism in the name of the game. I don't think it is appropriate to blow smoke up an assignor's skirt when he asks me about a horrible umpire. If you think that is backdooring a fellow arbiter, then I know you were never in professional ball. The world is competitive and most of us realize it.

Apparently, you don't understand what A2D means. That isn't a surprise, you haven't been able to read what else was written. Every one of your points was addressed and it was done with sincerity and a little self deprecation. You keep harping about how I claim to be so talented. I can't recall stating that, but I am confident in my abilities. Am I as good as I once was? No, age and desire have taken their toll. But I can still do the job and take pride that I earned the check.

Twist some more words, write some more things that aren't true. Chase another windmill Don Quixote, you imagination has gotten the better of you. You are boring me and aren't much of a challenge. In fact, you are beginning to sound an awful lot like someone else who just doesn't get it. Like him, you live for tangental thinking and misdirection. It's too bad, I started to think you were better than that.

[SanDiegoSteve]

It's just like saying COME ON, everybody knows all umpires are blind, on the take and have an IQ ceiling of 80.

Are you a sayin' they ain't?ASSOCIATION MEETING

[BlueLawyer]

Originally Posted by WhatWuzThatBlue

(Lawyers are the class example - sure we are in this together, but I'll cut your throat and sell my grandmother to make partner/win this case/get elected judge/etc.)

But WWTB did not disparage my profession, I did.

Originally Posted by WhatWuzThatBlue

I didn't disparage your job, you did a fine job of it yourself.

You're right, of course.

Strikes and outs!

[SAump]

Originally Posted by BigUmp56

This is exactly the kind of nonsense I was talking about, SA. You have shown on numerous occasions that you know very little about this game except how to formulate unsubstantiated opinions that are near worthless. You are a rookie at best and a long time Smitty at worst, yet you continue to engage the more knowledgeable posters on this board in matters of which you have no understanding.

Take the carelessly thrown bat issue for example. How many other officials told you that you were off base in your line of thinking? Way too many for you to keep arguing, yet on and on you went. At some point, a reasonable man would have thought to himself that he may need to re-think his position. However, as you're not a reasonable man, you no doubt cannot grasp this concept. As I have it right now, you're batting a big o-fer' on this forum.

Tim.

A carelessly thrown bat in OBR merits warning and an ejection.
My indifference results from the manner UMPIRES have granted OC responsibility to take care of the issue.
Mr Ortiz of Red Sox Fame was suspended 5 games for a carelessly thrown bat.
He could not be called OUT again because he had already been ruled OUT.
The league took PRO-ACTIVE punishment aside from the rules set in place.
I am aware of no such opportunity at lower levels of play.
I suppose a proper analogy would be:
1) The fox in charge of the henhouse.
2) The robber incharge of the LOCK BOX.
3) ...
I do NOT like it and it is an OPINION.
It is a well informed POLITICAL opinion you choose to ignore.
It is a well informed opinion that points out a weakness in the current rules.
Instead, you and your lost pups pretend the rule is greater than the game.
I have been attacked for forming an opinion defending the integrity of the game.
As I speak online today (2006), some local baseball leagues will have modified their own rules.
In softball and T-ball, many local leagues have already modified these rules.
You ignore the advice of professionl ballplayers and attack their character.
You ignore the reality only to besmirch my character.
You do all this on a thread named CIVILITY.
The yokes on YOU to correct it.

[WhatWuzThatBlue]

Four thoughts for the price of one:

1) I didn't realize those were disparaging. Most people are fully aware of the competition that occirs in a courtroom and office. I guess you must be a one man show.

2) You certainly have a neat way of giving someone the last word. Lah me!

3) You still can't counter my points. Yet another classis example of "Sorry coach, I didn't see the play. Give me a couple years and I'll know what to do."

4) You post about your expectations (limited opinions) regarding civility on a discussion board; what's next - don't look up, wet paint-don't touch, why do some umpires never learn?

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by SAump

A carelessly thrown bat in OBR merits warning and an ejection.

Yes, exactly. After a warning, the next offense by any team member results in an ejection.

My indifference results from the manner UMPIRES have granted OC responsibility to take care of the issue.

What umpires? Not real ones! Real umpires don't let the coaches run anything but their mouths, and those not for long. A good umpire will warn the player, his coach, and his team, that the next offender will be ejected. Period. End of discussion!

I do NOT like it and it is an OPINION.
It is a well informed POLITICAL opinion you choose to ignore.
It is a well informed opinion that points out a weakness in the current rules.
Instead, you and your lost pups pretend the rule is greater than the game.
I have been attacked for forming an opinion defending the integrity of the game.

You did not present this as an opinion, you presented it as a proper interpretation of the current rules, which it was not. Us "pups" know that the rule is the game, and without the rules, there would be no game. You have not been attacked for forming an opinion, you have been corrected for passing off your opinion as fact.

[BlueLawyer]

"Cut your throat and sell my grandmother" are not disparaging?

I'm not often at a loss for words. I am now.

Strikes and outs!

[WhatWuzThatBlue]

When someone says that they are giving the other the last word, being at a loss for words shouldn't come as a surprise. But then again, you twisted mine, so stumbling over yours is probably not uncharacteristic.

I shouldn't have to explain this, but the world's view of attorneys is not positive. I believe you wrote that there are many jackasses in the field. I alluded to the cut throat/sell your grandmother/bribe the bench to get the verdict as an example of competition in the workplace. You refuse to believe that competition exists within the umpiring brotherhood. That's a shame because outside of a Buddhist monastery, it exists everywhere counselor.

You began this thread by pondering why we can't all get along. Maybe you should read that initial post again. Then you can read the one I wrote that said it is okay to disagree, words don't hurt and if you can't retort effectively, you will be a weak umpire. Maybe my rebuttals will help you take the next step and improve your communication skills. Somehow, I think not.