Did you see
 

Hey did any of you guys see the article on MLB umpires in ESPN the magazine. to me it seemed like a good article, any comments, ect.

Just read it....didn't think it was anything that spectacular....this guy spent a week with Randy Marsh's crew and only had 4 pages of mostly regurgitated information? No stories from the guys on the crew, no real look at the depths of umpiring....just the typical stuff you see in every umpiring article.

Oh well, I guess every bit of exposure helps people understand it better, but I wasn't impressed with the article that much.

there is a book in the works about minor league guys. won't be published til fall of next year, but it should be pretty good. the guy who is writing it writes for the NY Times.

Oh, then I'll look in the "Fiction" section. :p

What is the basis for your opinion that "it should be pretty good?" Is it because that the author writes for the NY Times?

No, it's probably because WhatWuzThatBlue wrote the foreword or something. :D

If you are correct, then in my opinion, that would be the first "good" article
ever in ESPN the mag. That is the worst magazine available today. It should
be renamed " Diary of Popular Culture (oh yeah,with a little sports thrown in)
Magazine".

BOOOOOOOOOOYAH !!!!!!!!!!!

Umpduck, dog, you as cool as the other side of the pillow !

You done made all yo' kinfolk so proud ! Moesha, Tyreese, NanaMama, Darius, Ray-Ray ..................

Now, I'll be going BACK, BACK , BACK, BACK, BACK ..................




Doug

in part, yes, but there is more. he is an established writer that did a story about umpire school after attending Jimmy's for a few days a couple of years ago. he was so intrigued by the "umpire world" that he never knew existed that he enrolled in the 5 week course last year as a student, went through all the same things that the students went through, and also got a behind the scenes view from the instructing staff. he is also out on the road this year and has spent 3 days with an A ball crew, 4 days with a AA crew, plans on spending 5 days with a AAA crew, and has met with various big league guys as well. at the and of the season he plans on getting on the field and actually working some games around his hometown area, something he has never done before. the guy is putting in the effort to try and shed a little light on what all of us know is a tough job, but that somebody that has never called a game knows anything about. maybe we should all pitch in and buy McCarver a copy of it when it comes out...

The fact that the guy writes for that piece of trash called the New York Times is enough for me not to read the article.

Why? Too many polysyllables? Crossword too hard? No restaurant reviews of Cracker Barrel?

Ace

Because UMP25 is right.

The New York Times is a first rate newspaper. You may not agree with everything they have to say but it's their constitutional right to publish it. Why everyone is so quick to deprecate The Times, when our nation was built upon the principle of free speech, is beyond me.

I guess most would prefer to have their news and information spoon-fed to them in neat, little sound bites so they don't have to take the time to research and think for themselves.

A mind is a terrible thing to waste.

That's the problem I have with it. They don't differentiate between the news and the opinions. If they just gave the facts in their news stories and left the commentary to the opinion page, the NYT would be more reputable than it is today. I have a problem with any newspaper, no matter the slant, analyzing a story for me in the body of a news article.

Where did you read that?

What does Freedom of Speech have to do with this? I am a staunch defender of the First Amendment, but with Free Speech comes the responsibility of what to say and when.

The NYT is a piece of schit, pure and simple. They no longer have an ounce of credibility and have had a dangerous agenda for years. To put it mildly, they're nuts. They've become so bad that they're hurting big time. Their subscription numbers are down dramatically, and their ad revenue is also down. They've fired hundreds of employees lately as a result. And why is this so? Because people with common sense realize this newspaper is nothing but a partisan rag with no qualms about harming the United States. I say this not as some right-winger, either.

Neither do you say it as matter of fact, but rather as matter of opinion.

(If you don't mind, I will use this post during my next lesson on the differences between fact and opinion.)

Personally, I enjoy the writing style of most Times journalists. I also prefer the Times Style. Back in the day, we were required to use the NYT style guide for our term papers and thesis projects. I do, however, refrain from reading much of the editorial page.

An "opinion" I am happy to say that is shared by more and more Americans each day. It's no wonder the NYT is bleeding, with no coagulation in site.

It can never be seen as fact that the NYT is a very left-leaning rag, true. However, it can be seen as fact that the Times has employed some people who have no qualms about writing fiction and passing it off as news.

