Treatment of female umpire in Minor Leagues
 

I'm reading a book on professional umpiring (As They See'em- a really great read by the way), and it talks about how Ria Cortesio was treated in the minor leagues. Umpires said that she wasn't very good as a partner for example. They said she slept with players, and the players said she "chased the ball". On one occasion, her crew members stood in the outfield during the national anthem leaving her at home plate, an obvious sign of disrespect. The higher powers interpreted it as her inability to control her crew, and it reflected badly on her. She was kept in AA for an exceptionally long time, and even though she was next in line to be promoted to AAA, she somehow fell down the list in rankings and was later released. I felt that a lot of comments about her had to have been untrue. After all, how does someone get all the way to AA despite all these negatives? Then I came across this video: YouTube - Montgomery Biscuits Manager Billy Gardner Jr. Melts Down.

It appears that she doesn't do a good job of deciding whether she is going to intervene or not. It raises the question as to how PBUC treats females, and the quality of umpiring required in the minor leagues.

Ok, why did the 1b umpire, the one who EJ'd the manager, not turn and walk away. As a partner, I would have moved closer once the EJ took place, but I'm not going to get involved until my partner walks away. He didn't walk away, so it's apparent that he still wanted to have his say with the manager. This is poor game management by the crew, not just Ria. They let Gardner push them around big time.

It was handle the way that we are taught at umpire school. He held his ground, Ria came over, and the manager left shortly after. Nothing wrong with how this was handled.

Other then the manager ragged on over 2 minutes, unacceptable!!

This is professional baseball and this is how it works.

Did not look like he had much to say to me, just stood there and took the BS.

Well I think that's cause he (the umpire) is in control of his emotions. And is allowing the manager to look like an a$$ will he's still able to get his shots in without looking aggressive... Don't get me wrong I wasn't there so I could be way off on this one. You may be 100% right on this one.

Without ever working with Ria, I can only say she has made it farther than MOST on this board. In looking at the video, I felt either her or the HP umpire could have positioned themselves closer earlier. However, when she did get into positon to "rodeo the coach away", U1 walked the opposite direction taking the coach away from her. She did take him away eventually. Who knows if U1 wanted to get "his piece" or if the crew had a set signal when they had had enough. Regardless, we all shouldn't be judging another umpire without EVER working with that individual.

Your right man. Well put.

I agree about Ria making it really far in baseball and that we shouldn't judge her. It seems like the situation in this video was not handled well. There might have been signals going on though, so we can't know for sure. To spectators though, I think it would appear like a situation that got out of hand. I think the stuff minor league umpires said about Ria was slander.

And the facts you have to back up this statement are?

What signals? Certainly not covert, secret type signals.:confused:

Probably double super secret signals for boys only.:rolleyes:

Not relevant. The question is, where are the facts to back up the rumors?

Exactly. They're the ones making the claims about her. They have to back up their claims, she doesn't have to prove she didn't do the stuff they say she did. I got the feeling from reading that book that there was some resentment and jealousy because she was a woman in a "man's" game. Surely they wouldn't have kept her around that long if she wasn't a decent umpire.

With that said, I didn't think they handled the situation in the video very well.

Quote:
Originally Posted by cc6
I think the stuff minor league umpires said about Ria was slander.:D ...

:D

Why does he need facts to back up what he thinks about a subject? He did not one time say that what the minor league umpires said about Ria was slander. Who appointed you Thought Policeman?

No matter how it was "PERCEIVED", Mr. Mouth was sent home. The 1B umpire stood his ground, threw out the coach and then let him vent. But, in the end Mr. Mouth was gone, regardless of what all the armchair experts thought.

Show this video enough times and you will get enough different expert opinions to startup a national poll.

CC6, you start a thread about "Treatment of female umpire in Minor League", show a video about how another umpire she worked with handles a hot head, (because not knowing what took place or what was said there, she did what she should have), talk about slander against her and havn't backed up any of your claims yet.

So I have to ask, was it just a slow day up in the North Country or do you really need the attention? Give us the details of how she was treated and what the League did that was so wrong.

Hmm,
 

I believe it would be libel and not slander.

Also "truth" is the valid defense of libel. The umpire in question not only had sex with players but also with other umpires. She did not deny it when confronted.

Slander: Spoken

Libel: Written

So, it depends on exactly what remarkas were being referred to.

In any event, Ria must be aware of them (even before the book was published I had heard about them), so apparently she doesn't think it's worth pursuing.

