ASA Robot Umpires
 

Is it just me or are ASA (and when I say ASA I'm mean umps that live a breath ASA and think that is the only thing out there) becoming way to much like robots.

I worked a couple of games this last softball season with a guy that lives and dies by the ASA and has the personality of a cardboard box on the field. It's pretty bad when you have players even making comments on how he is a robot.

Do't get me wrong if that is how he does it then so be it and a pat on the back to him.

So my real question is this, do you think that it's a bigger deal for you to be sellected to work by your state high school association to work the state tournament or would you consider it a bigger deal to be selected to work an ASA national tournament? I know for me I think that it's a bigger deal to work the HS state tournament.

I guess with my though process I won't be making it to the big time anytime soon. Just thougt I woudl throw it out there and see what you guys and gals think.

I see a lot more problems caused in games from umpires using non-standard mechanics than I ever see from umpires using standard mechanics.

ASA's emphasis on using a standard set of mechanics strikes me as a good thing. You'll ultimately get better officials and better officiated games.

First, if that is his style that is his style. I don't consider myself robotic but try to get into the right position to make the call. If you want to see "robotic" watch NCAA :D

I have done ASA Nationals and HS State tourneys. I would do HS over ASA anytime. I love the Oklahoma HS state tournament. Exciting ball. In the smaller schools the towns close down when they are in State and they pack the ASA Hall of Fame Stadiums in OKC. It is a blast.

Don't get me wrong I love the ASA Nationals too but just prefer the atmosphere of HS a lot more.

Not to mention better communication to the players, coaches, fans and fellow officials.

What??

From plate stances to angles to set positions to positioning to mechanics to signals??

You surely jest!!........or don't pay attention.

Is this Wade under a different username? ;)


...reference the 'robot' attributes, you don't mention.. how do his games go?

Didn't we beat the crap out of this subject in the spring?

And, yes, when it comes to positioning, those teaching NCAA mechanics are turning their blues into robots. We saw it demonstrated in the NCAA Championships where umpires were so driven to get into the prescribed position, they almost missed a play or placed themselves in the middle of it.

Now, if the NCAA folks want an umpire to be in a particular place, that is their business, but not at the cost of not being able to make the appropriate call. Anytime a mechanic is placed above the call, something is wrong.

AFA signals, ASA isn't even close to being as anal on these as they were 10-15 years ago. Yes, there are basics and if that is what an umpire wants to use, who the hell are we to criticize a person for following direction.

Remember when the strike/out signal included reaching high and drop to the hammer? Well, that's gone, but I still use it in the school. Why, you may ask?

Because it is a good exercise to train umpires on how to get to the hammer. By the end of the session, we have them going right to the hammer. Unfortunately, many umpires' hammer lacks crispness because the get lazy. Too many believe just raising the fist with the elbow never leaving the side is hammer enough. IMO, that looks extremely lazy and sloppy.

And who really cares about the players' opinion on an umpire's mechanics? How many times has a player told any of you to get into position and tell you where that is?

We are talking about people who think the guy who announces his game from behind the plate is the best umpire in the world, but don't care for the guy who is doing his job as trained? Yeah, there is a valid authority to provide critique :rolleyes:

JMHO

The umpiring in this years CWS was the best its been in years..... They looked MORE flexible than in years past. Its NOT bad to have standardized signals...but the NCAA DID get to the point of ridiculousness....

If you havent looked at the CCA manual...take a look...well written...

I agree that in the past the NCAA consisted of a leadership that mostly promoted another affiliations mechanics, since that was their upbringing, and if they wanted to change anything they drove their point home in a robotic manner.

I think that it has changed dramatically in the past 2-3 years...to the SUIP's credit. And I also agree that the softball umpire manual is excellent in allowing a thought process to supercede x's and o's type robotic movements.

Someone save socalumps....they've captured him and brainwashed him!!! (yes I'm kidding)

When I started dabbling in NCAA a few years ago it was pretty well known that it really didn't matter if you got the call right they just wanted you to be in that perfect 45 or 90 (not alot of emphasis on whether you got it right), not a 47 or 88 angle (and nail the call).