I live in Madison. There are two daily papers here -- morning and afternoon. Morning is seen as more conservative and afternoon is off the charts liberal which sees nothing wrong with putting anti-Bush articles on the front page and spinning them as "News."

My opinion, as someone who has lived elsewhere is that BOTH papers are quite left of center, with the afternoon one almost a parody. But I subscribe to both -- I love newspapers and I can always get a chuckle out of the editorial pages.

Yes, and the last such example of that was with a reporter named Judith Miller.

Is the "not some right-winger" guy as upset with the Wall Street Journal as he is with the New York Times. If you compare their reporting - particularly on the stories that have gotten the current administration all hot and bothered with respect to the allegation that they have spilled state secrets, you will see that both publications have reported the same things, with the same level of detail, at the same time.

Dave,

I hate the WSJ. It has a lousy sports section. :)

I consider myself middle of the road these days, so you must be talking about someone else ;)

--Rich

PS -- Isn't it about time for the traditional LL bashing threads? I mean, U1 kicked the crap out of that call last night and I haven't seen anything here posted about it. :)

Let's see, the NYT, with 116 Pulitzer Prizes, more than any other newspater, according to it's SEC filings had increases in both subscription and ad revenues during Q2, 2006, this while much of the media suffered from a decline of ad dollars spent in several of the industry segments, including entertainment and automotive.

You need to get your news from someone other than Bill O'Reilly.

I read the NYT to balance the local neanderthal press. I add Time Magazine and NewsWeeK to the mix and I believe I get a fairly god picture.

(Sources: NYT Q2 Filing and "Seeking Media.")

That was the most brutal call I've ever seen, bar none! Took runs off the board, for sure.

Let the bloodletting begin.

Missing a banger is one thing. Blowing a call by two full steps is another.

If anyone has video of this play, it should be posted in the "what is a LL umpire" thread.

Stupid coach. Stupider rule.

Why? These kids are ALL-STARS. It's not like some local league where you try to hide the crappy playing kid on the bench. Kids shouldn't have to travel all the way to a regional so the same 9 kids can play every game.

Every LL coach knows the consequence of not meeting MPR. Most coaches make sure the starters meet MPR and get the subs in VERY EARLY. So your first sentence I'll agree with wholeheartedly.

I agree that the coach should have gotten his last sub in the game somehow to comply with the rule.

I regular season play, the MPR is 6 consecutive outs and 1 at bat. And they lessen the requirement in tournament play to 3 consecutive outs and 1 at bat. I just don't feel there should be any mandatory play rule, period, in tournament play. The coaches and parents should take care of that on their own.

I don't like it that these kids, from both teams in this situation, have to suffer and be totally disappointed because of one coach's negligence. Sure everyone should participate, but forfeiting a game over it rubs me the wrong way.

Because of this rule, the two managers involved resorted to shenanagins, and made a mockery of the game. They also embarrased their players, and like PWL said, I'd rather lose on the field than be given the win by forfeit.

I would've liked to have seen BOTH teams forfeit myself.

The whole mandatory play requirement chaps my a$$! IMO, this type of stuff just helps feed kids opinions of entitlement. If the kid is an all star, that doesn't mean he is just as good as his teammates!
Johnny, you want more playing time? Get better! How about a little extra batting practice, stay at the field with dad afterward and field some extra ground balls.

A couple of years ago, my sons hockey team lost the state championship game 2-0. The next day, I received an e-mail from a team mom asking for $15 so that she could order the kids medals anyway "because they did their best." My reply was that their best wasn't good enough, they should learn to earn their awards. I'm not trying to be cold hearted, I'm just trying to emphasize that youth sports are about fun and learning. Learning that anything worth having is worth working for.

All the coach had to do was play the kid in the top of the sixth and he would have fulfilled the defensive requirement of the 3 consecutive outs. Then he would have been able to play the bottom of the sixth.

The MPR rule for tournament play has an exception for shortened games, but does not include games shortened because the home team did not need the bottom of the sixth, or any extra inning in order to win. 10-run rule games are exempted from the MPR rule in tournament play, and also in League play if the Local League elects not to impose a penalty on the manager.

