The Teaching of Umpires

[mcrowder]

Chessref, my reply, with all possible moral outrage removed.

I submit to you that despite your initial confusion trying to answer question 87 (for example), you learned 25 times more about the rules during your thumbing, indexing, and searching through the book than you EVER would have learned from getting the answer off the internet and then knowing the specific answer to just that one question.

You, after all the fumbling, could likely handle a situation on the field that was similar, but not identical, to the question involved - because you eventually read ALL of the rules that pertain to the question (and possibly several that didn't pertain to THIS question, but pertained to SIMILAR situations). Joe Schmoe, who got the answer off the net, will be lost the minute the on-field situation deviates from this one question.

Therein lies the reason for my "moral outrage" on the other thread. I don't personally know all of my umpires character (yet!), especially the newer ones. I do know that matrix's actions, if seen by any of my newer umpires, makes my job harder.

[gtfreek]

If you want everything to be easier for you, be easier on everyone.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally posted by wadeintothem
still a slight overreaction... some reaction is justified and expected - but this is not the end of all umpiring as we know it.

I took my test, I took you up on your offer to grade but you never responded to me..

That, sir, just isn't true. I have never ignored or failed to respond to anyone asking to have their test corrected. Last year I did about four. This year, only one person has taken me up on my offer and it wasn't from this board.

the answers were posted here and I was glad to see them and used them to grade my own test. Of course you dont owe me to grade my test, but had they not been posted here, I would not been able to self grade my test and learn from it... it would have been turned in and gone whereever it is ASA exams go to die.

Exams in my area are always returned to the individual.

I think they should publish the answers.

Well, you are allowed an opinion.

Attitude in wanting to learn proper umpiring is not affected by availability of answers. Either you are a cheater and cheat or you try hard, read this board and other study, and try to learn - or you skate.

The availability of the answers is not the quantitative marker of that desire to learn.

No, but a desire to learn doesn't qualify one to be an umpire. I know many people that have a desire to learn. It doesn't make the good, it just means they want to be good. Ball games should not be decided by desire of an wannabe umpire.

If it were, the ASA would outline exactly how the exam was to be taken, actually grade the exam, and use it as a board. It is not a board, it is a tool for learning. Big difference IMO.

None of your umpires who have yet to take the test will be negatively affected by having the answers.. either they know and learn or they dont. If they are a cheater to begin with, you have other issues with them, the answers to make a squat of difference.

Isn't it amazing how often those who attempt to justify a shortcoming are often the ones who come up short.

I'm done with this one.

[wadeintothem]

Well review the the thread IM, you'll see where I asked.

Youre equally allowed your opinion on this matter.

One thing is for sure, I would bet the answers will be on the net every year, thats the way of the internet... so you better get something figured out for your assoc since its apparently so all fire important. Sniveling about it wont change the fact everything ends up on the net.

[Dakota]

Originally posted by wadeintothem
One thing is for sure, I would bet the answers will be on the net every year, thats the way of the internet...

So what? My daughter can download everything from research papers to book reports from the internet, too.

That does not mean it is not cheating and it does not mean that a person who takes advantage of this to short cut the learning process is not a cheater and a person of low ethical standards and a person who places very little value on their own integrity and honor.

The same can be said for the people who facilitate this cheating by posting the research papers and publicizing their locations (sometimes for a fee, which is even worse).

The tendency of this society to follow itself down into the gutter in nearly every part of life under the mantra of "everybody is doing it" or "you're no better than I am" or "if I hadn't done it somebody would have" or "who are you to judge" or ... is shameful.

We even have former presidents who made their career with such disreputable self-delusional nonsense.

Because posters come here to cheat and then react with righteous indignation when they are correctly seen for what they are does not change what they are - cheaters.

Because others do it does not make it right.

Because it is easy due to the internet does not make it right.

None of these reasons are in any way a reason to not protest when such unethical and dishonorable behavior is observed.

[gtfreek]

Thatll preach. I understand all that very well; perfection is an honorable goal. I just beleive showing mercy levels the playing field. You exalt yourself when you are judgmental and critical.

[Dakota]

Originally posted by gtfreek
You exalt yourself when you are judgmental and critical.

Not necessarily. If you say "You are bad and I am better" - true you are exaulting yourself.

OTOH if you say "Your behavior is bad and should not be condoned." - you are not.

Not saying I haven't done both on this topic - never said I was above acting, behaving, or typing poorly.

But, I will judge unethical behavior when I see it, be it in politics, at work, on web boards, or on the softball diamond. And, I won't apologize for being "judgmental" either - nothing wrong with being judgmental about unethical behavior. Nothing at all. And, being judgmental only requires a standard against which to judge; it does not require prefection in the person doing the judging (much as the unethical among us would like us to believe - because, conveniently for them - that lets them off the hook.)

Funny how the only two deadly sins remaining in our society are being judgmental and being less than perfect while being judgmental. Guess who that standard of "sin" benefits?

