Rules Interpretation

[NCASAUmp]

Originally Posted by RKBUmp

Point out that they need to actually wait to be awarded time before they walk onto the field. Cant tell you how many times I have had a coach call time and then just start heading out with action still going on, especially on a walk.

I usually include that in the plate conference. "If you have a question about a call, ask for time, WAIT for time to be called, then go to the umpire who made the call. We'll be happy to talk with you about it. (emphasis on being receptive)"

[Skahtboi]

Originally Posted by NCASAUmp

I usually include that in the plate conference. "If you have a question about a call, ask for time, WAIT for time to be called, then go to the umpire who made the call. We'll be happy to talk with you about it. (emphasis on being receptive)"

Seriously? I have always believed that the plate conference is simply for line-ups (reviewing/making any changes/accepting), covering any applicable ground rules, and establishing home team (if necessary.) I do not include any other information (except in HS where I have to do the "equipped according to the rulebook" thing and establish the site admin.) No rules clinics, no telling them things that they should already know.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by Skahtboi

Seriously? I have always believed that the plate conference is simply for line-ups (reviewing/making any changes/accepting), covering any applicable ground rules, and establishing home team (if necessary.) I do not include any other information (except in HS where I have to do the "equipped according to the rulebook" thing and establish the site admin.) No rules clinics, no telling them things that they should already know.

Depends... most tourneys around here have teams from all over - we are asked, during the first two games of the day (which covers all the teams' first games) to add the "how to approach us" piece and often a few other tidbits that need to be said once during the day but not all day long. We've learned from experience not to assume that the umpires from Podunk, Nowhere have any idea how to officiate a game, so their coaches have not learned either.

And at league ball, we generally do this on the first day as well. For games other than the first ones, my PC is very much like you describe.

[NCASAUmp]

Originally Posted by Skahtboi

Seriously? I have always believed that the plate conference is simply for line-ups (reviewing/making any changes/accepting), covering any applicable ground rules, and establishing home team (if necessary.) I do not include any other information (except in HS where I have to do the "equipped according to the rulebook" thing and establish the site admin.) No rules clinics, no telling them things that they should already know.

It only adds 10 seconds to the conference. Most SP coaches have zero clue about how to ask us questions.

Furthermore, it also lets the coaches know that as an umpire, I'm approachable, and that I don't view myself as above being questioned. It helps to defuse a situation before it even happens.

[shipwreck]

Some on this board think the "how to approach the umpires" shouldn't be brought up during the plate meeting. I disagree. Most umpires agree that preventative umpiring can save a lot of headaches during a game. I consider this 10 second addition at the plate meeting, preventative umpiring, and believe it could come in handy for some coaches and umpires. Dave

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by NCASAUmp

It only adds 10 seconds to the conference. Most SP coaches have zero clue about how to ask us questions.

Furthermore, it also lets the coaches know that as an umpire, I'm approachable, and that I don't view myself as above being questioned. It helps to defuse a situation before it even happens.

I'll jump on here. Introduction, check line-up cards, recheck line-up cards w/coach, ground rules SPECIAL tournament rules, request for confirmation/questions concerning what was just covered, coin flip, play ball.

Once you deviate where do you stop? If you start covering this and that and miss a particular issue or part, now you may have just added to the confusion. Not only that, but as noted, you have already predetermined how situations should be handled. Well, by this point you have noticed, not all situations play out in the same manner. This can easily create a "not one more word" situation.

You talk about "defusing" a situation when there is no situation to defuse. Much like when you have umpires who spend 10-20 seconds WARNING teams about their pet peeve du jour whether profanity, collisions, getting out of the way if ODB, complaining about balls/strikes, throwing a bat, conferences, smack talk, whatever.

And when I talk to these umpires, they give me the same spiel, it's preventive umpiring. Well, no it is not, it is antagonizing and opening up a can of worms that need not be open the entire game, but you have already done so.

