My 1st Ejection
 

Gentlemen,

On Saturday, while working my 68th game of the season, I had my first ejection. Below is the text of the ejection report I sent to the league.

(Addressed to the League President),

My name is John Muller and I umpired the xxx game earlier today between (Home Team) and (Visiting Team).

During the bottom of the 5th inning, I ejected the (Visitor) head coach following a controversial play.

With one out and the bases loaded, the (Home Team) batter hit a fly ball to RCF that the (Visitor) F8 and F9 both went after. The (Visitor) F8 got his glove on the ball and then had a near immediate and rather violent collision with the F9. I was unable to see the ball after the collision so I ran out towards RF to get an angle. When my angle of vision had cleared the fielder lying on the ground, I saw the ball lying on the ground and the fielder reaching to pick it up with his bare hand. I immediately ruled "NO CATCH, NO CATCH!" while signalling SAFE.

After action had relaxed, I called time, allowed the coaches to tend the injured player and had a discussion with the (Visitor) head coach. I let him have his say and then asked him if he'd like to know what I saw. I explained what I had seen and told him that my ruling was "No Catch" per OBR Rule 2.0 Catch, because, in my judgement the fielder's release of the ball was neither voluntary nor intentional.

At this point, the coach started making derogatory comments about my competency as an umpire. I told him, "That's enough, Coach". He persisted, and I ejected him.

After he left the immediate premises, the game resumed and was completed without further incident.

If you have any questions for me regarding this incident, you may feel free to contact me at this e-mail or on my cell phone at xxx-xxx-xxxx.

Sincerely,

John Muller

Comments or critique?

JM

"started making derogatory comments about my competency as an umpire"

Lose this. Put exactly what the coach called you or said about you.

Always put the exact words in the report. If the coach called you a "Stupid Mother F@@ker" than put those exact words in the report. It helps emphasize the context of the comments and might bring further action. For all you know this coach might have had other incidents and this gives the league more opportunity to deal with the behavior appropriately. Also the words you used might be anything to the reader. You do not want the people assume you were just being overly sensitive or that the words were tamer than they actually were.

Peace

UmpJM,

I'm not a wordsmith. I'm more the Jack Webb, Dragnet "just the facts, ma'am", style.

I try to keep my reports to 50 words or less, though I used 61 to report my six ejection game.

JMHO

Agreed that you need the specific words both initially and where you said "He persisted."

Here's what my report would have said:


[I](Addressed to the League President),

My name is Don Mueller and I umpired the xxx game earlier today between (Home Team) and (Visiting Team).

During the bottom of the 5th inning, I ejected the (Visitor) head coach.

After a catch/no catch judgement call in the 5th inning XXX head coach asked for an explanation on my call. After my explanation (coach) replied "You're incompetent" I said "that's enough coach" he replied "you're still incompetent" I ejected him.

After he left the immediate premises, the game resumed and was completed without further incident.

If you have any questions for me regarding this incident, you may feel free to contact me at this e-mail or on my cell phone at xxx-xxx-xxxx.

Sincerely,

Don Mueller


Personally I feel no compulsion to justify my judgement call in the ejection report. Nor do I refer to any rules or interps in an ejection report, I only need to do that if there is a protest which is a totally separate matter.

Ejections are for unsportsmanlike behavior and I try to limit my report to as little detail as possible aside from that behavior.
The decisions made from my report need to be based on the behavior of the coach irregardless of game conditions.
If more detail is needed or wanted they know how to contact me.

I'm not suggesting your report is good /bad or indifferent, only commenting on how I do it and why.

edited
Many new umpires feel the ejection report, in part if not in total, is a report to justify the ejection. WRONG
The ejection report is to advise league personnel of the unsportsmanlike behavior of the coach or player and help enable the league to take further action if needed, also to have a written record in the file in case of future issues.
When an umpire feels no need to justify the ejection the reports usually become very brief and to the point.

Others have commented on including the exact words used, which I agree with. I probably would have ejected as soon as the coach started making comments about my competency as an umpire. I'd use the warning if he was continuing to discuss the play after my explanation.

First: As Pauley said in Goodfellas, "Hey, you popped a cherry!" Congrats.

Second: If the coach called you a $&^%* then put that he called you a $&^%*.

Third: I wouldn't say "controversal play". To me that makes it sould like there is a possibility that you screwed up...even though it appears that you didn't from your further description. I would eliminate that language.

