Demoting MLB umpires

[Rich]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

And it should not be that hard to do so. I think MLB gets this wrong more often than not in how they hold onto or get rid of umpires on their staff. There are simply guys that need to get the walking papers. That is the case in other sports, if you do not grade out they get rid of you. And I think their position is why guys get on MLB's umpires in the first place. You should not be able to stay if you weight 300 pounds even if you are a good guy.

Peace

I'm not going to name names, but there are some umpires who simply cannot move to properly work 4-man mechanics who are still in the game. I just don't get why that's something MLB *and* the union is afraid to address. There are well-qualified people out there who could step into the league tomorrow (they're already working as fill-ins) -- nobody is irreplaceable.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

I'm not going to name names, but there are some umpires who simply cannot move to properly work 4-man mechanics who are still in the game. I just don't get why that's something MLB *and* the union is afraid to address. There are well-qualified people out there who could step into the league tomorrow (they're already working as fill-ins) -- nobody is irreplaceable.

And that is the point I am trying to make. These are not simply the best of the best. I also think that MLB needs to get away from the Minor League system as the only way to hire umpires. I think there are good college guys or amateur that should not have to go to "pro school" to umpire that level. Not to say that you cannot train guys, but if that is the only way you shrink the pool of guys that are available.

Peace

[Rich]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

And that is the point I am trying to make. These are not simply the best of the best. I also think that MLB needs to get away from the Minor League system as the only way to hire umpires. I think there are good college guys or amateur that should not have to go to "pro school" to umpire that level. Not to say that you cannot train guys, but if that is the only way you shrink the pool of guys that are available.

Peace

I've never thought that people should live in poverty for a decade or more to get a crack at the big time -- most of those people will just find themselves uneducated, unemployed, and 10 years older.

Good article in Referee about a guy who has done the CWS 8 times. No reason to believe that people like this couldn't work MLB. It doesn't take a decade of working miLB, living out of a car, and eating ballpark hotdogs to be a good umpire.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

I've never thought that people should live in poverty for a decade or more to get a crack at the big time -- most of those people will just find themselves uneducated, unemployed, and 10 years older.

Good article in Referee about a guy who has done the CWS 8 times. No reason to believe that people like this couldn't work MLB. It doesn't take a decade of working miLB, living out of a car, and eating ballpark hotdogs to be a good umpire.

I totally agree. I have a friend that is now in the Majors and he went on to get a law degree while working in the minors. He took advantage of his time off and that is good for him, but that had to be hard to do considering what they pay and where he had to go for law school. I just think this is so stupid that this is the only way they pick guys to work their highest level. One of the reasons MLB is a joke on so many levels IMO.

Peace

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by realistic

Bart Giamatti was a good man.

Lots of good men have been homophobic and homosexual. What's the point?

Originally Posted by realistic

It's no different than saying you are a homophobe, SDS. Would you like someone saying that about you?

I've been called worse. I certainly wouldn't sue somebody over it.

You could have said, "Hey Mike, you might want to be careful saying that without proof, there could be legal repercussions." Instead, you lashed out and wished him financial harm and legal troubles in a venomous fashion. That sucks, buddy.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by sandiegosteve

lots of good men have been homophobic and homosexual. What's the point?

You could have said, "hey mike, you might want to be careful saying that without proof, there could be legal repercussions." instead, you lashed out and wished him financial harm and legal troubles in a venomous fashion. That sucks, buddy.

+1

[MrUmpire]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

Lots of good men have been homophobic and homosexual. What's the point?

I've been called worse. I certainly wouldn't sue somebody over it.

You could have said, "Hey Mike, you might want to be careful saying that without proof, there could be legal repercussions." Instead, you lashed out and wished him financial harm and legal troubles in a venomous fashion. That sucks, buddy.

SDS:

I am well acquainted with the Giamatti family and have been for many years. If someone made the accusation or inference that Bart was homophobic, they are seriously mistaken.

There were several issues surrounding Pallone's resignation/termination. (Yes, he did submit a resignation, and yes, he did receive a letter of termination.)

Unfortunately most accounts are biased in one direction or another and Bart is not here to defend himself, not that he would have bothered addressing idiots on the internet.

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by MrUmpire

SDS:

I am well acquainted with the Giamatti family and have been for many years. If someone made the accusation or inference that Bart was homophobic, they are seriously mistaken.

