The Official Forum - How to handle?

The Official Forum (https://forum.officiating.com/)

- Baseball (https://forum.officiating.com/baseball/)

- - How to handle? (https://forum.officiating.com/baseball/43273-how-handle.html)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rufus

.....(for what it's worth the 3b coach and bench coach of the other team - their bench was on the 1b side of the field - both came up to me after the 1/2 inning and said his foot was on the bag).

In all fairness to you, Its not worth much! It doesnt really matter, as its easy for them to say/be gracious since they got the call. Plus the bench coach wasnt even close-in the dugout, and the 3rd base coach was across the diamond, so the BU had the best view.
Any decent official wont make a call safe/out based on a "weird" split stretch-his foot is either on or off. And the comment from another poster about a "splitters" foot always being on cause thats how they stretch--- well, I'll take that with a grain---again its either on or off......

Quote:

Originally Posted by btdt

Those looking for perfection need to find a different hobby.

those not striving for perfection need to find a different avocation.

the game has changed over the years and so has the umpiring. certain things used to be done certain ways in the bigs, and they have gotten vastly different as the game has evolved. my question to you is; why would you not try to evolve as an amateur umpire as the professional ones do each year?

there are guys every year that go to one of the umpire schools and either already are frequent posters on sites like these, or become frequent posters after they are introduced to the umpiring world and find their way here. furthermore, there are guys on these boards that currently teach at or are in direct contact with current instructors and have access to all the current teachings. why would you not want to work the way these guys were taught or are teaching?

the things that are taught at the schools are the result of hundreds of evaluations being done each year and are tuned to how the game has evolved. there are always mentions of the "old guard" on here, and i see posts made by this guard all the time. while some things they offer are invaluable and come from years of experience, many of the things the "old guard" do and teach are things that are just plain outdated.

why would you be satisfied doing things the way you've been doing them for years and not updating your techniques as often as possible? time honored techniques are a thing of the past. we live in the information age and the available information should be taken advantage of. in your regular profession, do you attend clinics, seminars, training sessions and the like to get better at what you do? why not employ the same theory to your umpiring?

rant over.

Quote:

Originally Posted by bobbybanaduck

Tom:

The term "old guard" is often used here to disparage anyone with whom a poster may disagree. In reality, many of the so-called "old guard" are more in your camp and many of those b!tching about the old guard continue to think like LL umpires from years past.

You will find the most of the posters here with direct exposure to proschool methods, PBUC recommendations and MLB directives and memos are those who get accused of being "old guard."

We need a better term. That one has been abscounded with and twisted to fit a political agenda.

Now to the meat of your post. I agree wholeheartedly. It makes little sense to fight change when it is being driven by those in control. Most of the change I've seen in mechanics, rules and philosophy have improved umpiring. A couple, not so much, but, again, not worth battling over.

Things change, and sometimes the change is selective, and sometimes things change back. Take the recent ejection of Larry Bowa for violating the coach's box. Some posters here would declare that a symptom of the old guard, when it reality it was the direct result of a NEW directive.

MLB, on one hand, wants kinder gentler umpires, and on the other directs strict and ultimate. It requires staying abreast of current issues as well as philosophy to determine which avenue to take and when.

Again, most of those here that devote the time and energy in doing that are among those accused of being "old guard."

if you can come up with a better term for me i will gladly replace "old guard" in my post. i think you know what group of people, in general, i was talking about.

Quote:

Originally Posted by bobbybanaduck

if you can come up with a better term for me i will gladly replace "old guard" in my post. i think you know what group of people, in general, i was talking about.

Yep, I do. But unfortunately there are some strange ones here that will utilize your reference to "old guard" as evidence to support their "no guard" positions.

Smitty's and Charlies come to mind.

Quote:

Originally Posted by canadaump6

I had an umpire come up to me uninvited a few years ago and tell me the running lane interference wasn't called in that league.

We can stop right there. Any blue who comes to you to lecture you needs to get the shove. If he is wrking with you, then he can make a suggestion, clarification, that's all. You can discuss later. If he's not wrking with you, he needs to STFU. Unless he's buying the martinins of course. :D

Quote:

He was an old guard and so I gave in. Now I'd be either ejecting him from the game or walking off the diamond.

Typical Old Guard. No communicaton skilss especially with the youner umpires. Everything is a lecture, never n educaion.

Looking down this thread, I see that you are getting criticized, wow, new, eh?

We, the older umpires, which predominate this forum, are on our way out. You, the younger umps, are on the way in. This threatens the BeJesus out of the Olg Guard, their days are fast n the past.

These are the same umps who will say "Show me up, player, I'll dump you" but when an old Guard umpire shows up a young man newer to the game, it's "for hos own good."

