Beards & Umpires
 

How is your association about umpires sporting beards?

1. Does your association allow them?
2. Does your association request that they be a certain length?
3. Does your association limit your assignments because you have a beard?

Obviously, beards have nothing to do with an umpire's knowledge or his calls. Although if the beard is similar to that of Billy Gibbons (ZZ Top), I suppose it could get into the way of your strike or out signal! :rolleyes:

How many politicians wear beards?

It creates the perception of not being trustworthy.

Our association has no policy against it.

Our association only requires that facial hair be neatly trimmed.

I have no problem working with an umpire w/ a beard, but when it is going to be 95 today, I hope it keeps him cool.

Like that notorious Jesus fellow.

Not to mention Abraham Lincoln. Horribly untrustworthy.

1. Yes
2. "Neatly trimmed"
3. I don't have one but others do. It doesn't seem to have effected their schedule...they work top level assignments and get post season work.

Association as no say over this.

Look at #1.

That is a different issue. I am sure the people that assign want you to look neat and that can be a factor. But there is no rule that I am aware of that says yes or no a to such a thing other than looking professional. And there are so few umpires available I doubt that this is a deal breaker unless there are two equal guys and the one that looks the most professional is also available.

You are right, but perception is reality to some.

Peace

U S Grant was a drunkard. Plenty of shenanigans in his term in office.

Yeah...A drunkard who kicked butt! By the way, it was terms not term. he was re-elected.

Not to mention the General of the Army who took Lee's surrender in that little skirmish known as the Civil War.

He's in good company. The history books are full of great men who remained great while drunk.

No evidence whatsoever that he had a beard.

But reasonable to assume that he did have one while fasting 40 days and nights in the wilderness.

I'm no historian, but it seems likely to me that in those days most men of modest means didn't shave routinely, particularly in outposts like Israel..

As I said, no evidence whatsoever ... not counting speculation, inference, educated guessing, etc. etc.

I'd heard that, too, about politicians, and think it simply comes from focus groups' perceptions. Probably subconscious.

There are obvious historical exceptions, but there's a reason people like Gov. Richardson (NM) shave their beards once they start gaining aspirations for a higher office that requires the trust of people they've never met.

I'm confused: are you asserting that many politicians wear beards, and thus beards make one appear untrustworthy?

Or that [credit George Carlin]:
"Karl Marx wore a beard .. Lenin wore a beard .. (Gabby Hayes wore whiskers!)" - somehow beards are "untrutworthy" and so politicians avoid wearing them?

Are you forgetting "Honest Abe"? - and about half of the men elected president in the 1800's?

Beards are a cultural manifestation that come and go according to fashion whims over time.

So you named one person, and one "mythical" character. If beards were held in positive public image, I can promise you our elected officials would wear beards, including the women if they could pull it off. :D

I'm not saying I have an issue with people with beards...but in terms of perception...it can be an issue.

Okay terms, the country got raped while he sat on his butt drunk for eight years. Not one of America's finest moments.

Think George W. Bush

Lincoln was a racist. He just didn't believe in slavery. Anyway the Civil War was about states rights. Slavery became an issue afterwards.

More revisionist history from the master.:rolleyes:

To the substance of the OP:

My assn has no such policy, other than a general expectation that one be clean and neatly groomed. I was [at one time] told that the main NCAA umpire group in my area DOES have such a policy - beards not welcome. If HHH still reads/ posts here, he could, perhaps, give more current or accurate info on that.

So far as I can tell, my assignments are not limited or effected in any way by my [distinctly NOT "ZZ Top"-style] beard, which has no effect on my comfort in plate gear during summer games.

Interesting read of the history. Grant, at the time of his death, was well-beloved by [OK, most of] the country, including not a few ex-Confederates; which believed him to have been a decent President notwithstanding the corruption of many of his assosciates in and out of his administration.

Color me skeptical that GWB has, or ever will have, even a substantial moiety of his own party who thinks as well of him.

This is not correct.