Maybe it's changed, I quick most of it for personal reasons. Still do a alittle bit.

I was flipping through the channels the other day and caught a pro fast pitch game just as the batter laid down a sac bunt with a runner on first. Runner broke for 2nd, 1st base ump moved into his perfect 90 degree position to make the call on the the throw from the catcher, directly into the throwing lane from 1st to 2nd. The runner had rounded 2nd, F3 wanted to throw to 2, but the ump was directly in the way.

I would suspect that it wasn't a true 90 degree angle if the umpire interfered. Where did the throw come from? Unless the catcher threw directly from the plate angle or from foul territory (usually a bunt goes out further into fair territory) there would be no need to go as far as the 1b-2b baseline, which is a true 90 degrees (intersection of foul line with 1b-2b line). If the 1b is stretching towards the throw from the catcher that would take them even further into the diamond...and if umpire still interfered...they could have been out of position. That would be on the umpire..not the preferred mechanic...I saw the Bandit-Force game, if that is the one you are talking about...didn't see this play.

Be that as it may...if a play (or subsequent play) takes you out of your prefered situation..by all means..move somewhere else. Thats like straddling a passed ball at home and not allowing catcher to get to it because you are in "your position?"

I dont think there is any doubt that NCAA has surpassed ASA in mechanics and their system.

The reason for it is simple, ASA designs their mechanic to a lower common denominator of umpire and does little to adjust/allow for adjustment as the umpire advances. They are too rigid in their expectations, to the point of not allowing growth or superior position on a case by case basis.

NCAA 3 man is superior, especially their considerations of inside/out theory vs rim.

NCAA plate positioning is superior.

NCAA focus on being smarter and reading the play is superior.

4th dimension is valid when it is given real consideration as a technique on tag plays.

Umpire-umpire communication is far superior... especially this year with ASA National Staff disallowing nonbook umpire communication.

NCAA is MUCH LESS robotic than in years past IMO. ASA allows no individuality with one single exception - called 3K..

ASA has fallen behind.. where they used to lead the way.


As to being chosen for ASA Nationals vs Fed.. obviously ASA Nationals is superior, especially since it means something towards advancing in umpiring.. whereas post season NFHS means nothing.

The correct mechanic, even if the ball were directly in front of home plate on a sac bunt would be a 90 degree angle from the throw, which would put the ump in the throwing lane to 2nd base, but in this case, the 1B ump would back off this angle a couple of steps (maybe 75 or 80 degree angle) so he/she would not be in the throwing lane. This is why the NCAA now allows their umps to make these decisions after reading what is happening, so they can get in the best possible position for that play but still not interfere with the next possible play.

Obviously, the horse is too smart to drink the Kool Aid (or FlaVor-Aid, if you prefer).:cool:



Again, I was referring to the umpires forcing themselves into prescribed positions even though it placed the umpire in a poor position. I'm not going to rehash everything that was posted a couple months ago, but three instances I recall clearly.

One was an umpire so involved on getting the 90 degree to the throw from the plate, when the defender turned to throw to 2B, she had to check up because the throw would have clocked the umpire.

Another was a play (runner on 2B) where the ball got away from (behind) F4 and the BU started inside, but then remember the "rim" and made a valiant attempt to get back outside and ended up in the middle of a potential play.

The third was PU with a play coming to 3B. With the throw on the way and the runner sliding to the inside, the PU was so involved on getting into his postion between the play and coach, that he over ran the play. Meanwhile if he just stepped inside about 10-15' from 3B, not only would he had his 90, but also the ever-important "4th dimension". I have no idea how he was expected to see that play.

Point here is you talk about "robotic" with ASA umpires as it is a bad thing. There is nothing in ASA's "robotic" mechanics that points them in the wrong direction. Even the evil ASA instructs their umpires that their directions are merely referenced starting points allowing adjustments and deviations as needed to see the play. It seems from the demonstration I witnessed during the NCAA's, these umpires were intent on following the prescribed mechanic regardless of the play at hand. That is not a good thing, but luckily there was no direct affect on the games.

