Tips for incorporating conflicting advice from evaluators?

[AtlUmpSteve]

A very wise man once told me that I would have to decide who to listen to, and who to ignore, as I attempted to learn the skill of football officiating. His statement was that all 20 year veterans were not equal; in fact, some were first year officials for the 20th time, some second year officials for the 19th time, etc.

At some point in your career, you made a decision whose evaluation, feedback and advice on your local level was worth listening; other experienced umpires you decided weren't helpful. Unfortunately, it is true at every level; it is clear and obvious that not all WCWS veterans earned their way with the same "scale".

It is equally obvious that not all are good clinicians, evaluators, or capable of translating their success to teaching points. It's well known that star players are often poor coaches; it is reasonable to expect a similar result from "star" umpires.

My advice is to try whatever is recommended by anyone appropriately credentialed (especially if the same evaluator is seeing you again!!); and then YOU decide, along with those you trust the most, if that has made your game better, or simply changed what you are doing. I also have heard the "too high" and "too low" from different evaluators without having changed anything; I strive for my eyes set at the top of the zone, and frankly, when working the slot (aside from when we are squeezed), I keep wondering who or why we should care in the slightest how high our head is compared to the catcher that we are looking PAST, not over or though.

That said, I am a long time Fireworks guy, and believe that the majority of the evaluators there in Colorado that week, most long time friends, are HIGHLY credible. Not familiar with who the Phoenix crew may have been. I would be very interested in a PM note if you are willing to privately share names and your observations; most here know I'm not shy about sharing my opinions.