We care far too much as a society about the sex that other people are having or are trying to have. And we are going backward, rather than forward. It's become an absurdity. We're laughingstocks in Europe and South America for letting this 19th-century mindset about sexuality have such a prominent voice in our national debate. I recall when a couple of female Bay Area sports reporters were seducing numerous Giants, A's and Warriors players in the late-'80s-early-'90s era (one of them wrote a book detailing some of it). It was of little consequence, because all they were doing was reporting on sports, which is mostly frivolity when compared to true journalism.

But there are certain environments in which a sexual affair could cause a serious conflict, and an umpire crossing the line with a player is certainly one of them that is high up the list. (I would say No. 1 is jetliner pilot and co-pilot in flight.) Of all the men in the world, she has to go at it with a player?! She should get booted for that alone.

Exactly.

These were not just "rumors" as cc6 claims and others support. Facts were presented and not refuted.

Calm down and be rational.

The use of "I think" prior to accusation does not diminish the accusation...especially false accusations. I know that it is a tool used by many, but that doesn't make it right.

I am neither un-calm nor irrational, and I resent the implication to the contrary. I'm just saying he was stating an opinion, not presenting his claim as fact. I think Ria got the short end of the stick myself, which is why she should have come to me in the first place.:)

Hmmmmm .....

A minor league umpire having sex is note worthy????????????

Larry, clear out some of your PM's so I can send you one!

A minor league umpire having sex with players is noteworthy.

Accoring to Bruce's book, not only did he ask her if she had slept with players , she denied it, as well as sleeping with her partners. Way back when, I had long hair, beyond the middle of my back. I also ran a 4:20 mile. An individual who knew NOTHING about me accused me of habitually and routinely smoking dope and taking speed. I laughed and walked away. Simply because I didn't deny it, I was perceived to be a "stoner". I ran anywhere from 70 to a 100 miles a week. But I'm sure he felt better about himself to believe I did.

Ok, explain to me why, and while you are at it, explain to me how a male MiL Umpire having sex with club personel is different, and why people don't write/talk about that more? Or a gay ump hooking up with someone from a team.

It is none of our damn bussiness who sleeps with who as long as the job gets done.

Exactly what kind of a "job" are you referring to? :D

Perhaps it was the "4:20" mile!:p

And some people develope these long narrow shaped heads, similar in shape and size to Neanderthrals and as innovative and flexible as granite. Unable to ever comprehend and accept and admit, that someone who looks different then them, may just be better and smarter.

And then to think that these people have sex also. How degrading to mankind can you get?

It is our business who sleeps with whom if it affects or gives the appearance of affecting the performance (including independence).

(okay -- not necessarily "our" business, but, in this instance, MiLB's business).

It doesn't give the appearance of anything if it isn't brought up, and it wouldn't be brought up if our society had its priorities in order and had a more realistic interpretation of true freedom and a contemporary outlook on human sexuality. It's only anyone's business if it comes out and there's a conflict. And if no one knows, there's no conflict. And no one should know, or even ask.

Also--and I know that this is bad news for some of the obsessed--sex is not immoral. Sex is a necessary joy, not an evil. In fact, anything that anyone does with another consenting partner or partners is not immoral. Nor is it anyone's concern but theirs. It's 2009. Things change. It's easier for the morally concerned or obsessed to ignore something that's supposed to be private than it is to draw it out. So why don't they just ignore it, rather than draw it out?

"Free country" means freedom for all, not merely those who claim moral superiority. That includes freedom to have any kind of sex one consents to having with anyone who consents to having it with them. It does not afford any faction the right to impose their religious dogma on all of us. Acting on interpretations of religious dogma is a choice that certain people make. Ignoring it, or filtering out the madness is the choice some other people make. When the dogmatic impose that religious dogma on all of us, well, then we go backward as a society, like we have.

We're laughingstocks all around the modern world. Cases like Clinton's, Letterman's and even Mark Sanford's make us look like fools when it causes a national uproar.

All that considered, because we are so backward and immature about sex as a society, things like this indiscreet umpire pose conflicts. If sex weren't misperceived as being a bigger deal than it is, maybe it could pass. But until that point where we grow up and act real about human sexuality, judges having sex with prosecutors, or some such thing, cannot be allowed to go on.

So this one woman professional umpire should not be having sex with players, and should go down for doing so. (Pardon the pun.)

Is it a conflict if a professional umpire goes out to the bars and celebrates a win with the players?

If that's a conflict, how is it not a conflict if the professional umpire does the same thing in bed? Don't ask, don't tell does not remove the conflict.

