Interesting Question

[dash_riprock]

Originally Posted by jicecone

Unfortunately until you get to work at higher levels consistently with pretty much the same partners, this is going to change, sometimes game to game. I worked two season's with one partner 75% of the time and we read each other like a book. There have been other times you just wonder if it would have been better to do the game yourself. For the most part though, pre-game this and just give your partner info for him to make a decision. It's his call but, make sure to back him up on the field.

I would say that at the Varsity level and below, I have found over the years, that approx. 50% of the time or more, your going to work with someone who really doesn't study mechanics, knows some of the rules and feels as though they have to obligh the coaches, or are just inexperienced and lack confidence. Regardless though, you still have to get through the game.

Good luck.

For high school games, I work with the same partner 80-90% of the time. For college games, I have many different partners. If it were up to me, I would get rid of the partner system. It fosters non-uniform mechanics. This can cause big problems when you work with a new partner which, in high school baseball, is likely to be in the playoffs. Not a good time for partners to be on different pages.

[rcaverly]

Originally Posted by dash_riprock

If it were up to me, I would get rid of the partner system. It fosters non-uniform mechanics.

How do you define "the partner system" and what do you propose in its place?

Our state baseball UIC is also pretty tight with the NFHS. Word on the street is that he wants us all to work one set of mechanics for all OHSAA games this year; regular season opener through state tourney final. The mechanics he wants us to use are straight out of the NFHS Umpire Manual. Ugh!

This old dog has some new tricks to learn.

[dash_riprock]

Originally Posted by rcaverly

How do you define "the partner system" and what do you propose in its place?

Bad choice of words on my part. I meant working with the same partner all season often leads to the use of non-standard mechanics. Assigning different partners forces everyone to be on the same page rather than a separate page for each team.

[jicecone]

Standard mechanics for everyone is the answer, I agree. Getting some of these guys to study mechanics, let alone read the rules, is another issue that should be reinforced at the association level. Having agreed to standard,s from one area to the next is another.

This problem is not unique to Baseball only though. When I officiated ice hockey it was the same thing. You would go from one area to another and "standard mechanics" became a local interpretation sometimes. A perfect example is some areas strictly use NFHS mechanics and some use CCA mechanics. Almost similar but not really, not completely.

[Simply The Best]

Originally Posted by dash_riprock

I meant working with the same partner all season often leads to the use of non-standard mechanics. Assigning different partners forces everyone to be on the same page rather than a separate page for each team.

IMHO and IME, I disagree.

Since most associations do a terrible job of teaching mechanics, if at all, much less agree on a set of mechanics, or requiring as a function of employment them to be understood and deployed (elaborate pre-season testing, review and supervision), assigning different partners is guaranteeing poor mechanical officiating.

If you have an association with a set of quality leaders, they can match up partners according to strengths and weaknesses, temperament, physical capabilities, etc. All derived from the testing, reviews and supervision.

But that isn't what happens all too often. The Big Dogs in the association want to work with each other after pancakes 'n beer. This dooms proper matchings; they have no interest in being astute leaders, only their self-interests. Which games with which other Big Dogs and the paychecks that come their way.

And IHOP pancakes and cheap beers of course.

[yawetag]

Originally Posted by Simply The Best

If you have an association with a set of quality leaders, they can match up partners according to strengths and weaknesses, temperament, physical capabilities, etc. All derived from the testing, reviews and supervision.

Sure, if every official was available any time you needed them and were willing to drive as far as needed. In actuality, it's impossible to make these pairings, especially with 100+ officials and thousands of games, so organizations are forced to pair partners by availability. This doesn't mean organizations can't pair officials with different abilities, but there's no way you can match them perfectly.

The only exceptions are when officials are being evaluated for promotion to higher-level games. Pair them with more experienced and stronger officials to evaluate them.

[Simply The Best]

Originally Posted by Simply The Best


If you have an association with a set of quality leaders, they can match up partners according to strengths and weaknesses, temperament, physical capabilities, etc. All derived from the testing, reviews and supervision.

Originally Posted by yawetag

Sure, if every official was available any time you needed them and were willing to drive as far as needed. In actuality, it's impossible to make these pairings, especially with 100+ officials and thousands of games, so organizations are forced to pair partners by availability. This doesn't mean organizations can't pair officials with different abilities, but there's no way you can match them perfectly.

Wasn't shooting for perfection. Availability is one of the criteria that you snipped from my post (i.e. "etc)

The only exceptions are when officials are being evaluated for promotion to higher-level games. Pair them with more experienced and stronger officials to evaluate them.

Fair enough.

[rcaverly]

Originally Posted by Simply The Best

The Big Dogs in the association want to work with each other after pancakes 'n beer. This dooms proper matchings; they have no interest in being astute leaders, only their self-interests. Which games with which other Big Dogs and the paychecks that come their way. And IHOP pancakes and cheap beers of course.

Originally Posted by Simply The Best

Why is it that so many officials on this forum have the unending desire to be statesmen or comediennes and impending need to test coach's patience? This was uncalled for, imo.

Do those shoes fit?