Evalutions by coaches

[MrUmpire]

Our association tried it and all we learned from it was that coaches don't have a clue about mechanics but feel free to b!tch about umps being out of position and they just love to show off their ignorance of the rules.

We no longer invite their input.

[jdmara]

I guess a common gripe I've always found with coaches is they don't feel they have an input in the assigning of officials. Although, as a matter of opinion, they shouldn't have a say. At least this way they will feel as though they have a dog in the fight (although they will be equipped with a standard issue Teacup Yorkie, not a pitbull) with the evaluation of these officials.

I'm sure it will be taken by some as an sounding board for all their complaints but these people will be noted almost instantly.

-Josh

[jdmara]

Originally Posted by MrUmpire

Our association tried it and all we learned from it was that coaches don't have a clue about mechanics but feel free to b!tch about umps being out of position and they just love to show off their ignorance of the rules.

We no longer invite their input.

Did your evaluation form include drop down/check mark responses or text boxes?

I like the way our sportsmanship ratings are for the state. It provides a drop down rating for each of the areas (Coaches, Players, Spectators):

Explanation of Ratings:

* 1 - EXCELLENT: Sportsmanship was exemplary; model behavior displayed, exceptional officiating experience.
* 2 - ACCEPTABLE: Sportmanship was acceptable; behavior generally good; expected officiating experience.
* 3 - NEEDS IMPROVEMENT: Sportsmanship needs improvement; behavior concerns; disappointing officiating experience.
* 4 - UNACCEPTABLE: Sportsmanship was unacceptable; severe behavior concerns; intolerable officiating experience.

Then underneath each heading (Coaches, Players, Spectators), it has a few check mark radios-boxes for additional detail:

Coach's Rating: {drop down box}

Please select any of the following comments that apply regarding the coach:

• Courteous and respectful throughout the contest
• Commended player's actions on the field
• Cooperative in helping officials with unsportsmanlike behavior from fans and players
• Questioned judgment of officials
• Argumentative attitude concerning official's decisions
• Not knowledgeable of contest rules and/or IHSAA policies
• Use of abusive language
• Use of abusive gestures

Athletes' Rating: {drop down box}

Please select any of the following comments that apply regarding the athletes:

• Courteous and respectful throughout the contest
• Commended teammates' actions on the field
• Positive interaction with opponents during the contest
• Questioned judgment of officials
• Argumentative attitude concerning official's decisions
• Use of abusive language
• Use of abusive gestures (includes throwing equipment)

Spectators' Rating: {drop down box}

Please select any of the following comments that apply regarding the spectators:

• Courteous and respectful throughout the contest
• Commended coaches and players' actions on the field
• Commended actions of coaches and players of opposing team on the field
• Disrespectful comments to game officials
• Disrespectful comments to game participants
• Disrespectful comments to opposing spectators
• Confronted officials following the contest
• Use of abusive language
• Use of abusive gestures

I think additionally a general comments field would be necessary and functional to address any specific problems or concerns. I haven't thought about specifics I would like to include for an officials' evaluation but I'll think about it as I get more input.

-Josh

[Ump153]

Those coaches who have passed a mechanics test and the rules exam are welcome to evaluate me.

The rest can be thankful that I'm not invited to evaluate them.

[jdmara]

I'll just put this out there since mechanics is obviously going to be an issue, proper mechanics is not the purpose of this proposed evaluation. It will be more geared towards knowledge of rules, application of rules, and comportment. Mechanics will "mistakenly" be left out of the discussion. Although some coaches may not have the best grasp of rules, they will be of some help to a assigner who never gets the opportunity to see the officials. This is a tool for the association assigner, not an end all.

-Josh

[MrUmpire]

Originally Posted by jdmara

I'll just put this out there since mechanics is obviously going to be an issue, proper mechanics is not the purpose of this proposed evaluation. It will be more geared towards knowledge of rules, application of rules, and comportment. Mechanics will "mistakenly" be left out of the discussion. Although some coaches may not have the best grasp of rules, they will be of some help to a assigner who never gets the opportunity to see the officials. This is a tool for the association assigner, not an end all.

-Josh

When we tried it, high school coaches rated our D-1, former MiLB and top rated Varsity officials in the lower categories. They rated newer varsity officials, some of who responded more to their whinings, and the occasional JV umpire who got a Varsity game, in the higher categories.

Their idea of what makes a good umpire was obviously different from college and high school evaluators.

Overall, it doesn't matter to me what you do. I just find the exercise worthless and not deserving of any time or effort.

[David B]

Originally Posted by MrUmpire

When we tried it, high school coaches rated our D-1, former MiLB and top rated Varsity officials in the lower categories. They rated newer varsity officials, some of who responded more to their whinings, and the occasional JV umpire who got a Varsity game, in the higher categories.