Lincoln wanted to keep slavery from spreading. He didn't have any qualms about slavery, so he did "believe" in it. He was willing to do whatever he needed to keep the Union together.

If you don't think the Civil War was about slavery, you didn't pay attention when they covered everything from about 1815 on during history class.

Let's jump to the present, shall we?

Name a politician with facial hair. They're few and far between, FOR A REASON. It's a commonly known fact, that present day Americans do not trust folks with facial hair. You can choose to believe it, or not. Some trace it back to Hitler, and others the Cold War, with Stalin. Me, I believe it was Snidley Whiplash that started it all.

Also, that same holds for women with bangs. But to a lesser extent.

Both are considered, again, this is the "masses" talking, to be hiding something.

Different times, you'll be hard pressed to find a modern day (served within memory for a substantial portion of voters) president who gets a favorable review from a majority of voters. Reagan and Clinton may be the only ones who get even the majority of their own party. Before Reagan, you have to go back to Kennedy.

Not saying that's the only reason, but it's not insignificant either.

He was a Rabbi. Evidence enough. ;)

thank you Kyle

So I can keep my bangs but my wife has to shave her beard....sigh...

JJ

No argument from me on the lack of general esteem for "modern" presidents.

I'd surmise that differences in character, rather than merely the "times", were mostly responsible; and MY GWB reference was merely in response to the analogy suggested/ made by Mr. Tyler, not intended [by me] to cut GWB out from the herd including either the current occupant, nor any of the living [or even deceased-but-within-living-memory] precedents.

BS. Name a [living] politician generally believed by the American electorate to be "trustworthy". Has nothing to do with the presence [or lack of] facial hair. There are many "commonly known facts" that simply aren't. This is one of them.

When I first started a razor-free appearance [after 20 earlier years with a 'stache], I was almost unique among my collegues. Since then, several judges [in my VERY socially-conservative area] have adopted full beards, many mustaches, and facial hair of varied description is now rather common among [male] members of the bar, all of whom's perception of "trustworthiness" among the general American public [from which, you may recall, juries are drawn] is professionally important to them. My own experience with juries [who have indicated they find me very "trustworthy"] supports the proposition that the "masses" don't care about beards, and remember that I represent that least percieved-trustwothy segment of the people - those accused of crime.

NOBODY on any baseball field has ever remarked upon my beard as having any effect on their assessment of my umpiring - trustworthy-ness, or any other way. They care if I know the difference between ball/strike, safe/out: and if I get the call right [actually if I call it the way they "see" it].

As I said before, facial hair on men is a fashion variable; it has and will continue to vary, ACCORDING TO FASHION [style, meaning people's opinions about what looks nice, not opinions about the character of the bearded ones]. People who assign "commonly known" assumptions about the character of others based on their appearance are seeking justification for their own prejudices about how someone "should" look, and those prejudices are no more worthy when based on face furniture than when they are based on skin color or crooked, big ears.

[RANT OFF]

You may think it's BS, but a lot of folks still subscribe to it, in a lot of different arenas. Not just politics. I'm not saying it's right or wrong, but I do know it's a factor in some places.

Well where was it going to spread to? We only had so many states. Slavery was a constant source of consternation among the northern and southern states. It wasn't the reason the first shot was fired to start the Civil War.

Yes I took plenty of history in school, and didn't sleep through it. That's why I know what I'm talking about, and you don't.

Prove me wrong, or better yet, prove that anything in the Bible ever happened.

Never heard beards mentioned.

Dont have any association members with a beard, that I can remember.

Way too much evidence that the entirety of Bible is true, and I don't waste time arguing with atheists. Too many people already have shot your argument down for me to waste time rehashing the subject. You can stop wasting YOUR time trying to bait me into your silly little arguments.