[Dakota]

Funny how the only two deadly sins remaining in our society are being judgmental and being less than perfect while being judgmental.

Originally posted by 03matrixrs
I just dont think anyone here can live up to whats being said or hasnt done it in some compacity themselves.

Is there an echo in here?

[gtfreek]

No, judging implies that you are better. I here you though, just dont agree.

[Dakota]

Originally posted by gtfreek
No, judging implies that you are better. I here you though, just dont agree.

Depends on the standard. If I judge against the standard of MY behavior, you are correct. If I judge against a higher standard than I, you are not correct. I try to do the latter. Sometimes I do the former (which is why the standard had better be higher that I am).

IOW, if your standard of behavior is me, you are setting your standards too low.

And no one who is trying to live an ethical life should settle for that. (I don't ).

[wadeintothem]

I also hear you guys and see your POV.. If the ASA exam were a test administered by ASA with specific guidelines as a board type exam, I would agree. It is not. It is basically a multiple choice POE. Its not even a real test. So I put it at the level it is at. ASA as the org itself doesnt care.. You are inventing principles not applied by the governing org. Basically, "this is my local rule so the entire nation must comply with it".

Sorry, dont work that way.

Your local rules are simply that. Nothing done violated either ASA rules or even ethics, as to have an ethical problem, there MUST be a set criteria to measure against. There is no set criteria here.

If you want to invent yourself a local rule, you'll now need a local rule that says "no reading the answers off of the net".

[Dakota]

IOW, Wade, your position is, "there is no controlling legal authority" so in that vacuum, everything is ethical?

[wadeintothem]

IOW, if you, as a UIC, have a local rule that says you will take the test on such and such and such date, it will be a closed book exam (or whatever) and you catch one of your umps cheating off the net.. I would agree that person is unethical.

It is not proper to judge the entire nation (or world) based on local rules that the ASA has decided to leave up to the local bodies.

It is perfectly legal in ASA for a UIC to simply give the answers to his umps, or in fact, to not test them at all.

"Ethics" of how an exam is administered is determined locally.

Mikes way of doing it in his locality is no more legal or ethical according to the ASA than another body not even testing their umps.

It used to be unethical in baseball to throw a pitch that was difficult to hit.

Are we less ethical now than then?

Rules are the rules.. your local rules are your rules - that is all they are.

[Dakota]

One area administers the test. After the test is administered, as a convenience to their local association, they post the answers so everyone (who has already taken the test) can look up what they missed. Is that unethical? Not in and of itself, but it does place the temptation out there for those who are ethically challenged.

Another area passes out the tests with instructions for their umpires to take them home and answer the questions using their rule book and case book. One of those umpires tries to find the answers on the internet instead of looking them up.

Is ASA National going to get involved? No.

Is that umpire unethical? Yes.

Legality and the existance of an enforcement mechanism is a very, very poor tool to use in defining your own ethics, unless you just don't want to have any at all.

I seriously doubt that any area will pass out the tests along with the web site URL for looking up the answers with instructions to copy them down and turn the test back in. Yet, you seem to be arguing that this should be considered ethical behavior. At the very least, it would be a colossal waste of time.

[wadeintothem]

One area administers the test. After the test is administered, as a convenience to their local association, they post the answers so everyone (who has already taken the test) can look up what they missed. Is that unethical? Not in and of itself, but it does place the temptation out there for those who are ethically challenged.

Those who are ethically challenged AND required to complete their tests in a certain way that does not include simply finding the answers.

For those who are not required to even take the test, or those whose tests are not graded or those who the UIC simply give them the answers at the next clinic - its not a problem at all.

Another area passes out the tests with instructions for their umpires to take them home and answer the questions using their rule book and case book. One of those umpires tries to find the answers on the internet instead of looking them up.

Is ASA National going to get involved? No.

Is that umpire unethical? Yes.

For that local umpire, that is a problem.

Is it devestating?

No.

Legality and the existance of an enforcement mechanism is a very, very poor tool to use in defining your own ethics, unless you just don't want to have any at all.

Then again, inventing your own criteria and applying it to everyone else who may not be subject to that criter is equally a poor way of doing things. You are passing judgement based on your own areas way of doing things.

Which is fine, it is your opinion - I dont see how you can justify that it is defacto correct.

I seriously doubt that any area will pass out the tests along with the web site URL for looking up the answers with instructions to copy them down and turn the test back in. Yet, you seem to be arguing that this should be considered ethical behavior. At the very least, it would be a colossal waste of time.

They may not, but they certainly could. Some orgs pass them out and dont require them to be turned in.. fed we didnt turn them in - the UIC read through the answers. Some dont grade them and return them.

There is a bigger picture here than your narrow slice of local rules - that being it is done differently in so many areas that applying your own invented local rules, that you could change tomorrow, to every single org in the nation is rather arrogant IMO.