![]() |
|
|
|||
Quote:
Why re-invent the wheel? The CCA and Redbook are both widely available and much, much better. Evans' new Mechanic Bible, based on the Redbook, is the best out there. |
|
|||
Our state does not use the Manual. So who cares what you write.
![]() Peace
__________________
Let us get into "Good Trouble." ----------------------------------------------------------- Charles Michael “Mick” Chambers (1947-2010) |
|
|||
I used to agree.
What CCA had going for it were its expanded visual aids and discussion. I think Evans' new tome surpasses CCA in both areas and others. It will take some time, but I believe it will replace the CCA and the Redbook as the top alternatives to the FED manual. |
|
|||
![]() Quote:
While I do not own the new Evans/Nelson mechanics manual yet, I understand it is outstanding. I would suggest the CCA manual simply because it is more affordable and, in addition to 2-man mechanics, covers 3, 4, & 6 man as well. Probably a little more realistic that a majority of umpires might actuallu acquire one. JM
__________________
Finally, be courteous, impartial and firm, and so compel respect from all. |
|
|||
Quote:
__________________
"My greatest fear is that when I die, my wife will sell my golf clubs for what I told her I paid for them." |
|
|||
I believe I wrote that I thought it would become the alternative for the FED manual. Unless colleges in your area use the FED manual, that's really not an issue.
|
|
|||
Men, you know better than this
Yes, I know we all have our favorite stuff for mechanics, mine being the six weeks of notes from Harry's in 1985 when I was there.
But you and I all know that FED is not going to adopt CCA mechanics, or an expensive Evans book, also when both are set up for higher levels of baseball than FED is. And until we all who work BB move to JR's state, we are stuck with FED. |
|
|||
If you work FED, and your assocation tells you to use the FED manual, then that is what you have to use. Not everybody owns the CCA or Evans manual, and even if they did, it's still out of line to do things differently than how the league trains you to. The solution to disagreeing with the FED manual is to not work any more of their games, rather than going against the directions of supervisors and evaluators.
Take the Baseball Ontario umpire's manual for example. It might be a bit different than what is taught in the pro schools, but we go by the Baseball Ontario manual because the majority of people who are carded under OBA haven't been trained PBUC mechanics. For example, PBUC says to go out on any flyball that pulls the center fielder towards the right field line. OBA says to go out on any flyball that pulls the right fielder towards the line. We do things the Ontario way because that's what we are told to do, not because some umpires decide that their way is better than the rest without consulting the book publishers. |
|
|||
Quote:
That said, if your association has endorsed FED mechanics, perhaps you are stuck. My sympathies. |
|
|||
Quote:
Also keep this in mind, it is not like baseball mechanics are that far off base from each other. The mechanics differences are really minor at least from the CCA Manual to the FED Manual. And just like anything in mechanics, these are guidelines, they are not mandates. There are situations not covered clearly in the mechanics and if your partner does one thing, you have to adjust to cover plays properly. For example the FED tells umpires that are in the A position to go out on every hit to center field to right field. The CCA Mechanics basically says "Read, Pause and React." All I care about is if my partner goes out, I cover what they cannot cover. It is not really that complicated if you ask me. Peace
__________________
Let us get into "Good Trouble." ----------------------------------------------------------- Charles Michael “Mick” Chambers (1947-2010) |
|
|||
Quote:
I learned a long time ago that there are many, many complainers about, well just about everything. Ask them to step up to the plate, run for an office, take the lead role, re-write a manual, etc, etc. they are nowhere to be found. Start the re-write yourself. Go for it. However, if the acceptable mechanic (whatever it may be) is something that is not explicity covered in the rules and manual, (and I agree it is not), for missing a base is your main reason for re-writing the manual, then???? Lets look at the practical side of this. Exactly how many times have you had to make this call and use whatever mechanic you choose to use. Once? Twice? Threee times?. In twenty something years I am lucky if I remember once. I know some may say that is because of my age but, I haven't quite lost it yet. I think most officials get a good understanding of the intent of the rules and the proper way to handle a missed base infraction more sooner that later. I also do not know of any Professional Federation Umpire. So if it is perfection you are after, go for the re-write. Some will be happy, some will care less. But, putting things into perspective here, Welll ??????????????????? |
|
|||
The problem lies when you deviate from the state association's standard. PA uses the FED manual as the standard, which should only be used for kindling.
Here is the catch: you work CCA mechanics in your chapter. You work playoffs or with someone from another chapter and they work FED mechanics. Even though you pregame CCA mechanics, if you blow a rotation and subsequent call, YOU (the one who uses CCA) are in the wrong because you didn't use the FED standard (even though it sucks). PA guys - we should submit something to "Uncle Marty" and ask him about changing the standard. |
![]() |
Bookmarks |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
J/R Manual | johnnyg08 | Baseball | 29 | Tue Aug 26, 2008 07:47am |
MLB Umpires Manual | cityofficial | Baseball | 11 | Sat Aug 23, 2008 10:37am |
Rewrite of 9-9 Backcourt | DownTownTonyBrown | Basketball | 0 | Wed Nov 12, 2003 12:28pm |
CCA MANUAL | brianp134 | Basketball | 2 | Sun Sep 21, 2003 08:55pm |
OBR rewrite? | Patrick Szalapski | Baseball | 5 | Tue Apr 10, 2001 02:03pm |