[NCASAUmp]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

I'll jump on here. Introduction, check line-up cards, recheck line-up cards w/coach, ground rules SPECIAL tournament rules, request for confirmation/questions concerning what was just covered, coin flip, play ball.

Once you deviate where do you stop? If you start covering this and that and miss a particular issue or part, now you may have just added to the confusion. Not only that, but as noted, you have already predetermined how situations should be handled. Well, by this point you have noticed, not all situations play out in the same manner. This can easily create a "not one more word" situation.

You talk about "defusing" a situation when there is no situation to defuse. Much like when you have umpires who spend 10-20 seconds WARNING teams about their pet peeve du jour whether profanity, collisions, getting out of the way if ODB, complaining about balls/strikes, throwing a bat, conferences, smack talk, whatever.

And when I talk to these umpires, they give me the same spiel, it's preventive umpiring. Well, no it is not, it is antagonizing and opening up a can of worms that need not be open the entire game, but you have already done so.

You know, I just don't see how telling a coach that s/he can come ask you a question is antagonizing them, especially in the polite and upbeat tone in which I deliver the message.

The Umpire Manual does give an excellent outline, but that's exactly what it is: an outline. It's a framework that leaves the umpire to fill in as s/he sees fit, and if I have green coaches, I see nothing wrong with informing them of how to approach us.

Many of the coaches in the local leagues are very green. They come out of the dugout and are halfway to me before asking for time, and before the runners are on their bases with the ball in the circle. They have no clue that they're putting themselves at risk of complicating the game for everyone.

I don't see this as a deviation. I see this as filling in part of the outline, not script, that ASA gave us.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

I'll jump on here. Introduction, check line-up cards, recheck line-up cards w/coach, ground rules SPECIAL tournament rules, request for confirmation/questions concerning what was just covered, coin flip, play ball.

Once you deviate where do you stop? If you start covering this and that and miss a particular issue or part, now you may have just added to the confusion. Not only that, but as noted, you have already predetermined how situations should be handled. Well, by this point you have noticed, not all situations play out in the same manner. This can easily create a "not one more word" situation.

You talk about "defusing" a situation when there is no situation to defuse. Much like when you have umpires who spend 10-20 seconds WARNING teams about their pet peeve du jour whether profanity, collisions, getting out of the way if ODB, complaining about balls/strikes, throwing a bat, conferences, smack talk, whatever.

And when I talk to these umpires, they give me the same spiel, it's preventive umpiring. Well, no it is not, it is antagonizing and opening up a can of worms that need not be open the entire game, but you have already done so.

You sound like we're talking about having discussions on various rules... if that's what you thought I meant, I apologize. What I'm saying is adding a simple, "If you want to discuss a play, ask for time, wait for us to call time, and then approach the umpire that made the call. If that umpire feels we need to get together, we'll do so." That's not opening any doors or initiating any what-ifs. It's clear and concise, and A) makes us more approachable and less antagonistic and B) hopefully heads off the coach walking onto the field during live play and/or going to PU to ask for help on BU's call or vice versa. It also doesn't invite further conversation - we say that and move right into whatever's next.

[NCASAUmp]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

You sound like we're talking about having discussions on various rules... if that's what you thought I meant, I apologize. What I'm saying is adding a simple, "If you want to discuss a play, ask for time, wait for us to call time, and then approach the umpire that made the call. If that umpire feels we need to get together, we'll do so." That's not opening any doors or initiating any what-ifs. It's clear and concise, and A) makes us more approachable and less antagonistic and B) hopefully heads off the coach walking onto the field during live play and/or going to PU to ask for help on BU's call or vice versa. It also doesn't invite further conversation - we say that and move right into whatever's next.

...followed with "let's have a great game with good sportsmanship. Shake hands, good luck. Home team, please take the field."