I don't blame the umpires as they were doing what they were told, I've been in a similar situation. And I don't disagree that the finals were well done and event free. I just think the priorities are a bit askew.

Mike,

Not trying to be combative, so don't take this as such, but when was the last time you saw an NCAA manual? The NCAA staff no longer have prescribed spots for umpires to go to as Socalumps mentioned earlier. If the umps at the WCWS went to positions, it was they chose to do so based on what they saw developing, not on predetermined spots on the field.

I really think that you should read the new NCAA manual then coment on what you read now, not what was in the manual several years ago.

Thread: ASA Robot

That depends on how you view each assn. mechanics

I agree with the first part and it is an obvious reason. However, I disagree with the part. I have been around a while working some high-level nationals and I can tell you as a fact, the umpires who work their way up have made adjustments and are anything, but robotic. Each have an on-field character of their own and they all still learn.

I've worked both and I'll take the I/O though there are limited instances (in the 3+ umpire systems only) where an umpire on the corner stays outside. I had quite a long discussion with HP in Plant City concerning such situations.

IMO, that's laughable as there are obvious drawbacks that you just refuse to see.

ASA doesn't focus on an umpire using their brain and read a play? I feel sorry for those who go through your training as it sounds you are definitely receiving inferior training compared to what we stress.

Yeah, another catch phrase that has no meaning. No matter what an umpire does, he is still only going to get a 3-D look at best. And getting such an angle is nothing more than an umpire moving into what s/he believes is the most advantageous look available. Something that all umpiring bodies have been preaching for years.

If you say so. Other than the IFF, I don't believe there is that much need for special "signals".

Again, I disagree with your view of ASA. Then again, how many different ways can you execute the signal for a routine out or safe call? And what is wrong with having a uniform method of providing signals to communicate the results of an event for those not within earshot?

Actually, my training comes from 3 primary sources, 2 pac 10 umpires, 1 of who is elite ASA, the other is NIF.. and the 3rd is ISC (mens FP)/ASA Elite umpire and former pac 10 umpire.. all fast pitch umpires. These guys have called at the highest levels.


Now that said.. their training goes something like this:

Well in NCAA it goes like this.. in ASA, especially when being evaluated, it needs to be like this, but another way to do it is NCAA way or this way that way

It doesnt take much training from top level NCAA/ASA guys before you realize NCAA has passed up ASA. Thats simple fact IMO.

I've talked to none involved at high level of both org who deny ASA has been passed.

The only people who really deny it are die hard ASA guys who dont even actually diligently check how NCAA does it to see if maybe there is a better way.

If you stay stuck on "ASA leads the way" without even knowing how the top NCAA umpires are doing it, then that is your choice. I approach it differently. When top dogs teach, I listen.

I kinda get the feeling we are beating a dead stubborn horse with with a stick. Which resolves very little. I do have a lot of respect for those who have kept current, viewed with open eyes and relate accurate information. Evolving I guess you could say. I do appreciate the NCAA openness to exploring MLB's training of their umpires. Could there be any better source of information...realizing that some stuff applies some doesn't...but most is worthy of trial and consideration, along with the emphasis of allowing for "thinking" umpires. All the while aknowledgeing all ASA has done for umpireing (including me personally) locally, nationally and worldwide.

Of course, we are beating a dead horse.

You folks talk about having an open mind, yet you have nearly zero tolerence for ASA doing things differently if it conflicts with the NCAA methods.

The NCAA, like MLB, trains their umpires to a particular game and number of a crew. ASA doesn't have that luxury. As noted before, some of the mechanics need to be simplistic and not necessarily scenario specific. But please don't take that as a dummying down for not-as-smart umpires than those at the NCAA/MLB level.

Just because someone doesn't work that level, does not make them any less an umpire than those who do. Nor does it makes those who do any better than those who do not.

There are many umpires who are very good umpires, but they have issues that prevent them from working NCAA levels. They are called career and family. On the same topic, there are many umpires who get great assigments that are not necessarily deserved simply due to availability, while there are many deserving umpires that do not get these assignments simply because a slot is not available.

Nonetheless, just because the NCAA methods support something different, it doesn't mean it is better. It just means those in charge of instructing their umpires believe it fits their game.