What makes this a big deal, as already pointed out is immaturity, jealousy, as well as ones need to excel at all costs. Umpiring is a cut-throat occupation. At all levels, there are those that have to degrade, belittle and ridicule another umpire to feel better and spread false hoods or accusations, all in an attempt to "move up", at any cost or expense. No doubt something we all have done one time or another to some degree. I've worked with one umpire that I know of on this forum, I would go to war with him anytime, hopefully he feels the same. I try not to make "those" statements, as I also have some glass in my house. I will never make an accusation on hear say or innuendo. Especially if I have never worked with that individual. Nor should you. Ria's goal was to become the first woman in MLB, do you really believe she would jeapordize that, knowing she is/was under the microscope at all times. Maybe the next time a single fellow umpire goes out and gets laid, you should also report him to your assigner, church and the moral police.

Hehehehe
 

Report me for last night!

Why, did you have sex with yourself again?:)

Well ... Sleeping with the girl at the hotel front desk is a conflict of interest, sleeping with the promo girl is a conflict, sleeping with the GM's wife or daughter is a conflict, but those things happen and you don't hear about em, so they are a CoI to you are they?

Just saying, only a CoI if it affects an umpire's work, and most that I know only want one thing, to get **** right.

No actually its a spectacle and probably quite uncomfortable. Could you imagine people trying to sign in while your having sex.

DING DING, "Oh bellboy, can you make sure this bag gets safely to my room"

It is a CoI if it is reasonable to predict that it will affect the umpire's work. A close personal relationship with a person over whom you are expected to carry out unbiased authority is always a CoI, whether in umpiring, the military, business, or government. Conflict of Interest does not require actual bias for it to be present. All it requires is that the person who is supposed to be unbiased has a conflict presented by his two interests (friendship v umpiring, for example).

I'm only speaking in the abstract here, not in the specific wrt the female umpire. She may very well have been submarined by false accusations, I don't know. But the CoI by an umpire having an intimate relationship with a player has nothing to do with whether the intimate relationship is immoral, or even whether it is known. It it exists, it is a CoI.

Yes.

It does to a partial extent. The rest is up to the particular umpire to perform on the field in a way that rises above the possible conflict.

It's the same as any kind of cheating: If it's not disclosed, it isn't happening.

And again, if our attitudes about sex were not so backward, there would be fewer conflicts.

Bob, it's time to close the thread. Tyler doesn't want to play nice in the sandbox with the rest of us.

1) You should know by now that I'll delete the posts as soon as I see them (that is, the next time that I log on). Your responses just make it worse.

2) Didn't you recently chastise someone for "playing moderator?" (those are my words)

1) I'm not letting his crude insults slide. I don't want to allow his comments to stand uncontested or unrebuked waiting for the moderator to come to my rescue. I can handle it. Anyway, I was just making a joke in response to Tim's post, and the "poster" in question was acting EXACTLY as I described him.

2) No, I chastised someone for taking it upon themselves to monitor the thoughts of one of the posters. I actually came to the defense of someone who was being called out for having an opinion. This was very different.

I just find a comment about "masterbating" not funny. Just my opinion, nothing more, nothing less. I'll leave it at that.

Professor Peter Singer of Princeton University, a renowned ethicist who has won all kinds of awards for his astute perceptions regarding ethics and morality, believes—and teaches—that it is healthy for humans to have sex with animals. He recommends sex with chickens, which he says will help both human and chicken understand each other better. (He does not get into details.) Professor Singer, a proud Marxist and atheist, is not encumbered by 19th-century hangups, and has a progressive, "contemporary outlook" on sexuality.

This wise ethicist also believes that if parents find that caring for their handicapped one-year-old is too difficult, they should be permitted to "euthanize" their problem. Again, no 19-century hangups for this man. Professor Singer is highly regarded in South America and Europistan.

If you have the money, you can have your son or daughter taught by Professor Singer.

Forty years ago, I played in a baseball tournament that received a lot of press attention for two reasons: (1) we used a 20-second scoreboard clock for pitches, and (2) Bernice Gera was one of the umpires. MLB sent Monte Irvin and other representatives to gauge how well the clock worked, but it turned out that it was practically irrelevant: no pitcher took anywhere near 20 seconds between pitches. Bernice Gera handled herself pretty well, but when an opposing pitcher checked runners on 1B with an obvious turn of the shoulder (which was unusual to see at that level), I quietly questioned her about it. She said that since he did it on every pitch, it was part of his motion and thus legal. I didn't pursue the point.

Sorry for cluttering this thread with actual baseball discussion but...I wonder if that would still be true today?

Especially now that it is 12 seconds. I've still never seen it called at any level yet.

It only applies, of course, with no runnrs on base. Then:

The MLBUM (2009 edition p24) says the clock starts when the pitcher is in possession of the ball AND the batter is in the box "alert to the pitcher".

At this point in play, there is hardly ever anything approaching a violation.

At first, everybody was watching the clock (including me, in left field). By the time the tournament was over, nobody was. It's interesting to me that even in 1969, MLB was concerned about the pace of the game.

