Had a coach this weekend ask me if I could detect when his pitcher was throwing a change up. Well, yes, you can, but only at the very end...and part of it may be that I've umpired her since she was 9, so I kind of know her tendencies and her motion.

BUt my question to you is...do you tell him? If so, when?

I have been asked this as well as pitches that are supposed to be rises, screwballs, etc.
From behind the plate and sometimes from the field I can tell what they are throwing before the release.
Not always but enough of the time.

My standard answer to the coach, "Yes I can some of the time coach." Then I end the conversation or change the subject.
I answer a reasonable question with a reasonable answer. I dont' get into coaching.

Off the field and away from the games, we might have long philosophical discussions on the pitching but not on the field.

I found that a while back, I was getting into a bad habit of making a decision on a pitch by the time it was halfway to the plate. I got burned on this a few times, so I started to force myself to concentrate on the whole pitch until the time it hit the catcher's mitt, then make a decision.

The byproduct of this of this is that I couldn't tell you if the pitch was a screwball, curve, drop, etc..., I could only tell you if it was in the strike zone or not.

I have had coaches ask me about a pitcher's ball movement and such during inning breaks...I just give some generic answer like "Gee, coach, I really can't tell."

I figure that I'm out there to call balls and strikes, not be an assistant coach.

If you are watching the pitch into the glove, aren't you able to follow the patch of the ball? Isn't that the whole concept of tracking?

Maybe I'm missing something here, but...
 

As the umpire, why would you care what kind of pitch it is?

I think Andy has it right - there's too many other things you should be concentrating on - like if it's in the zone or not, or if that was a legal pitch or not, did the batter commit when she squared to bunt, etc.

Generically answer the coach's question. If he wants your opinion on his pitcher's movements, then your pitching instruction rate is $xxx per hour, and we'll discuss that after this game. :)

Re: Maybe I'm missing something here, but...
 

To me, the only proper answer to that question that would maintain your professionalism, impartiality, and politeness would be to say something along the lines, "To be honest, coach, I don't even notice that kind of thing since, as an umpire, my focus is directed elsewhere at that moment. If you're wondering whether your pitcher is tipping her pitches, I really couldn't say."

And leave it at that.

If you tell the coach that she *is* (or isn't) tipping her pitches, you've just become a game participant. You are giving out useful tactical information that the other team may be making use of.

Where do answers to questions like these end?

"Does her fastball have movement?"

"Do you think she's throwing too many change-ups?"

"Could you please tell the other team to stop trying to steal our signals?"

"Should my leadoff batter bunt next inning?"

"Do you think I should buy some stock in Coca-Cola?"

"Do you think my wife is cheating on me?"

I believe such inappropriate inquiries to the umpire can be deflected politely.

David Emerling
Memphis, TN

Re: Re: Maybe I'm missing something here, but...
 

"Yes, coach, I do. When she leaves my place tonight, I'll remind her to call your stock broker about the Coca-Cola thing."

;)

SRW, here's one for ya
 

Hey coach, where do you think I should spend my bonus money?

As a coach, I don't see what the big deal is about an umpire telling a coach if a ball breaks or not. I can tell when someone is avoiding a question.I would rather someone tell me that they "legally or ethically" can't do that. Some of your responses, make me think that you are not part of the game,when in fact you are a big part of the game.I enjoy being able to talk to umpires between innings.If an umpire answered a question for me, I would expect him to do the same for the opposing coach. If you asked a coach a question about how you could improve the game, do you think he would answer it?

Apples and oranges.

A coach telling an umpire how he (the umpire) can improve as an umpire is not going to provide any advantage to either team.

On the other hand, an umpire sharing his impressions of game situations and action <b>WHILE A GAME IS IN PROGRESS</b> is simply inappropriate.

Naturally, the environment of each game is different. You have games that are not particularly important nor tense, where everybody knows everybody, where the atmosphere is cordial ... I could see an exchange like this taking place. The umpires know the coaches - may even be friends - the coaches are friends - and the umpires know the players. Everybody is one big happy family. No big deal. I've called games like this.

But that is the exception.

An umpire better have a good sense about this before engaging in these type of exchanges.

If there is an air of tension ... if the game <i>matters</i> ... if one team doesn't know the other ... if the game is close ... if there have been close plays and disputed calls earlier in the game ... an umpire does best to stay away from conversations like these.