For example, 3blx. For some calls, it works fine, though I believe some umpires get too far away. However, it is not the be all to end all positions and leaves an umpire not in good position to adjust.

Meanwhile, the ASA game often have plays at the plate where the runner comes directly into the plate and catcher. In this circumstance, the 3blx is the one place an umpire should not be since they cannot see through the catcher.

I just don't agree with the "this is where you need to be, end of story" mentality. I would hope that doesn't exist anywhere, but from how some umpires act on the field, it certainly seems that their mind is on the position, not the play.

Mike,

I agree with a lot of what you say. ASA needs to make their mechanics as simplistic as possible for the vast majority of umpires that call league ball every night, have no desire to move up the ladder but are very happy doing what they do. And I have a great deal of respect for these people. They are the backbone of umpiring in the country.

However, you never answered my question earlier. When is the last time you looked at an NCAA manual? The 3rd base line extended position is used for swipe tags. Not for every play at the plate. You keep saying this is the only position they want their umpires to use and that is not correct. Again, when was the last time you looked at a manual. It has changed drastically over the past few years.

I wasn't referring to NCAA or any other particular association.

Hey if it wasnt for beating dead horses, there would be little to talk about. :D

It is my opinion that ASA has switched from being the leader on a mechanic/mechanic change/rule change to the follower.

"Lets wait and see how that works _____________" then we'll try it.

I also consider that some mechanics are dumbed down to cater to a lower quality umpire than who is at other levels of ball. ... resulting in inferior mechanics for ASA umpires at every level.

This is why ASA no longer leads the way.

OK..My bad. I thought you did reference specific affiliations.




Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA
Of course, we are beating a dead horse.

You folks talk about having an open mind, yet you have nearly zero tolerence for ASA doing things differently if it conflicts with the NCAA methods.

The NCAA, like MLB, trains their umpires to a particular game and number of a crew. ASA doesn't have that luxury. As noted before, some of the mechanics need to be simplistic and not necessarily scenario specific. But please don't take that as a dummying down for not-as-smart umpires than those at the NCAA/MLB level.

Just because someone doesn't work that level, does not make them any less an umpire than those who do. Nor does it makes those who do any better than those who do not.

There are many umpires who are very good umpires, but they have issues that prevent them from working NCAA levels. They are called career and family. On the same topic, there are many umpires who get great assigments that are not necessarily deserved simply due to availability, while there are many deserving umpires that do not get these assignments simply because a slot is not available.

Nonetheless, just because the NCAA methods support something different, it doesn't mean it is better. It just means those in charge of instructing their umpires believe it fits their game.

For example, 3blx. For some calls, it works fine, though I believe some umpires get too far away. However, it is not the be all to end all positions and leaves an umpire not in good position to adjust.

Meanwhile, the ASA game often have plays at the plate where the runner comes directly into the plate and catcher. In this circumstance, the 3blx is the one place an umpire should not be since they cannot see through the catcher.

I just don't agree with the "this is where you need to be, end of story" mentality. I would hope that doesn't exist anywhere, but from how some umpires act on the field, it certainly seems that their mind is on the position, not the play.

I take back my previous statement joking about socalump being kidnapped and brainwashed by the NCAA......I am now serious, he has been!

Don't know if you caught it or not...I like the practice of discussing, discovering and exploring better ways to umpire particular levels. Regardless of affiliation. You probably couldn't notice as you have already stated your high school and ASA preference. My concern is when the NCAA is misrepresented.

If that is your definition of brainwashed :confused: ....so be it!!
I'm OK with it.

I was still being tongue in cheek....I still do some college ball. I use the mechanics based on the organization I am calling. There is good and bad in all. NCAA, the way it is tought by the assignor inthis area, is still extremely robotic. Haven't gone to the NCAA clinics in a while because of the waste of $$$ going so maybe they are backing off some, I hope so.

Are you getting the feeling that you aren't being heard???

Silence speaks volumes?

Oh, there is no silence here or any place else where someone may have figured out my comment. Actually, I'm still laughing. Maybe some day the light bulb will come on. :D