A few years ago, I ran into an old friend we had picked up to play for us in that tournament. He had gone on to a 15-year career in the Majors and played in a League Championship Series and a World Series. He mentioned that—35 years later—he still felt bad that he hadn't hit better for us during that tournament. He didn't remember that a woman had umpired any of our games.

I remember that our coach, who was also a college coach, got himself a permanent nickname from that tournament. They used 3 umpires, and he went out to question a call made by the 3B umpire. Our coach asked, "Are you telling me he didn't get under that tag?" and started on his way back to the dugout. The response: "That's what I'm tellin' you, Mac," froze our coach, and we all laughed while a spectator yelled, "He was out by a mile. Get back in the dugout, Mac!"

Since that night, he's been "Mac" to everyone who remembers.

It only applies, of course, with no runners on base. Then:

The MLBUM (2009 edition p24) says the clock starts when the pitcher is in possession of the ball AND the batter is in the box "alert to the pitcher".

At this point in play, there is hardly ever anything approaching a violation.

In the tournament, they started the clock shortly after the pitcher received the ball from the catcher. They stopped the clock if the batter stepped out, and they reset it to I think 10 seconds if the clock stopped within 10.

I'm not sure whether the clock ran with runners on base.

So you choose to be part of the problem. Thanks for making that clear.

Not from this side of the exchange.

As far as I can tell, very little (except for one or two posters) of this thread has to do with the morality of sex in general. This is a completley different topic from an umpire's realtionships (in the broadest sense -- not just sex) with the players and others involved in the game.

Let's keep the focus off the former and on the latter (to the extent it needs to be discussed).

Once again, you leave an offensive post up from one of your preferred members, and when it is answered, you delete the response. What part of what I posted warranted censorship? The part about freedom? Or the part about extremism? It was the truth. And it was relevant.

There are no "preferred members." You have posted (at least) twice on an issue that isn't relevant to the discussion (the general morality of sex); someone else has posted once.

And, while I did delete your most recent response, I deleted at least one other response that was not yours as well.


Drop it.

I highly recommend Weber's book, by the way. He's a fine writer with a great take on our wonderful vocation.

Agreed. It gives great insight into what umpire school and life in the minor leagues are like. Tuss Agee might enjoy it to prepare him for what it is like at Jim Evans if he plans on going in 2010.

The book shows that just like in this thread, a lot of verbal spats take place in the umpiring world. It seems like all kinds of non-umpiring stuff (i.e. the stuff about Ria) finds it's way into being an umpire. It's unfortunate, but the book suggests it's a reality of the profession. I'd be interested to hear what Tee and others have to say about this.

It's the reality of all professions. The gossip at APA and CPA conferences and conventions is unreal. At the university level, the talk of which professor is sleeping with which dean is fodder in the cafe and at the pub. What I hear from those ML and MiLB umpires with whom I have had the opportunity to share a beverage or two is nothing more extreme or different from any other profession.

Remember, Weber had to select among many many hours of conversations and quotes and minimize the opporutnity for law suits. I'll bet my next game fee that in person, he has even more interesting stories to tell.

Agreed.

Greymule and Kevin F:

This is your official reminder.

:D

Oh, be sure to return the favor!

To me, it's not the sex that's the issue. The issue is the appearance of favoritism, and it stems from fraternization, not sex.

For example, if a judge was caught dating or spending more time with a lawyer, questions will come out on whether he favored that lawyer in court proceedings. Whether they were in bed together doesn't matter much at all.

Sanford's case was more about lying and not doing his job.

I also stated very plainly that her being caught doing it should result in her being dismissed. And I make that statement because a personal relationship between a player and an umpire shows impropriety. I even compared it to a judge having a relationship with a prosecutor.
Sanford's case caused a dual uproar, and his abandoning his post for five days was one of them. I was referring to the business of his having a mistress and all of the lunacy and hypocrisy that it caused. It may not have been more important than his leaving his post, but it certainly was one of the prominent aspects, and the reaction to it was laughable.

I want to know should the player also get in trouble for sleeping with the umpire? If she should get fired, what should happen to the player..

His wife didn't think it was funny.

I think the player should be forced to sleep with Mark Sanford, Bill Clinton and David Letterman.

I meant its being blown up bigger than any other aspect and made a colossal spectacle was what was laughable. It's the personal lives of human beings that are being toyed with, including children's.

Don't know and don't care what she did off the field. Bottom line, she was not a good umpire and was kept longer than many who didn't miss the things she did on the field.

So what you're saying is she sucked two different ways.

That makes more sense.

Nope. I'm saying she wasn't AAA material. That's all.

Five pages of sheesh!
 

Great comment, ENuf said.
Any more doubters out there?

Have there been doubters?