Is the BIG Game worth it

[Publius]

A few years ago, I had a choice between a 2-man, U18 district semi-final for $50 and a 3-man, U12 "World Series" (with the proliferation of sanctioning bodies, that term is practically meaningless now) game on a 60' diamond for $30. They were both played at the same complex at the same time. I chose the U18.

Did I turn down the BIG game? The assignor acted like I did. I thought the other game was a bigger challenge and more money--easy choice. I also thought it would be nice to let someone who was excited to have it work the U12 game.

Is a game between a bunch of kids just out of elementary school a BIG game just because they slap the misnomer "World Series" on it?

[Tim C]

Define "Big" anyway it fits your schedule.

As ever one knows (ad nauseum) I have never worked a JV game or small diamond game and have no intent of ever doing that.

Do I think ball played by shaving aged players is "bigger" than small diamond ball?

That answer is obvious.

Regards,

[HokieUmp]

Originally Posted by Tim C

Define "Big" anyway it fits your schedule.

As ever one knows (ad nauseum) I have never worked a JV game or small diamond game and have no intent of ever doing that.

Do I think ball played by shaving aged players is "bigger" than small diamond ball?

That answer is obvious.

Regards,

Okay. For the not working less than HS, all I can say is "good for you." And not in a sarcastic way... Well, maybe a little sarcastic, but not that much.

Unfortunately, I'm neither a) a living legend, or b) the one making schedules for my association. So I don't really have the luxury of saying "HS or Death!" I suppose I could, but then I'd get a lot less games, and it would take that much longer to get into four figures of games.

Overseas, I was in a town where there wasn't another place to umpire for 1,000 miles, no lie. So I took what the town offered, which was little kids, teenagers (not a school comp, but the local league), and the adult league (4-6 teams during my time, player ages running from 15-55 or older).

Here, I'm part of a 130-man organization, and as I said before, I'm not that high in the order. Do I want a game that's meaningful? Sure, I want that; I'd like to get picked for districts (or whatever it's called) and/or state games. I'd like to get whatever college level we have. But I work what I'm assigned. (Several people here have mentioned picking some game over another - pretty sweet, if you can get that.)

But until then, I need and want work, to show what I can do. So those games do have a meaning of their own, even if I'm the only one on the field that gives a $%#^.

I just wish those on this forum that have gotten to a point where they can be a little more choosy wouldn't be so disdainful of the rest of us. I'm probably not as bad an umpire as you think.

[MajorDave]

The tenor of commentary leans a bit toward the holier than thou side by some. The lack of camaraderie by some on this site is a big drawback for this forum. I have never understood why some posters choose to be so negative toward others. I agree that some posters deserve it when they start arguments, ask the same dumb questions over and over and argue with advice when they sought the advice in the first place. However, the lack of compassion, understanding and downright nastiness of some for no apparent reason puzzles me. I have learned that several of the "regulars" or "old timers" on this site have grown intolerant of the relative ignorance of some newer or more inexperienced posters. I do my best to ignore it. Commenting on it, even like I am doing now, never helps anyone, even me. I write to help me clear my head, sort out complex (at least to me) concepts and inform others when I can. Others apparently just like to give some a hard time. It is easy to do anonymously or via the internet with the hundreds and thousands of miles between many of us. Also, the avocation, as I like to call it, demands a certain level of skin thickness, stubbornness and ego that most jobs never come close to. So, consider the source of some of the commentary and ignore it if it doesn't help you get better. I still get a lot of valuable information from the postings here. I try to give some of it back as I strive to get better every day. Both in my umpiring career and with the rest of my life. Good luck. My two cents.

D.C. Teater

[JJ]

Originally Posted by MajorDave

So, consider the source of some of the commentary
D.C. Teater

That's one of my "rules of thumb" of umping when I'm getting chirped at - consider the source. Good rule, too...

JJ

I thrive on doing higher levels. I love the challenge.

What I hate is the politics that are involved as you move up. Dealing with plenty of that right now.

The intensity of the game is NOTHING compared to the intensity of the competition of the top umpires trying to get to "the next level". The degree of false rumors, backstabbing, and politicing is incredible!

I literally questioned tonight if I have the stomach for it anymore. Tim C can let you know if I decided no!

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by rei

I thrive on doing higher levels. I love the challenge.

What I hate is the politics that are involved as you move up. Dealing with plenty of that right now.

The intensity of the game is NOTHING compared to the intensity of the competition of the top umpires trying to get to "the next level". The degree of false rumors, backstabbing, and politicing is incredible!

I literally questioned tonight if I have the stomach for it anymore. Tim C can let you know if I decided no!

You complain about rumors and backstabbing, and then invite someone else to report your feelings? Maybe that was supposed to be funny, as evidenced by the wink, but it just seems inconsistent to me.

Originally Posted by MajorDave

The tenor of commentary leans a bit toward the holier than thou side by some. The lack of camaraderie by some on this site is a big drawback for this forum. I have never understood why some posters choose to be so negative toward others. I agree that some posters deserve it when they start arguments, ask the same dumb questions over and over and argue with advice when they sought the advice in the first place. However, the lack of compassion, understanding and downright nastiness of some for no apparent reason puzzles me. I have learned that several of the "regulars" or "old timers" on this site have grown intolerant of the relative ignorance of some newer or more inexperienced posters. I do my best to ignore it. Commenting on it, even like I am doing now, never helps anyone, even me. I write to help me clear my head, sort out complex (at least to me) concepts and inform others when I can. Others apparently just like to give some a hard time. It is easy to do anonymously or via the internet with the hundreds and thousands of miles between many of us. Also, the avocation, as I like to call it, demands a certain level of skin thickness, stubbornness and ego that most jobs never come close to. So, consider the source of some of the commentary and ignore it if it doesn't help you get better. I still get a lot of valuable information from the postings here. I try to give some of it back as I strive to get better every day. Both in my umpiring career and with the rest of my life. Good luck. My two cents.

D.C. Teater

You know, when you got to the big clinics/camps and what not, you will inevitably hear an official who has achieved a fairly high level in the pro ranks give a seemingly heartfelt speech concerning the "brotherhood of officiating". You will hear all sorts of great talk about how you should never talk bad about fellow officials no matter how deserving they may be of it. You will hear about how you should never openly criticize a fellow official, even to another official. How you should never envy another officials assignments. How you should never work against another official. All of these same things may be published in rule books under "ethics" statements and what not.

This is a great speech, until you hear that same guy talk trash about somebody. I have seen it way too many times in the 3 sports I have officiated.

The "culture" of umpiring upper level sports is not going to change. I am not sure it can! You MUST be ambitious to improve. That same ambition though often leads to unsavory behavior for officials (meaning, behavior that is contrary to the mission and ethics statements that we read).

There are territorial disputes. There are political plays. There are conflicting personalities. It is all there in officiating. What makes it really messed up is that any even halfway decent sports official is a Type A personality. Thus, these battles can be very nasty.

To survive, you have to be clever! Probably the best advise I could give anybody newer trying to move up the ranks. Be clever!