Also, in League play, there is no forfeit penalty whatsoever for a MPR violation. The player(s) who didn't fulfill the requirement must start the next scheduled game and then fulfill the requirement before being replaced in the lineup.

All he had to do, then, was pinch hit the kid that neeed playing time in the bottom of the fifth and then play him in the top of the sixth. You ALWAYS start the MPR cycle with an at bat when possible cause he can get his playing time in the field. Instead, the coach put him in the field and not for someone guaranteed to bat. Too bad.

Hey, for those that don't like it -- it's the rule and the coaches hear all the horror stories of forfeits. This just becomes the biggest one.

The last all star team I coached won a state championship. The team had 13 players and the top 3 players were clearly better than the rest (these 3 were starters on D1 baseball teams in the spring). The difference between #4 and #12 was very small. And they all worked very hard and they all deserved playing time, which they got. We did not have a mandatory play requirement, but I worked hard to get them all some playing time. Oh, and you might wonder about #13, he was hand picked by me (league allowed the coach to pick the last 2 players from the top 8 vote getters who were not in the top 11 vote getters) to be a closer. He pitched the 6th in quite a few games, retired the side on 11 pitches in one of the state tournament games that we led 1-0 going into the bottom of the 6th. And at practice he worked hard at batting, and fielding just like everybody else but he knew what his job was and we would not have won without him, the 13th and final pick.

These are All-Star teams,right? Coach to win, not to appease players or
parents with playing time. This is "best of the best" time, not regular season
Regular season, little Johnny's mom paid for him to play, therefore he should
get playing time. Nobody is forced to participate in all star tournaments. I
believe these coaches want to win, and they would play the best lineup to
win games. If little Johnny is the tenth-best player on the team, so be it.
Get him in when you can, but don't bump better players so Johnny doesn't
lose self-esteem.

P.S.
Yes, I understand that parents pay for all star teams, also. No need to
jump on me about that...... :D

I think we are getting some opinions here from some who have never coached a youth league team at all, and/or never coached an all star team.

Also, the rule is modified from the regular season. A player only needs 3 consecutive outs and 1 AB to fulfill his MPR, it's 6 outs in the regular season.

Like the rule or not - it's really not that tough to comply.

I mentioned this in an earlier post, Walt.;)

I think you're missing my point. Let me try another approach.
I have a very good friend who is an NCAA D-2 hockey coach. Every year, he has players arrive on campus who have always been in the top 5% of every team with which they've played. Perennial All Stars at every level. They stride into the locker room at the start of the season only to find that the room is full of all stars. During the course of the pre-season, it's apparent to coach that they're very good players, but he wants to redshirt them for a year. Many times, these kids either transfer to a smaller school or quit playing all together because the've never had to deal with this type of disappointment before. That is a shame.
Youth sports are supposed to build character. What is learned by constantly shielding youngsters from disappointment. Let kids experience the agony of defeat, that makes the sweet smell of victory that much sweeter.

BTW- I have coached both LL baseball and youth hockey. I have always followed the MPR for little league because that's the rule. On the ice, I almost never tried to match-up line changes, although, at times when the game was on the line, the weaker players may have sat in order to preserve the tie or win. In 10+ years, the only parent to complain about her kids ice time was the mother of my son.

Your point was that MPR chap your a**. NCAA sports and youth leagues are entirely different. And hockey is a different forum.

In fact, I was talking about someone else, the fire-breathing guy who was calling the New York Times traitorous and stuff. Having begun my post with a quote of your prior post, that surely wasn't clear, and for that I apologize.

Oh, I see we're back to correcting my mistakes again. Yes, I misread. I missed the part where the kid already played defense. So what? The details are far less important than the point. You spend way too much time worrying about what I write. Smileys don't cover up sarcasm.:)

I also realized my mistake about 4 hours ago, but unlike you, I dont' go back and delete or alter my posts so as not to look bad, like some people (you) I know.

You're still missing my point
 

Ok.... I'll spell it out for you. My point wasn't that MPR chaps my a$$, but rather that such rules only serve to strengthen the feeling of entitlement that far too many kids possess. The chaping is not a result of the fact that Johnny must play, it's a result of what Johnny learns from this sitch (ie that I deserve this just because I'm here). Far too many young people have the opinion that they are owed something. That was my point.