By default - an umpire should not engage in such conversations and I think he can do it politely.

David Emerling
Memphis, TN

Umm...every game matters.

It may not matter to you, it may not decide the world championship, but it definitely matters.

In these "tense" type of situations I do not think a reputable coach would ask if his pitcher is tipping her change up, or "Do you think my wife is cheating on me?"
It is those times in which you speak "where things feel right" in which I was referring.

Not all games are created equally.

It's naive to think that all games are given the same amount of importance by the participants. There are varying degrees of intensity.

I've called pool games in tournaments where the outcome of the game didn't matter and wouldn't effect anything ... and the teams KNEW IT!

Then there's the tournament championship game.

Sure, they both "matter" ... but not equally!

My point is *not* that the umpire should not try as hard for "unimportant" games. That's not even what we're talking about. You give every game your best effort. But there are certain aspects of more casual games that change how coaches/players/umpires/fans interact. For better or worse, that is a reality.

David Emerling
Memphis, TN

Re: Maybe I'm missing something here, but...
 

I like this sentance, we shouldn't care at all.
I tend to look at them and identify them after having spent some time helping a good friend identify college prospects (he works with a college scouting service).

In reality, we should never care what the pitch is.

Now, on the other hand, we should make ourselves aware of a pitchers potential so that we don't get caught unaware at that critical moment in a game.

It is not unusual for me to talk to a catcher while a pitcher is warming up and to ask if the pitcher has any moving balls.
The catchers that know what they are doing will communicate with you and let you know. They want you to call them strikes.

Let me ask this,
When a new pitcher is warming up, do you drop into position and take a look?
You should, it lets you see what their motion is and whether they are throwing any moving balls.

You should be aware of what can come but otherwise not care if they throw heat, changeups or screwballs.

Re: SRW, here's one for ya
 

You must mean the "Profit Sharing". If I recall, that subject is taboo for you. Get off my field.

:D ;)

Re: Re: SRW, here's one for ya
 

I don't know about you guys, but I stash my bonus money on the yacht!!!!

(Inside joke for those that frequent the eteamz board)

If a coach asks me the question mentioned, I simply answer "Yes", in a very polite manner. I have no reason to provide any more explaniation.
Sam

To me, the obvious response has been overlooked.

Why wouldn't an umpire respond, "Coach, shouldn't you be asking your catcher that question?

I agree that a catcher should be the one to ask. However if your dealing with 10 to 12 year old catchers you will probably get the shoulder shrug. I think this all boils down to a coach wanting a little conversation with the official. A coach can tell,sitting on his bucket, whether his pitcher is tipping her change up. A good coach knows if his pitchers balls are breaking or not.(no pun intended).

And if a 10-12 yr old catcher can't tell, then neither can a 10-12 batter. So what difference would it then make whether the pitcher is tipping her pitches or not?

I think you're right - I would interpret this conversation as the coach trying to "suck up" to the umpire by trying to inflate the umpire's ego. The coach is creating the impression that he VALUES the umpire's assessment and opinion. Seldom does the coach need, nor want, any tactical help from the umpire.

David Emerling
Memphis, TN

[Edited by David Emerling on Dec 11th, 2005 at 08:39 AM]

Based on my 15 years of coaching experience, I will simply state that a certain percentage of the umpires that called my games would engage in some light banter about the weather, the schedule, the game, a play, etc.

I don't think I was "sucking up" to these umpires, any more than they were "sucking up" to me.

Depending on the game situation, such as a "blow-out-in-progress" there may have been discussions about certain specific mechanics of pitchers, fielders, batters, catchers, base-runners, etc. either during or after a game.

There are many other "neutral" situations that could deem such dialogs as "OK". Of course, there are just as many other situations where such dialog is not OK.

This comes under the category of Game Management. You need to know when it is OK and when it isn't. If you are in doubt, then assume it isn't. But never be so inflexible to adjust to the sitch.

Problem is that once a conversation begins, it is ofter harder to determine the location of that line. This is why I suggest you don't start the conversation during the game. If a coach wants to approach me after a game, away from the field, players and fans, I'll talk to him/her about certain plays and rules applications. However, player performance and mechanics are topic I choose not to address. I'll talk to other umpires about things I see, but only with working umpires.

