Getting Tuss's EJ thread back

[LMan]

Meh. The fact that the player chose to show him up by screaming it for a third time says he was tired and didn't feel like playing any more that day. When a player makes sure that the entire county hears it, he's publicly challenged the umpire and raised the stakes for himself.

"if you don't stop yelling, Junior, you'll go to timeout."


For a head coach, OK...maybe. For a jackhole adult-league player who seemingly wants to provoke, nowayinhell. Perfect recipie for an out-of-control game the rest of the way.



and yes, I know, I'll never work above rec-league, Tball, Jackhole Muni League, blah blah

Originally Posted by LMan

Meh. The fact that the player chose to show him up by screaming it for a third time says he was tired and didn't feel like playing any more that day. When a player makes sure that the entire county hears it, he's publicly challenged the umpire and raised the stakes for himself.

"if you don't stop yelling, Junior, you'll go to timeout."


For a head coach, OK...maybe. For a jackhole adult-league player who seemingly wants to provoke, nowayinhell. Perfect recipie for an out-of-control game the rest of the way.

Actually, replying back to him is being argumentative. Of course he is going to escalate the situation.

[LMan]

Originally Posted by rei

Actually, replying back to him is being argumentative. Of course he is going to escalate the situation.

Let's agree to disagree (A2D) here. If anyone 'questions' a call with an actual POV and not yelling to all of Calaveras County (not a general "YGBSM!") I'll use Garth's "Verbal Firearms" 5-word response (he.was.on.the.bag). For a player, that's enough. Then I'm walking to my position.

If I hear a player 'escalate', he might get TheLook or nothing. Once more.

A scream at my back, begging to depart? That's not 'argumentative' on my part, it's taking out the trash. Between us, only one of us is being paid to enforce the rules of baseball, and it ain't him. I'm not talking down a jumper from a tall building here.

/mycommentsonthistopic

Originally Posted by msavakinas

they are trying to prevent it from getting to that... which is why Tony said "Why respond in the first place"

He's saying if he didn't respond in the first place, because there was no question asked, it might not have gotten to the point it did.

Exactly!

When arrow thrown at head, move head.

[tcarilli]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

And don't do anything about the person that threw the arrow at your head.

Resist force with similar force. An arrow thrown at my head does not require a nuclear bomb be dropped on the thrower. Again, in Tuss's situation if you think there is a need to respond why not try just holding up your hand in the stop sign so that he knows you heard him?

I think most comments directed at umpires need to be addressed in some fashion. I liken it to the situation where a parent is on the phone and the child wants to speak to the parent. "Mom." says the child. If the parent ignores the child "MOm!" escalates the child. If the parent ignores again, "MOM!" shouts the child. If the parent ignores again, "MOM!!!MOM!!!" yells the child. At some point the parent yells back and we have a mess. If the parent lets the child know she heard him the first time, the kid typically goes away for a while. He may come back but it will not be to yell the second time. Start the process again. Participants are a lot like kids, sometimes that just want you to know that you heard them. If you address it early, it usually won't escalate. If it does, then you have run people.

If they know you can hear them, the generally don't bother you as much. There is a reason they are loud enough for you to hear them...because they want you to hear them. If you ignore them, they only get louder to assure themselves that you can hear them. If you continuously ignore them, they will get louder until you've let them know you've heard them or your sh!t splatters on your partner.

[tcarilli]

is this thread a case in point?

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by tcarilli

is this thread a case in point?

Yup, WOBW. I'm out of here.

[Ump153]

Originally Posted by tcarilli

Is it just me or...

is this thread a case in point?

If it were just you, it would be a good thread.

[ozzy6900]

Let's see, if I remember the OP, here is my normal response.

Me - Called B1 out at first.
B1 - Speaking in a normal voice, "He was off the bag"
Me - Saying nothing, continue to my position.

As long as B1 keeps going to the dugout, we are okay. We each had our say but mine is the one that counts. This is the same response no matter what age I am officiating. Let's go a step further.

B1 - "I said he was off the bag, Mario"
Me - Hand Up "That's all chief. We are done here!"

Again, if all ends, that is it. Now let's go further.

B1 - Screams, "I said he was off the bag!"
Me - Still in my position - Point and hook - he had his chances, he need so to leave now.