BTW- these NCAA kids are learning this at a very young age. They learn it from Mom and Dad, the schools, and youth sports.

I hate it when I agree with PWL !!!



Doug

That's the kind of "magazine" prose that we won't publish at Officiating.com. No insight, no life, no controversy, no entertainment.

Just the kind of the pap they teach you to churn out in journalism school.

You're a good man, Steve. ;)

A rule was violated and protested. Would you take the same stance if the home team, down by 1 run with two outs in the bottom of the last inning, hit a walk-off home run only to have the lead runner miss a base before scoring?

Lock up the sharp objects.........
 

I refuse to reply to this.

What I will do however is just sit here, shake my head and ask myself, "Why me, Lord? Why me?"

That's a different situation than a team trying to lose so they can win. Hope they get smoked in the LLWS.

I never was a Nebraska football fan, but I gained a world of respect for Tom Osborne when he went for the two point conversion and the win. He could have easily settled for a tie and a national championship in the Orange Bowl years ago. I don't think anyone ever second guessed him for his decision. If you want to be number one, go in through the front door not the back.

Ummm, lots of people questioned his decision to do that.

I'll get on the VT coach for making a mockery of the game that lead to the NH coach doing the same. The VT coach started it by throwing wild pitches. He should have just let the game play out, not said anything, then the NH coach would have done the same. When the VT coach started telling kids to lose intentionally, the NH coach was well within his right to do the same, IMO.

Sorry. You couldn't say anything that would be more wrong.

The <i>Times</i> is the newspaper of record in the USA, and their stance on current issues is progressive, intelligent, and well-supported.

The only place they have lost credibilithy is where they never had it, with the right-wing, your protestation to the contrary notwithstanding, as the cliche goes.

Take a look even at the rags you're fond of. EVERYBODY quotes the <i>Times</i>.

BTW: Could you give a source for your figures on the decline of the Times?

Ah, "progressive," "intelligent"--the euphemisms of the uber-left. That doesn't surprise me, just as it doesn't surprise me that you'd lump me into the right-wing because I happen to agree with more and more Americans who see the NYT for what it is--a piece of rag that gets its jollies bashing anyone to the right of Ted Kennedy.

"Progressive," huh? Is that why the Times hasn't endorsed, for example, a Republican for president in 50 years? The only reason the Times is the newspaper of record is because it's in our largest city, and NY is the largest media outlet in the country.

More than one way to skin a rat......
 

Hate to break it to you, but you weren't even born when this took place. Some people said he could have taken the easy way out, but as I recall he was praised for being man enough to either win or lose the game.

I don't believe Herm Edwards said, "You play to tie the game." If there had been OT back then, of course go for the tie. He put the whole season and national championship on one play. It was do or die, not make an out so we can lose the game and advance.

I don't know if it is within the rules, but the VT coach might have possibly had the kid come down with a sudden injury or sickness to avoid having to bat the player. What about the squawking that the NH people would have raised then. I bet they would have been raising holy heck over something like that.

Progressive is just a fancy word for "really, really liberal." I live in the Berkeley of the Midwest and our afternoon paper is called "progressive." It editorializes on the front page without apology. I subscribe cause it only costs an extra $5 a month and it gives me a good laugh in the afternoon.

If the Times is the paper of record and their stance is "well-supported" why did the Republican win the 2004 presidential election? I mean, the Times endorsed Kerry.

Garth,

The NYT has increased circulation and revenues only by trying to sell more subscriptions outside of its home area.

"Falling home-market circulation. Circulation has fallen 16% in the NYT’s home market in this decade, from 665,000 to 556,000, but you can’t find the numbers in the Company’s 10K. Rather, you have to perform some arithmetic gymnastics on old and new 10K’s to uncover these figures about its poor performance in its 31-county home market. The Times has seen its comparable circulation decline by 27% since 1993 (the first year that such figures were available online), when it had a circulation of 758,000. Its current 556,000 circulation places it a dismal number three in its home market behind the Daily News (689,000) and the NY Post (663,000)."

--Rich