Good job!

My version:

(Addressed to the League President),

During the fifth inning of the game between xxx and yyy earlier today xxx head coach asked for an explanation of a "catch/no catch" call. After my explanation (coach) stated "You're incompetent." I said "that's enough coach" and he replied "you're still incompetent." He was immediately ejected.

He left the immediate premises and the game was completed without further incident.

Sincerely,

Umpire's name
email address and phone number.

Original Version: 296 words/ 19.5 words per sentence
New Version: 64 words/ 12.2 words per sentence

I agree with the others. Put in the EXACT words that the coach said to you.

RE: Some leagues in addition to having an automatic 1 game suspension also have fines in place for use of profanity. The president of one of the leagues we service in addition to the reason why someone got Ej'd ALSO wants to know if profanity was used. In other words to keep control in the league a "double whammy".

Also, as Garth Put it, simply put in words the inning / incident that the coach was Ej'd. You have too much detail

NOTE: All of this advice could be moot if this is the way your association wants it. We had a recent thread on this lately. The explanations given to you are what is done in most associations. No-one likes reading a thesis and for possible disciplinary actions the exact wording needs to be included.

In other words, the type of report you gave us might be the type of report that is required where you work.

Pete Booth

Gentlemen,

Thanks to all for your helpful advice - especially the concise "rewrites" of my first attempt at an ejection report. Most helpful.

I honestly don't/didn't remember exactly what the coach said. I just distinctly remember the comments going from focusing on the call to commenting on my umpiring. Next time I'll make it a point to remember exactly what was said. (The coach never used anything approaching profanity - not even a "Damn" or "Bull$hit").

There hadn't been a peep from him or anyone on his team the whole game prior to that, nor was there anything after he left.

When the game ended, the only way back to the parking lot was down the Visitor's side of the field. I braced myself to "walk the gauntlet" back to my car. I didn't hear a single comment until I was almost off the field when one of the visitor's Dad's said, "I thought you called a good game". I said "Thanks" and kept walking.

Kind of weird.

JM

You really need to know what the coach said. If all you say is something general, the coach will be able to say they said no such thing. Even if you did not hear everything, you have to know why you ejected them. It just adds to your credibility to the league or whomever that you have to deal with.

Peace

I assuming you were in a two man system. What were you doing running out to rightfield? You never get out of the grass and cross the dirt if in B and C. If you were in A on ball hit to right centerfield you should have been coming in and pivoting with the runner.

Since you have the bases loaded, you were hopefully in C. Who is going to make the calls on the bases if you're in rightfield?

I would have tossed him after the first "incompetent" call, and included exactly what he said to me in the report. He he said something personal (ie incompetent) or profane the report would be very short.

Congrats there for the 1st one! We had a pool going at the DC to see how long it would take. Most went to <5 games ... enough said.

As a note: I keep a 3x5 card + a Honigs bullet pencil handy when working the bases. Makes it easy to jot down comments, quotes, etc (Esp when you get old & gray like me). Amazing how concise an EJ report can be when one spends 30 seconds on notes. At the plate we have lineup cards, so that's a no brainer.

Mr. Aerosmith, he said it was hit to Right Center Field. That's why F8 and F9 are converging on the ball. It's called working the V. Who do you think should go out on trouble balls? Pretty basic stuff. Go back to the attic and play with your toys.

I really hate to agree with Steve, but you do not leave the diamond from the B or C position. You might move for an angle, but you do not leave the diamond.

Well Steve, if the bases are loaded many are taught to be in the C position. This is often taught to put the umpire in a better position to call the play at first.

Peace

Well, C is just a pre-pitch position. Hopefully JM meant what he said, in that he was moving toward RF, not into RF, from his starting point (C), without crossing the base line.

Playoff time too. U1 in three or four umpire crew WOULD go onto the grass for this.

Two umpire crew - Agree with SDS.

My three man is a bit rusty, but when would U1 be in "C"? I thought he was in "B" with a runner at 2nd base.

For God's sake, is it necessary for people to nitpick the mechanics here? (Not the person I quoted, but since ST is on ignore, this is the best I can do).

If F8 and F9 collided and I needed to cross the basepath to see if the ball was laying on the ground behind a fielder, I'm doing it, especially if the players were injured and I know that we're calling TIME as soon as we ascertain what's going on and play stops. The catch/no catch is paramount. My partner can pick up on what I did and can cover third, if necessary. I can pick up plays at second from behind, if I need to.

