Incorrect instructions at plate meeting...

[IRISHMAFIA]

Why do umpires believe it is their responsibility to "remind" teams of what they are already supposed to know? Same thing with pre-game warnings. "I don't what to hear this" or "I don't want to see that" should never be part of a pre-game meeting.

A meeting should be introductions, check and double check and administer the exchange of line-up cards, address any special rules for THAT particular field, answer any questions as would pertain to those ground rules and finally, conduct the coin toss, if applicable.

This meeting is NOT a rules clinic, NOT a platform to warn of pet peeves, NOT a situation where an umpire threatens teams if they do something the umpire doesn't like, etc.

[BuggBob]

I had a PU tell the teams what the awards for out-of-play would be. Problem was his awards were wrong. Because recently I had had a BAD game with a partner where he accused me of stealling his call, I did't say anything. The real problem was it came into play. Lesson learned. I will now gently offer the proper awards.

Bugg

[Dakota]

Thanks for the comments.

I agree the issue should never have been brought up in the first place at a plate meeting. He had a fairly lengthy plate speech, but this was the only error in it; he just said more than needed to be said about several other things, too. (JMO)

I chose to keep quiet since the "harm" would be minor and even unlikely to come up, whereas a disagreement between umpires at the plate meeting would damage our crediblity as a team.

And, as I said, he called a very good game.

[gsf23]

Originally Posted by Dakota

Thanks for the comments.

I agree the issue should never have been brought up in the first place at a plate meeting. He had a fairly lengthy plate speech, but this was the only error in it; he just said more than needed to be said about several other things, too. (JMO)

I chose to keep quiet since the "harm" would be minor and even unlikely to come up, whereas a disagreement between umpires at the plate meeting would damage our crediblity as a team.

And, as I said, he called a very good game.

And how would your credibility as a team look if it did come up and your partner wasn't going to allow the runner? Would you then go and have a talk to him? What are you going to tell the coach?

"Well, coach, I knew that he explained the rule wrong before but I didn't want to say anything."

That will really help your credibilty. Or how about the next day when this coach comes out to argue that the other team can't use a CR because the umpires yesterday told us that that was the rule. Now how is your credibilty with that coach or with the other umpiring crew who has to deal with the problem you caused.

If your partner is going to be explaining rules at a plate meeting then you better be sure that he is giving the correct information. If you don't want to do it at the meeting then you need to pull him aside, get things straight before the game starts and make sure both coaches know what the correct rule should be.

Of course the real simple solution to all of this is don't conduct a rules clinic during your pre-game.

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by gsf23

And how would your credibility as a team look if it did come up and your partner wasn't going to allow the runner? Would you then go and have a talk to him? What are you going to tell the coach?

"Well, coach, I knew that he explained the rule wrong before but I didn't want to say anything."

That will really help your credibilty. Or how about the next day when this coach comes out to argue that the other team can't use a CR because the umpires yesterday told us that that was the rule. Now how is your credibilty with that coach or with the other umpiring crew who has to deal with the problem you caused.

If your partner is going to be explaining rules at a plate meeting then you better be sure that he is giving the correct information. If you don't want to do it at the meeting then you need to pull him aside, get things straight before the game starts and make sure both coaches know what the correct rule should be.

Of course the real simple solution to all of this is don't conduct a rules clinic during your pre-game.

First of all, I was interested in feedback on whether keeping silent was what I SHOULD have done; the followup was only to explain why I didn't speak up. Thanks for the comments.

As to stepping in as BU on a lineup card discussion between the PU and coach, I don't think so. Obviously, if it came up in the game, the rule as he explained it would have been enforced, unless the coach chose to protest. Since neither expressed any disagreement at the plate meeting, that was highly unlikely.

I agree the entire mini-rules clinic should not have been conducted at the plate meeting. However, note that if it hadn't been discussed, then he still would have enforced the CR rule during the game as he apparently understood it. So a "proper" plate meeting would have had exactly the same result as me keeping silent on the issue.

[MNBlue]

BTW, Tom, did you discuss the incorrect rule interpretation with the PU after the game? Did the coaches leave the field with an incorrect idea of how the CR rule should apply?

Just wondering what happened during the followup.

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by MNBlue

BTW, Tom, did you discuss the incorrect rule interpretation with the PU after the game?

No, I intended to, but forgot about it until I was driving home.

Originally Posted by MNBlue

Did the coaches leave the field with an incorrect idea of how the CR rule should apply?

Unfortunately, probably yes.

[gsf23]

Originally Posted by Dakota

First of all, I was interested in feedback on whether keeping silent was what I SHOULD have done; the followup was only to explain why I didn't speak up. Thanks for the comments.

As to stepping in as BU on a lineup card discussion between the PU and coach, I don't think so. Obviously, if it came up in the game, the rule as he explained it would have been enforced, unless the coach chose to protest. Since neither expressed any disagreement at the plate meeting, that was highly unlikely.

I agree the entire mini-rules clinic should not have been conducted at the plate meeting. However, note that if it hadn't been discussed, then he still would have enforced the CR rule during the game as he apparently understood it. So a "proper" plate meeting would have had exactly the same result as me keeping silent on the issue.

So you would knowingly let an incorrect rules interp. stand because the coaches didn't protest it or it wouldn't "look good"?

I'm sorry but I think that that makes you look far worse as a crew than getting together and making sure you both understand rule.

Now you have two coaches who think that this is the rule. Next game when the rule is applied correctly and they protest and get shot down how is your association going to look? You have some umpires making one ruling and other umpires making a completely different ruling.

I agree with you on not stepping in on his plate conversation, and I wouldn't have either, but as soon as the meeting was over, I would have gotten with him and made sure that we had the rule correct and that the coaches had it correct also. That's just my opinion.

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by gsf23

So you would knowingly let an incorrect rules interp. stand because the coaches didn't protest it or it wouldn't "look good"?

Your adding words that I did not say.

I would not correct him at the plate since, worst case, he strongly believes what he just said and does not accept my correction. Nothing good can come from this.

I would not intervene during the game since - think about it - where am I when this CR discussion with the coach is going on? I'm in position somewhere 60+ feet away. I have no idea what is being discussed, and even if I suspect it MAY be about a CR, I'm not sprinting across the field with a "wait a minute... let me check that card..." THAT ain't happening!

I agree I probably should have mentioned it to him during the top of the 1st warmup pitches.