The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Baseball
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #25 (permalink)  
Old Tue Sep 22, 2009, 12:36pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Texas
Posts: 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by HokieUmp
But to me, the market could and should 'bear' more for the service provided. Not least of which because baseball (meaning: MLB and its owners) could certainly swing the costs of a living wage. Also, given they a) expect perfection in each game and every call, and b) have told umpires "you have to take all kinds of %^&$% from every yahoo player and coach that wouldn't know the rules if they were introduced, and you can't give it back" ... then they should pay for that level of service.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jwwashburn View Post
Whether they 'should' or not is an interesting discussion. The MILB umpires are trying to get to the MLB. They are willing to work for peanuts for the chance. You think the owners 'should' pay higher wages because you think that the owners have too much money. How about the ticket takers, ball girls, beer guys, grounds crew, souvenir shop cashier, etc? 'Should' they make more, also? And who 'should' decide how much? 'Should' the owner have any say so in how he spends his money? After all, for now, the government is not running baseball...yet.
Wow. So I say the word 'should,' and it somehow becomes a shot at 'the government running things.' You don't happen to watch Fox News, do you?

My use of 'should' in the original paragraph would be better interpreted as "should = if they want better quality umpiring, and thus better quality games." Not "should = some alleged Marxist scheme."

And...

1. I don't say 'should' simply because owners have too much money. (I mean, they likely do, but that's not the point.) See the above interpretation; being in the entertainment business, if they want a better product, then pay for it. Yeah, they might not make the same profit margin if they did; they'll likely survive.

2. No, the other "oppressed workers" aren't included in any of this. I don't know what games you go to, but I've yet to see a ticket taker, ball girl, etc, etc, get abused like umpires do. Maybe I haven't been to enough ballparks. And other than grounds crew, the other jobs you mention aren't exactly skilled labor, are they?

But maybe it's more simple than all this. "Should" also could imply they 'should' get what the market truly would bear. Since MLB is legally protected better than you or me by their exemption from anti-trust laws, I submit your assertion umpires are getting what the market will bear is neither true nor false, but better listed as "unknown under existing conditions."

But I'd still rather just say you're wrong and I'm not.
Reply With Quote
 

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
2009 ASA Umpire Exam SRW Softball 31 Wed Aug 05, 2009 08:22pm
2009 ASA Umpire Exam Skahtboi Softball 7 Wed Feb 04, 2009 10:34pm
2009 Houston ASA Umpire Certification Clinics DeputyUICHousto Softball 0 Sun Dec 21, 2008 12:07am
2009 CCA Umpire Manual Skahtboi Softball 5 Wed Nov 19, 2008 08:57pm
MLB Umpire Crews johnSandlin Baseball 2 Wed Aug 03, 2005 05:38pm


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:04pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1