Not baiting anyone, but if you can't answer the question, just say so. Oh yeah, I forgot to mention that Lincoln was once an umpire, I mean vampire killer..........:rolleyes:

Yes, No, No

Our association is run by open-minded officials that are more interested in the following:

1. Professional appearance. (With or without a beard)
2. Good Rule knowledge.
3. Good Mechanics.
4. Professional attitude.
5. Promptness.
6. Hustle
7. Respecting Players and Coaches

All the other bullcrap went out in the 60's. HELLO!

Yes but there were writings of his that made it clear he did not find Blacks as equals. Which at the end of the day is what racism is when you believe that they are not your equal as a white person.

But honestly who cares, this has nothing to do with the original post.

Peace

Best post in the whole thread

I thought you to be somewhat intelligent, until now. Even Austin knows better.

I agree with Steve though.

"Commonly known fact" is code for "I really want it to be true so I'm just going to assume it is."

My personal experience is facial hair improved the trust coaches had in me significantly (because I no longer looked like I should be playing in the game) and had no appreciable effect on my career as an accountant.

Commonly known: I have no data, but I believe it.

So why the Emancipation Proclamation in 1863 two years after the start of the war?

Evolutionist or creationist?

Realist!

Uhhh, I don't know? Those territories in the west that were all about to become states?

You're right, and I didn't mean to imply he thought that blacks were absolute equals.

Mainly because he thought he could hurt the South economically by issuing the proclamation. The E.P. made it clear that abolition was a main goal of the war (So much for the argument about "The Civil War was not about slavery!"). It was issued because he thought it would help to win the war and reunite the country.

I never said Lincoln hated slavery and was an abolitionist, because neither were true. I said that the Civil War started in part because of slavery. The two are different.

So what are ya sayin'?:rolleyes: Pretty subtle there Kyle!

The beginning of the end of the war was on this date in history, July 3, 1863, with Lee's folly of invading the North in Gettysburg, PA. and he was defeated soundly.

BTW-You're wrong in your assessment. The southern states DIDN"T want a strong central government. The Emancipation Proclamation only made the slaves in the Confederate states free. A lot good that did then.

God answers all prayers. Sometimes the answer is no. As real as it gets right there.

+1.

Anybody shocked?:eek::)

I love how I asked a simple question and got about 1/2 a page of actual answers with 3 1/2 pages of pure Bull$hit! You people are pathetic!

Well, the very first post in this thread makes reference to ZZ Top. I guess the thread went off the rails right from the start!

In other words, one person's amusing aside is another person's pure Bull$hit.

Yeah, Billy, Dusty, and Frank don't umpire baseball last I checked.

And a lot of guys we reference do not also umpire either. I have also never seen a ZZ Top look-a-like individual ever umpire a HS game for sure and I would have to think of someone that did a youth game looking like that as well. Usually most would never look that way in most areas or professions. I also do not agree that the conversation is total BS, when you introduce a topic that has many facets to it and usually it is considered an issue of trustworthiness.

Peace

You get what you give...................:rolleyes:

I ran into those guys and their entourage once in Kansas City. They were at a blues club to hear Charlie Musselwhite. Quite a scene, and their entourage (babes right out of their videos and muscle) did not seem to be as into the music as they did.

They were pretty recognizable. I didn't ask whether they umpire.

Where did I say that the Confederates wanted a strong central government? I know full well what they wanted.

Whether it actually worked or not, the E.P. was intended to hurt the South's economy by eliminating slave labor. (Which kept it going in the first place) It wouldn't have mattered anyway because the South's economy was already in shambles by 1863. Their money was worthless and Europe didn't need their cotton like they had hoped.

Thanks for the quote from Gone With the Wind.

Sherman's march to the sea, and the Union blockade had more to do with the South's economy than the Emancipation Proclamation. If Lee wins at Gettysburg, the South could have very well won the war. It wasn't like the Civil War was popular in the North to begin with.

We've been in debt since the American Revolution. Give a huge shout out to France and Spain.

What quote?

I didn't say that the E.P. had more to do with the South's economy than anything else. I said that was Lincoln's hope. Nothing more.

Frankly, zm1283, I don't give a damn!