Like I said earlier, most people that have been doing this a while (both coaches and umpires) usually have a good sense of what the game is all "about".

There are such things as casual/friendly games. Such games exist when everybody knows everybody and nothing of substance is on the line. Everybody is on the same page.

I think such games would provide a small exception to what we're talking about here.

* * *

Example: I once was working the plate during what amounted to not much more than a practice game between two teams. I called a pitch a "ball" and immediately realized I had blown it. Even though nobody complained I commented to the batter and catcher, "that was probably a pretty good pitch." Then, jokingly, I told the batter, "the strikezone just got bigger." The next pitch was a bit low which I called a "strike." I looked over at the offensive coach and said, "I had to make up for the last bad call. Now we're even." He just chuckled. He was a friend of mine! I knew all the players. We were all just having some fun. No big deal.

I wouldn't DREAM of having these type of exchanges under different circumstances.

David Emerling
Memphis, TN

What I've been taught and learned and believe is never discuss the way players play, the way coaches coach, etc. because any help gives that team an advantage in that game or a later one. That aspect and even joking makeup calls affect your credibility for being neutral.
What if:
- you give a pitcher your reaction to her motion and she fools the last batter in the game into a K; or
- someone hears you make that comment and expects the same help for their team; or
- someone hears you make a suggestion to the team who is their opponent in the finals; or
- not everyone knows the "makeup call" was a joke (better to change the first one)?

All we have is our neutrality and consistency, so let's not be so casul about them.

I've been sitting back and enjoying the conversations and discussions here over the question I posted. Let me tell you what I did.

Situation: Indoor tournament (hey, there's a foot of snow on the ground here) in a "blow-out-in-progress" type of game. Coach calling pitches is pitcher's dad. Pitcher is a top notch pitcher, now 15 year old. Very good. D-One Quality player already. Hard thrower. Impecable control.

Coach asks the question stated above. My reply: talk to me after the game. He does.

"Yes, coach/dad, she tips it right at the end, but it's almost unnoticable. The change looks just like the fastball until right at the end."

I could have told them during the game, but chose not to. Not that I think there is anything wrong with that (in this situation), but I chose not to say anything about it.

Remember to all those of us who would not answer the question, we must make a professional reply to the request, not just "shrug it off." I've seen far too many solid officials stop officiating becuase they get a reputation as "stuck up" and "egomaniacs" by not talking to coaches in a polite, professional manner.

Now that's the reply and repore' I would want with an umpire. Sounds like you sir are the type of person that I would like to be on the field with.
Thank You

If a sports official allowed such a perception to affect them in such a manner, I would have to question how solid an official s/he was to begin.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by newatumpiring

Quote:

i know that i am new her and ll that but i find your remarks egotistical sorry

Looks like one of the trolls from the baseball board has decided to come over here to play.

[Edited by scottk_61 on Dec 13th, 2005 at 11:34 AM]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by scottk_61

Quote:

Originally posted by newatumpiring Quote: i know that i am new her and ll that but i find your remarks egotistical sorry Looks like one of the trolls from the baseball board has decided to come over here to play.

Troll, maybe, but if he finds Mike's remarks "egotistical" he'll never survive on the baseball board. Over there, that remark would be almost self-effacing. ;)

I respect your opinion, but I too disagree with you.

I know several very good balls, strikes, out, safe and mechanical umpires who I'd go anywhere with except for their crappy attitudes towards the game. They are bigger than the game and try to "show their stuff" during the game. To me, that gives off stuck up and egomaniacal attitude that turns coaches off (and it really does, trust me).

Whoa, Bubba! :)

You said they got a reputation, you didn't say they actually acted in the manner you decribed in the latest post. Polite and professional manners are often a matter of perception, not necessarily reality.

On the field, if someone asks me a question which I need to answer, I give them the Reader's Digest version. In some parts of the country, it is considered "rude" and "impolite" to not have a full conversation. As an umpire, I'm not there to entertain people. I don't even want to be noticed, let alone get involved in a conversation.