I rarely have had a situation like this escalate to the last point. Most times, either the player finds his brain or his manager tells him to "Shut up and get in the dugout!" which suits me fine.

[RPatrino]

Ok, here's my 2 cents. My feeling is, if you felt that your EJ was good, why bring it to this forum for reinforcement? Obviously you felt the EJ was warranted, so who am I to disagree with you? I wasn't there. Would I EJ'd the participant in this situation, I don't know.

Our job is NOT to keep individuals in the game, our job is to CONTROL the game as a whole. You do that by taking care of problems (it's called umpiring) that need taking care of, and not ignoring them. How you do that depends on your skill set and the tools you have at your disposal. The EJ should not be your only tool. As younger umpires mature and their tool kit becomes more diverse, they have better tools at their disposal and their EJ rate tends to lower.

Originally Posted by tcarilli

Resist force with similar force. An arrow thrown at my head does not require a nuclear bomb be dropped on the thrower. Again, in Tuss's situation if you think there is a need to respond why not try just holding up your hand in the stop sign so that he knows you heard him?

I think most comments directed at umpires need to be addressed in some fashion. I liken it to the situation where a parent is on the phone and the child wants to speak to the parent. "Mom." says the child. If the parent ignores the child "MOm!" escalates the child. If the parent ignores again, "MOM!" shouts the child. If the parent ignores again, "MOM!!!MOM!!!" yells the child. At some point the parent yells back and we have a mess. If the parent lets the child know she heard him the first time, the kid typically goes away for a while. He may come back but it will not be to yell the second time. Start the process again. Participants are a lot like kids, sometimes that just want you to know that you heard them. If you address it early, it usually won't escalate. If it does, then you have run people.

If they know you can hear them, the generally don't bother you as much. There is a reason they are loud enough for you to hear them...because they want you to hear them. If you ignore them, they only get louder to assure themselves that you can hear them. If you continuously ignore them, they will get louder until you've let them know you've heard them or your sh!t splatters on your partner.

Indeed! That is the most common thing I hear from coaches and players about how "discussions" are handled. They feel that they are not heard. They feel that the umpire feels "above" them shown by the ump not saying anything about their complaint.

Ignoring the complaint usually just makes things worse. You don't have to agree with their argument to simply say something like "I heard ya. Let's go.", or, "I hear what you are saying but........". Deflector statements. They acknowledge that you actually LISTENED to them without you having to agree. They also are never confused with arguing. Most of the time, no more needs to be said. If they do continue to yell, you can simply say "Hey, if you could lower your voice we can talk about it". NOW you seem approachable, and you have a chance to explain what you saw. If they continue to yell, you can say "If you stop yelling at me, you can stay in the game. If you continue, I will do something about it". If they continue, toss 'em. You have given them a chance to cool down, and if you did have to toss them, the ejection report writes itself, and you look totally like the person that was in charge, approachable, and just. You have NOTHING to lose by giving them a chance to settle down and only gain their respect.

Or....you can look like a hot head that nobody can talk to, with the quick trigger. THAT will certainly get you a lot of respect and the big games!

[tcarilli]

Originally Posted by LMan

Meh. The fact that the player chose to show him up by screaming it for a third time says he was tired and didn't feel like playing any more that day. When a player makes sure that the entire county hears it, he's publicly challenged the umpire and raised the stakes for himself.

"if you don't stop yelling, Junior, you'll go to timeout."

Recall, in the original post, the player's initial reactions was not to yell at the umpire but to say "he's off the bag." If he yell's to start with you have to handle it differently. Maybe you start with "Let it go!" or "knock it off" stated vehemently with your hand up in the stop sign.

The question was could I have done something differently. Here we are trying to prevent the issue from getting to the third time. Not what to do after the third time. I think it important that we stick to the question at hand ie, could I have prevented this? The question was not what do you do when someone yells at you for the third time. The reason it is important is that different question require different answers. Recall in Tuss's situation he responded to the player not once, but twice hence my "rabbit season duck season" metaphor. So the starting point is no question asked no response needed and moving to your next position.

Other things equal, we would prefer not to run individuals. Which is not to say "let them sh!t on you," instead it's to say it seems to work better if we keep it from escalating to the sh!tting by addressing situations appropriately before they escalate.

So, LMan, lets address the question posed by Tuss here. We agree that when somebody yells for the third time he needs to be excused from further participation in reindeer games.