Yeh, right, the hypocrisy is so deep one can barely see out. :rolleyes:

Quote:

Originally Posted by rookieblue

What a piece of work. I really have to remember to log in before reading these threads.
"...a humble and contrite heart, O God, thou wilt not despise." - Ps li

New Guard, same as the Old Guard. Hyporites.

Quote:

Originally Posted by GarthB

...unfortunately there are some strange ones here that will utilize your reference to "old guard" as evidence to support their "no guard" positions. ...

Quod erat demonstrandum! :cool:

JM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GarthB

Tom:

The term "old guard" is often used here to disparage anyone with whom a poster may disagree.

A blatant lie and howwould you know, anyone who uses that term is on your Ignore List? :rolleyes:

"Old Guard" stans for the umpires who abuse their positions of authority and experience. Who refuse to mock up into the real world of the 21st century.

Quote:

Originally Posted by GarthB

Tom:

Now to the meat of your post. I agree wholeheartedly. It makes little sense to fight change when it is being driven by those in control.

Glad yu weren't around during the 'Nam War and the 60s.:rolleyes:

Quote:

Originally Posted by bobbybanaduck

1) Change is uncomfortable for the old Guard. It means theyhave to think new thoughts, re-analyze their past philosophies...think neo-conservatives.

Quote:

there are guys every year that go to one of the umpire schools and either already are frequent posters on sites like these, or become frequent posters after they are introduced to the umpiring world and find their way here. furthermore, there are guys on these boards that currently teach at or are in direct contact with current instructors and have access to all the current teachings. why would you not want to work the way these guys were taught or are teaching?

See above.

Quote:

the things that are taught at the schools are the result of hundreds of evaluations being done each year and are tuned to how the game has evolved. there are always mentions of the "old guard" on here, and i see posts made by this guard all the time. while some things they offer are invaluable and come from years of experience, many of the things the "old guard" do and teach are things that are just plain outdated.

Yet they will defend them to the hilt. Usually by smearing those who point out their deficiencies.

Quote:

why would you be satisfied doing things the way you've been doing them for years and not updating your techniques as often as possible? time honored techniques are a thing of the past. we live in the information age and the available information should be taken advantage of. in your regular profession, do you attend clinics, seminars, training sessions and the like to get better at what you do? why not employ the same theory to your umpiring?

You really think they do that in their real lives? I don't.

Originally Posted by bobbybanaduck
if you can come up with a better term for me i will gladly replace "old guard" in my post. i think you know what group of people, in general, i was talking about.

Quote:

Originally Posted by GarthB

Yep, I do. But unfortunately there are some strange ones here that will utilize your reference to "old guard" as evidence to support their "no guard" positions.

Smitty's and Charlies come to mind.

As Ipointed out, the Old Guard has nothing left except to smear those with pejorative terms, those that point out their deficiences and challenge their outdated methodologies.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rufus

Had a situation last night where a ball was hit to our 2b who bobbles the ball, gains control, and throws to our 1b (full disclosure, my son was playing 1b). 1b makes a large split reaching for the throw, catches it, and holds the position. There were runners on base so the field ump was in between the mound and first (I know there is a term for the positions of the field ump, just not sure what that is). Field ump calls him safe and motions that 1b came off the bag (for what it's worth the 3b coach and bench coach of the other team - their bench was on the 1b side of the field - both came up to me after the 1/2 inning and said his foot was on the bag).

I started to go onto the field to ask the field ump what he saw and, assuming he would reiterate his call that 1b came off the bag, wanted to ask if we could ask the PU if he had a different view (there were other base runners so PU may have been looking at them - I still wanted to ask the question though). I knew that yelling across the field "Can we ask your partner if he saw it differently?" wasn't appropriate and so wanted to have the conversation in a normal speaking voice.

Before I got 2 steps out of the dugout the PU informed me that it was a judgment call and that I cannot be on the field. Not wanting to delay the game or, more to the point, get tossed from the game, I went back to the dugout.

My question is this - when, if ever, can a coach come onto the field to discuss a play such as this? Also, when, if ever, can you request that the umpire making a call see if his partner had the same thing?

Please understand that I'm not asking this just to get the call reversed. We won the game 14-9 so there's no bitterness or anything going on here. I'm more interested in making sure I don't waste time during a game with events such as this if there is no recourse. I also realize that sometimes officials get "straight-lined" or don't see a play clearly that the other official may. My intent is to try and figure out if there is a way/time to ask their partner for their view or if I just need to get over it and play ball.

Thanks in advance.

You have a tele number if you want a complete explanation.

Quote:

Originally Posted by rookieblue

What a piece of work. I really have to remember to log in before reading these threads.

You'd better not be referring to me.