Umpire knocked unconscious by 10U coach

[NCASAUmp]

Originally Posted by DaveASA/FED

But again in this story what is the take home lesson? Umpire shouldn't have called coach a liar, I can't defend that....but if someone calls you a name you punch them? Great lesson to teach 10U....

The take home lesson for the girls is: solve your problems without violence, or else you go to jail.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by Skahtboi

Wait....did I just point the finger at our nation's leaders????

Point a finger at our nation's leaders???? Not possible.

You cannot point a finger at something which does not exist. This country is in dire need of a leader instead of the shepherds the electorate has been duped into placing in positions of authority.

[Skahtboi]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Point a finger at our nation's leaders???? Not possible.

You cannot point a finger at something which does not exist. This country is in dire need of a leader instead of the shepherds the electorate has been duped into placing in positions of authority.

You are aware that I was using the term in the familiar sense, weren't you? Not the literal meaning.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by Skahtboi

You are aware that I was using the term in the familiar sense, weren't you? Not the literal meaning.

Either way.

[LIIRISHMAN]

What is lost here is the effect on both teams. We're talking about 10 and under here! Do these leagues do any backround checks before making some moron their leader. Also if it's true that the umpire called the coach a liar he's another guy who would need a talking too from his UIC. Some times I wish the parents would drop the kids off and come back after the game is over and let kids play!

[wadeintothem]

Originally Posted by LIIRISHMAN

What is lost here is the effect on both teams. We're talking about 10 and under here! Do these leagues do any backround checks before making some moron their leader. Also if it's true that the umpire called the coach a liar he's another guy who would need a talking too from his UIC. Some times I wish the parents would drop the kids off and come back after the game is over and let kids play!

I doubt a background check would have prevented it.. just because he hit an umpire does not mean he is a registered sex offender or some other high level criminal who would have failed the limited scope feel-good BS back ground checks that are done (in areas where they are done).

[Chess Ref]

Originally Posted by wadeintothem

I doubt a background check would have prevented it.. just because he hit an umpire does not mean he is a registered sex offender or some other high level criminal who would have failed the limited scope feel-good BS back ground checks that are done (in areas where they are done).

Isn't this the part where Dakota chimes in with his take on background checks ?

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by LIIRISHMAN

Do these leagues do any backround checks before making some moron their leader. Also if it's true that the umpire called the coach a liar he's another guy who would need a talking too from his UIC. Some times I wish the parents would drop the kids off and come back after the game is over and let kids play!

STOP! Background checks only catch those who have already been caught and are basically useless in serious situations.

And I don't care if he called him a liar, maybe he was, I don't know or care. Umpires are called much worse in the course of a game. It is still no excuse for a violent reaction.

[wadeintothem]

Originally Posted by Chess Ref

Isn't this the part where Dakota chimes in with his take on background checks ?

Well I was hoping to set off Irishmike. Its always fun when he drones on and on about background checks and then threatens to quit.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by wadeintothem

Well I was hoping to set off Irishmike. Its always fun when he drones on and on about background checks and then threatens to quit.

Wait until Matt informs you that you will have a background done on you, at your expense.

I will not quit. I will refuse to permit a BI as a matter of principle. It is a waste of time, money and effort. It is a Chicken Little, feel-good, knee-jerk reaction that is common to this country. Unfortunately, it will provide no positive results and place ASA in a very vulnerable situation.

[wadeintothem]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Wait until Matt informs you that you will have a background done on you, at your expense.

He already has btw, guaranteed it within the next few years..some lame $7 back ground check. I'm not worried about it.. I've gone through real background checks.

I will not quit. I will refuse to permit a BI as a matter of principle. It is a waste of time, money and effort. It is a Chicken Little, feel-good, knee-jerk reaction that is common to this country. Unfortunately, it will provide no positive results and place ASA in a very vulnerable situation.

I agree in principle.. with the exception that if it was required, i would simply do it.. since I could care less if they do so or not just for a "feel good measure".

[NCASAUmp]

Originally Posted by wadeintothem

He already has btw, guaranteed it within the next few years..some lame $7 back ground check. I'm not worried about it.. I've gone through real background checks.

Same here. Go ahead, check me out if you want, but I'm not paying for it.

I agree in principle.. with the exception that if it was required, i would simply do it.. since I could care less if they do so or not just for a "feel good measure".

The only thing background checks do besides give the warm and fuzzies is absolve (or minimize) an association of wrongdoing if an incident later occurs. I think it's more a requirement from the lawyers trying to keep an association from having to pay a small fortune when Joe Schmoe can't keep his hands to himself.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by NCASAUmp

The only thing background checks do besides give the warm and fuzzies is absolve (or minimize) an association of wrongdoing if an incident later occurs. I think it's more a requirement from the lawyers trying to keep an association from having to pay a small fortune when Joe Schmoe can't keep his hands to himself.

Actually, it does just the opposite. If ASA "certifies" coaches and umpires as being "safe" around children via background checks, they will be the first entity listed in the lawsuit.

If the ASA lawyers suggested this, I'm glad they do not represent me.

[NCASAUmp]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Actually, it does just the opposite. If ASA "certifies" coaches and umpires as being "safe" around children via background checks, they will be the first entity listed in the lawsuit.

If the ASA lawyers suggested this, I'm glad they do not represent me.

It's not ASA certifying the coaches or umpires, it's whatever agency ASA uses. It's their nuts on a string if they fail to dig up the right bone. ASA can claim they exercised due diligence.

Either way, they're still a bad idea.

[Skahtboi]

All of these background checks are a waste of money and time. As has already been pointed out, all that they tell us is who has yet to commit a crime. They are certainly no indication of who will commit a crime. Case in point, Dennis Rader, a former military man and private business man, who had also worked for a security company and the City of Wichita, Kansas, would have passed any background check performed by any organization. Yet for the more than twenty years that he was murdering people, he would have been able to umpire for ASA or anyone else. (Even by the current BI standards.) BI's are nothing more that what they have been described, knee jerk warm fuzzy actions. They are otherwise totally useless.

I have a real personal feeling about these, too. For in order for me to continue to practice in the profession of my choice, in the state in which I live, I will now be forced to not only agree to a BI but also to submit my fingerprints, which I feel is a violation of my right to privacy. Further problem with the fingerprints in Texas is that they will be readily available to any state agency.