Then again, Saint's HC Jim Haslett probably thought the referee in the MNF game last night to be impolite when informed of the never-ending plane of the goal line. ;)

How "solid" can an official be if they think themselves as the show instead of just the umpire? Making the right calls from the right position doesn't make someone an umpire. Knowing all the rule and interps doesn't make someone an umpire. Dressing in the proper uniform and maintaining a professional appearance doesn't make someone an umpire. These are merely individual components which when applied properly make an umpire.

How does one get a reputation without there being some truth behind it.

A solid official can be a crappy people person, just like "Mr. Personality" can be a crappy official.

And Don't Call Me Bubba ;)

Simple, it's perception. We use to have an umpire who had a reputation for tossing players and coaches. In fact, he didn't dump any more than the other umpires. He got the "rep" because he didn't care who you the player was or level of play, if their actions or language crossed the line, it was bye-bye time.

Quote:

A solid official can be a crappy people person, just like "Mr. Personality" can be a crappy official.

This may be where we start to separate ways. I think part of being a solid official is the ability to handle players and coaches without being mean or obstinate.

Isn't perception based on reality?

Not necessarily. Isn't perception nothing more than opinion based on belief and personal observation?

I can go through a pile of umpire rating cards submitted by HS coaches and tell you which team won the game based on comments about the umpires. Is a coach's perception reality, or just how they felt?

Last year a coach stated that the umpire was terrible, had no idea what the strike zone should be and was "short" with a coach.

In fact, the umpire is a highly regarded ISF qualified umpire who works the NPF & Big East/ECAC games.

While the coach may truly believe her perception to be reality, it may be only HER reality, not anyone else's.

I'll give you that one specific umpire may be disliked and thought of as horrible by one specific coach.

But from that game of "horrible officiating" that coach will never think of the umpire as good. Thus perception becomes reality.

Whatever qualifications a person holds (NCAA/ASA/USSSA/ISF/ETC) is based on someone elses perception of the umpire.

Thus, perception is reality.

Nice try, but again, reality to whom?

Main Entry: re·al·i·ty
Pronunciation: rE-'a-l&-tE
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural -ties
1 : the quality or state of being real
2 a (1) : a real event, entity, or state of affairs <his dream became a reality> (2) : the totality of real things and events <trying to escape from reality> b : something that is neither derivative nor dependent but exists necessarily
- in reality : in actual fact

I guess we shall agree to disagree, becuase I too can quote a dictionary, but isn't that just Websters perception of what the definition of reality is? :)

Any time we enact judgment upon someone we are using perception. Unfortunately, when we "advance" in our careers, the perception of those evaluating us is the reality we must deal with.

Existential enough for you?

I too can wax poetic. :)

GREAT CONVERSATION MIKE!

There IS a difference between waxing poetic and waxing pedantic.

Maybe you need this? ;)
http://a1468.g.akamai.net/f/1468/580.../56663/200.jpg

Apparently not. ;)

Quote:

but isn't that just Websters perception of what the definition of reality is? :) Any time we enact judgment upon someone we are using perception. Unfortunately, when we "advance" in our careers, the perception of those evaluating us is the reality we must deal with.

The Superior Court of New York declared Kris Kringle the one and only Santa Claus. Maybe Mr. Macy, Gimbel and Sawyer have to live with that "reality", but it doesn't make it real.

Speaking of evaluations, perception is only the basis for a follow-up discussion with the individual and should never be the sole event used to determine how an umpire is to be evaluated. That happened to one of the umpires I sent to a national tournament this year. After checking with all those involved, it seemed that the on-site person aiding the UIC in evaluating the umpires saw an umpire talking to a member of the ground crew and ASSUMED the umpire was making them do something. He reported to the UIC that there was no way these two umpires should be working on Sunday, that they were causing trouble at the complex. This appeared on the umpire's evaluation.

I talked to the umpire, a member of the on-site crew and the TD to determine what had occurred which reflected poorly on this umpire and his partner. Turned out that the person who directed the ground crew was the TD. The umpire didn't do a thing wrong and actually got an "atta boy" for handling the situation. I cornered the TD and UIC and brought this to their attention. The UIC requested and received permission from ASA to ammend the evaluation of the umpire crew on the field.

One individual's perception does not make something real anywhere, but in that person's own world. Luckily, what was real for everyone else prevailed and kept this umpire in good standing. BTW, no, I was not the umpire. :)

What he said!