Their idea of what makes a good umpire was obviously different from college and high school evaluators.

Overall, it doesn't matter to me what you do. I just find the exercise worthless and not deserving of any time or effort.

We used the Arbiter and it allowed coaches to evaluate us in basketball and baseball. It was interesting because we could go look at the ratings, but not the comments.

You could always count on it when you had a coach who was upset at the game, your rankings would go down the next week.

I even had a coach tell me one time, that will go into my evaluation. Of course I did not care, but they did think it was something that they could hold over us.

We lobbied that we should be able to evaluate the coaches, we did get to evaluate the school as a whole as far as things like dressing room, security available, etc.,

At the end of the season, they would send us our rankings etc., it was absolutely absurd, in baseball my lowest ranking was always ...

"understands the rules of the game".

Since I was the rules interpreter and on the board, we got to see everyone's rankings etc., and the younger officials who "were still learning" would get ranked a lot higher on "understands the rules" and also on "maintains control of the game".

We figured it was because the coaches liked being able to "bully" the younger officials and to get away with things that the veterans would not let them such as balks, rule interpretations etc.,

Bottom line, it was not useful and a waste of time.

We found it much more helpful to have an evaluation form that we filled out on each other and sent it to our assigning sec. to keep on file. It was confidential and no one other than the board ever saw any of these.

Thanks
David

[LMan]

Sometime after I stopped umpiring temporarily (health issues) a year or three ago, my assoc (state, maybe) started the 'coaches' input' in their umpire evaluation system.

I don't think I will be going back.

[DonInKansas]

Originally Posted by jdmara

I like the way our sportsmanship ratings are for the state. It provides a drop down rating for each of the areas (Coaches, Players, Spectators):
Then underneath each heading (Coaches, Players, Spectators), it has a few check mark radios-boxes for additional detail:


-Josh

You sound suspiciously like a coder.

[SanDiegoSteve]

...are usually worthless.

[UmpJM]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

...are usually worthless.

Steve,

Aside from the "entertainment value", of course.

Can't beat 'em for that!

JM

[umpjong]

Originally Posted by UmpJM (nee CoachJM)

"Coaches evaluations"
Aside from the "entertainment value", of course.

Can't beat 'em for that!

JM

We also found that if you look real hard you can sometimes find one or two coaches who really take the time and are actually a good resource. It also helps to have documentation that certain coaches can and will give you ample ammo to establish their biases. We would even tell coaches to wait a couple days before evaluating and remind them that all evaluations were filed for future references. Documentation can be a good thing.

[zm1283]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

...are usually worthless.

Our state has coaches rate officials in all varsity contests in most sports. They put quite the emphasis on it as a matter of fact. If a coach doesn't rate officials they can be barred from the playoffs in their sport for that year.

Surprisingly enough, we don't get to rate the coaches. Funny how that works.

Yes, evaluations by coaches are worthless. It's like letting fans do it.

[ozzy6900]

Coaches have no business evaluating umpires - period!

A coach is there to take his team through the battlefield to victory, not to determine what was the cause of the loss or the victory of the battle.

Most coaches do not have any idea what the rules are, how they are interpreted, what umpire mechanics are, which set of mechanics are used at what level....... I could go on and on! Of course, you have those coaches who are "umpires" as well as coaches. they always are right there to tell you all your faults and shortcomings. I usually remind them that unless they are my partner, they need to stick to being a coach because that is what they chose to do today.

Only an umpire can evaluate another umpire and it has to be someone that knows the rules, the proper mechanics and preferably, has some time under his/her belt. Evaluators do not focus on calls but what led to the call. The umpires initial position, the signals to each other, the game situation, the "pause, read, react" that brought the umpire to his decison. None of this can be done by someone who's sole job is to lead his team through battle.

Lastly, when I can evaluate a coach and his players, then I will allow a coach to evaluate me.

[jwwashburn]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

...are usually worthless.

Agreed. How are they supposed to evaluate if they have not been trained to do so. Furthermore, I think they are kind of busy coaching.

A few years back, I got great evalations except for three schools. I called up the state and I said: That would be this school, this one and this one, right?

The guy said: "Um, let me cross reference your ejections reports..." He agreed to take out those and my top three.

That year, I got a five game ejection on a coach: First game of a tournament he screams about strike three from the 3rd base box and was halfway down the line before i could toss him...he actually was running at me on a strike in the FIRST inning...bizarre! So, the rule(Mught have been state, might have been NFHS) was Today(3 games of the tournament) AND the next day of competition-Double header a few days later. yeah, pretty bad evaluation from THAT guy!

I think that if an umpire got a lot of "unprofessional" grades from coaches, that would probably be the indication of something real, though...but they graded us on positioning? Are you kidding me?