C is a starting point. The right place to go is the place that's necessary for the situation. For example, if the ball is stuck under something in the outfield and a fielder raises his hand, I'm going to go out to check on it.

I was working the game solo.

I had come out from behind the plate and had set to call the catch/no catch just short of the pitcher's mound to the 3B side where I had an angle on the initial attempt.

When no one came up showing the ball after the collision, I started running towards RF, about midway between 1B and 2B to get an angle to clear the tangle of the 2 fielders and was probably about a step or two onto the infield dirt when I saw the ball on the ground.

JM

Coach, you did what you had to do in the situation - no big deal like others are making of it. Just remember that if those fielders were not on the ground, you may get a throw back into the infield, but that would be a different situation.

To the amateurs out there, the number one, most important thing that an umpire needs to know is the status of the ball. Nothing can happen without the ball! Try to keep that in mind in the future!

This is the exact reason why it is totally wrong for anyone to work a game by themselves by design. You cannot call the game very well even if you are in shape or you know what you are doing. I am so glad I started in a place that never did this on purpose. I think if I started umpiring in this area and had to work by myself, I would have quit years ago.

Peace

This is not true. There is a lot that can happen without the ball. If someone misses a based and there is no play on that runner, the ball is not relevant to the play. This is the very reason someone should not be working alone during any baseball game.

Peace

You might want to check with any pro, college or HS instructor, Rut. Nothing is more important than the ball! NOTHING!

You are correct that many things can go on, but the first and foremost thing is the ball. Everything else is secondary to this.

Regards.

Working solo is not a big deal. I've worked hundreds of games alone, including JV games and Colt games on big diamonds. You just have to hustle, and if anyone argues a call you tell them to hire two umpires next time, and that shuts them right up.:)

I do not care what any pro, college or HS instructor says. That is in my opinion not a very good point of view or philosophy if you ask me. And this is only a baseball mentality where you think the ball is everything. Well it is not and when you miss the obstruction call or a missed base, tell the coach then how important the ball is then. I am also not saying that the ball is not important, but it surely is not the only thing.

Peace

I am not talking about it from the angle of folks arguing calls. I am talking about that when you work varsity and college ball, you do not work the game from only one point of view. Working by yourself gets you into bad habits and you do not get to work the game from positions that will really make you a good umpire. Part of being a really good umpire is knowing how to handle a game on the bases. Many of the toughest calls are made from there and making them from weird angles is not helpful in the long run if you ask me.

Peace

Jeff,

I think these are pretty good points. I might say "..can get you into bad habits..." rather than "...gets you into...", but the point is valid nonetheless.

However, I'm the new guy. I go out of my way to work 2-man games, but the fact is, at this point, the majority of the games that are available to me are solo.

I think it's better for my development as an umpire to work more games, even if solo, than to "hold out" for just 2-man games.

While I would agree that two competent umpires are preferable to one, I would argue that one competent umpire is better than two who are less than competent. (Possibly better than one who is and one who isn't.)

The world is not always the way we wish it were. Such is life.

I umpire because I enjoy it. While I like working a 2-man game better than solo, I still have fun when I work solo. You ought to try it some time.

JM

Well, while I have worked many a solo game (as I said, hundreds) I have worked at least 2,800+ games with a partner, and probably around half of them on the bases, so I don't think mixing in solo games got me into any bad habits. You just have to adjust to it. Making calls from what you call weird angles sharpens your ability to call from the plum angles you get working the bases.

JM,

I am not referring to you directly. You have to do what you have to do. But from my point of view working solo stunts the growth of umpires. There are guys where we live struggling in their 4th and 5th year when they finally work a 2 man game. They do not know where to go and where to stand which is extremely basic stuff. Once again this is just an opinion. I know there are people that disagree.

Peace

If I had been forced to work solo exclusively for 4 or 5 years before working 2-man, I would have been lost too. They never did that to us here. Everyone who was qualified got to go work with the veterans, and get work on the bases. Plus, we had instructors, clinics, and several pro school grads and minor league umpires doing drills with us. One in particular had me running pivots from "A" in a shopping mall parking lot under the lights late at night after a game. There was a whole lot of emphasis on developing umpires who wanted to learn and advance when I started out.