There were several issues surrounding Pallone's resignation/termination. (Yes, he did submit a resignation, and yes, he did receive a letter of termination.)

Unfortunately most accounts are biased in one direction or another and Bart is not here to defend himself, not that he would have bothered addressing idiots on the internet.

The point was how the poster in question tore into someone for their opinion. My beef was not with Mr. Giamatti, or whether he was or was not. I couldn't care less either way. It was with the way the poster lashed out, which I found unnecessary and over the top.

[MikeStrybel]

Our New York based troll simply proves his last sentence correct - he is biased. By alleging that you know the family, you prove the point. Thank you.

A number of good books have been written about Major League umpiring woes. I noted one that tells specifically of Pallone's firing. There are many others, including one by an esteemed SI writer - they all state the same thing; Pallone was fired for being homosexual. It is important to note that I did not mention Pallone's own book as evidence of opinion. As others have stated, he was among the best the year he was fired. It seems ironic that on the day that "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" was repealed that anyone would suggest otherwise. I guess that we'll now here that he is long time friends with Joe Cronin's family too and that Salerno and Valentine weren't fired by a union buster. The clock is ticking.

[MikeStrybel]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

The point was how the poster in question tore into someone for their opinion. My beef was not with Mr. Giamatti, or whether he was or was not. I couldn't care less either way. It was with the way the poster lashed out, which I found unnecessary and over the top.

Thank you. Anonymity provides safety and it is easy to throw stones over a fence.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

The point was how the poster in question tore into someone for their opinion. My beef was not with Mr. Giamatti, or whether he was or was not. I couldn't care less either way. It was with the way the poster lashed out, which I found unnecessary and over the top.

For the record, so did I.

[MrUmpire]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

The point was how the poster in question tore into someone for their opinion. My beef was not with Mr. Giamatti, or whether he was or was not. I couldn't care less either way. It was with the way the poster lashed out, which I found unnecessary and over the top.

I had not read the original post the led to the response. I saw only that apparently someone inferred or accused Giamatti of being a homophobe. That's a serious accusation these days and one that intelligent people do not make casually.

While I do not agree 100% with the response you refer to, I can understand it.

[realistic]

I see my statement ruffled some feathers. Mr. Strybel, when making accusations in an internet forum, imo, I would be extremely careful how I would word what I would say. The content of your accusation could be considered libelous. I understand the law and would have not made the statement if I didn't think it could be considered as such.

I'm not sure if you are aware of who the late commish was the father of. For those of you who are not aware, the late commish's son is Paul Giamatti. If I was Paul Giamatti and was looking to make sure my name isn't used for things that it shouldn't be, I would have my family name googled from time to time to make sure that no one is illegally benefitting from the use of my name. Now if a search came up that showed that someone may have libeled my dear deceased father and they used their name and I could track that name down, I might have to cause that person to have a very bad day. You see, libel wouldn't have to be proven because I have attorney's that work for me and I have plenty of money to pay them. The person that should have stated that it was there opinion that Giamatti was a homophobe, may not have such deep pockets.

In a nutshell, that's the reason I said what I said. Don't go posting crap you can't prove or hasn't been proven by anyone else.

Years ago, Giamatti did some things that helped me and other umpires put a little more green in our wallets. I'm not taking up for him but I hate to see people spout off about things they have no idea about. You may have read that someone said something but you didn't write it.

[SanDiegoSteve]

You still didn't need to say it the way you did. I offered an alternative. You don't seem to get the point. Only the way you said what you said did I have a problem with.

I think it is stupid to call someone a name as if it were a fact (or even if it is a fact), but I also don't like wishing bad things or ill will upon people. There is enough of that in our everyday lives away from this forum. It's really not good karma, just like calling someone names isn't. I have been guilty of this kind of lashing out at people on this forum in the past, insulting them or getting in silly arguments with people I don't even know personally, or understand what their position is, or maybe what they are going through at the time. I regret having done this, and it looks very ugly when looking at it in print.

I would like to take this opportunity to apologize to people that I have insulted or belittled on this board in the past, and to Bob Jenkins for giving him carpal tunnel from all the deleting and editing he has had to do with my posts.

[MrUmpire]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

I think it is stupid to call someone a name as if it were a fact (or even if it is a fact), but I also don't like wishing bad things or ill will upon people.

Reminds me of a quote from my literary hero:

"I've never wished a man dead, but I have read some obituaries with great pleasure." - Mark Twain