There is a big difference between working a solo game here and there and only working solo games for several years until you get a varsity contest (which is very common in this part of the state). Also one of the reasons working with a partner is better. You have someone that can evaluate you on some level if you are working 2 man constantly. When you work the plate, someone can see how your zone looks. When you are on the bases, your partner can tell you about your timing on a play at first. I have worked with many umpires that are just getting their shot at 2 man to see them do things that they might have long stopped doing if they had an experienced umpire watching them.

Also baseball is not a sport where someone can go all over the place and work games at a camp every other weekend like basketball as an example. So many times umpires are just doing what they know to do and often the things they do is just flat our wrong.

Peace

John,

I'd rather eat lead paint than work solo.

--Rich

So would I, but there was never any lead paint around when I needed it, so I just went ahead and worked the games.

The $69 I got for solo JV games was not to bad, even if working solo is worse than root canal.;)

I agree that 2 man crews will generally call a better game and in a perfect world all leagues would hire 2 per game BUT
If he wants to learn 2 man before he gets to varsity he has the opportunity. There are multiple clinics every year teaching 2 man, there are resources on line and published, there are summer games with 2 man crews that he could get. There's no excuse for an umpire to have that deer in the headlights look on the bases after 4 or 5 years if he was truly motivated.
So my question is: Did the solo games stunt him or did he stunt himself with lack of motivation?

Working solo as a beginning ump has its advantages.
It forces you to work on game management skills.
It definitely hones your sense of anticipating where the play will develop.
In one man your always looking for the angle because you usually are sacrificing distance, then when you get to 2 man you've already developed the knack for the angle and by default you've cut your distance.
You have no one to pow wow with on a rules interp question so after your first screw up(when you realize you're not all knowing) it should be a motivating factor to get back into the rules and you learn real quick the art of BS.
The big problem I found after doing many solo games and then going to BU in 2 man was trying to stay in the game.
BU is very boring if you're used to solo gigs.

JM, this is your first year. Does any of this ring true for you?

I enjoy the comraderie of 2 man before and after the game but the game itself goes much faster for me as PU with or without a partner.

Don,

Quite a bit of it does.

Game management, most certainly.

In terms of anticipation, I found I initially had a tendency to commit too early to the "obvious" (to me) play. I believe I am now more patient in letting the play develop and letting the actual action of the play take me to the proper angle and best distance I can achieve w/o sacrificing position for a possible subsequent play.

I am pretty confident in my rules knowledge and have not yet had a situation where I improperly applied the rules. I did have one situation where I wasn't sure & happened to guess right.

When I do work 2-man games (approx. 20% of my games so far this year), I find the biggest liability is I have to think too much about which calls or responsibilities are mine and which are my partner's. I kind of "know" in a book-learnin' way, but it is far from second nature to me at this point.

So far I haven't had too much difficulty in staying focused when on the bases in a 2-man game. Except sometimes when it's the second MSBL game I'm working that day - but that's a different issue.

I certainly prefer working two-man games; for me, doing a game solo is preferable to both eating lead paint and not working a game at all.

JM

And to those who have moved beyond amateur status, while half of this is true (The number one thing you need to know is the status of the ball), the other half is not. One of the things I find myself UNteaching semi-new guys is the obsession with the ball - staring at it ALL the time. In THIS OP, the status of the ball has become important enough to ignore all else until you have determined out/safe... but in many other situations, the status of the ball will remain undetermined for some period of time, or has already been determined, and JUST watching the ball is bad advice.

"Nothing can happen without the ball" --- umpires that follow this cardinal rule will miss OBS and INT calls on a consistent basis. OBS and INT most certainly happen without the ball. MC can as well.

Not only will these happen without the ball, when you miss them you might get a much bigger argument when you miss these plays.

Peace

Watch the Ball Glance at Runners
 

Watch the ball, glance at runners. The ball is the most important thing. (Damn near) Nothing can happen without the ball. Watch the ball glance at runners.

I'm with Tony. Have they stopped teaching this concept?

I have worked with newer officials who while working the bases watch a runner's exclusively. If you glance at the runners while keeping track of where the ball is, you won't miss obstruction or interference.

Both extremes are wrong, ignoring the ball or the runner is bad mechanics. Yes, things do happen away from the ball. You miss those plays working solo, which is an advantage of 2 man.

What a croc. Tell the truth, if Coach popped off with profanities, or whatever, write it up.