It's a "my door is always open" statement, nothing more. Keeps our demeanor positive out there, as we have enough conflict waiting for us as it is.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

You sound like we're talking about having discussions on various rules... if that's what you thought I meant, I apologize. What I'm saying is adding a simple, "If you want to discuss a play, ask for time, wait for us to call time, and then approach the umpire that made the call. If that umpire feels we need to get together, we'll do so." That's not opening any doors or initiating any what-ifs. It's clear and concise, and A) makes us more approachable and less antagonistic and B) hopefully heads off the coach walking onto the field during live play and/or going to PU to ask for help on BU's call or vice versa. It also doesn't invite further conversation - we say that and move right into whatever's next.

I was talking about drawing a line as to how far some umpires may go. Not stating that this is the case here. Besides, a coach is going to come out and discuss issues with umpires anyway, it is their job. Wouldn't you think instructing someone and offering them permission of how to do their job could be taken as a bit demeaning. If I'm the coach and you gave me that little talk, probable reaction would be "no ****".

OTOH, I've seen umpires tell coaches and players they didn't want to talk to anyone but the HC and that is just as much a load of crap. The only time I would consider limiting discussion to the HC is if there were multiple issue or individuals questioning a play and that decision would made at that time, not beforehand.

Look, I just don't believe there is any value to extraneous instruction and many umpires don't stop at just reminding the coach how to approach an umpire.

[NCASAUmp]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

I was talking about drawing a line as to how far some umpires may go. Not stating that this is the case here. Besides, a coach is going to come out and discuss issues with umpires anyway, it is their job. Wouldn't you think instructing someone and offering them permission of how to do their job could be taken as a bit demeaning. If I'm the coach and you gave me that little talk, probable reaction would be "no ****".

OTOH, I've seen umpires tell coaches and players they didn't want to talk to anyone but the HC and that is just as much a load of crap. The only time I would consider limiting discussion to the HC is if there were multiple issue or individuals questioning a play and that decision would made at that time, not beforehand.

Look, I just don't believe there is any value to extraneous instruction and many umpires don't stop at just reminding the coach how to approach an umpire.

A lot of this is going to be situational. If we're talking D1 NCAA, I can't imagine ever needing to remind a coach of this.

If we're talking an instructional league with parents volunteering as coaches, then yes, I would say it's needed. Badly needed.

[EsqUmp]

Originally Posted by umpire12

much agreed..the plate conference is not the place to give the coach any lessons in proper protocol or open invitations to disrupt the game with inane questions. if he has a legitimate inquirery thats fine but its much prefered to keep the coaches in the dugout where they belong

I agree 100%. I've sent more umpires home from national tournaments because they couldn't control coaches and manage the game properly than for any other reason. Umpire all games consistently. If you're going to say something at the plate conference in the first game of a tournament or season, you better say it on the last game. How do you know which coach is going to be present? How do I know what my partners have said in previous games.

Keep the coaches in the dugout. That is where they belong unless they are making a change, taking a conference or coaching a base. Why open the door and invite them out of the dugout? Why is there a need to say anything? That doesn't mean you can't talk to them when the time is right if it is appropriate. BUT DON'T PLANT THE SEED!

Umpires have a job to do. Game management is a huge part of that job and it is what separates average umpires from great umpires. Keeping the coaches in the dugout and keeping them quiet goes a long way to making sure the game runs smoothly.

The problem is when these milk toast umpires want to appease everyone by trying to be their friend. They sell their fellow umpires out. Now I have to deal with a coach saying, "Well the last umpire said I could come out." That is as obnoxious as "Well the last umpire let us play with [fill in the blank: jewelry, no chin straps, etc.]. Now I have to deal with a coach who thinks I'm abrasive because I just want to continue the game but the last umpire invited him to have a nice chat.

[LIUmp]

Originally Posted by EsqUmp

Keep the coaches in the dugout. That is where they belong unless they are making a change, taking a conference or coaching a base. Why open the door and invite them out of the dugout? Why is there a need to say anything? That doesn't mean you can't talk to them when the time is right if it is appropriate. BUT DON'T PLANT THE SEED!

Umpires have a job to do. Game management is a huge part of that job and it is what separates average umpires from great umpires. Keeping the coaches in the dugout and keeping them quiet goes a long way to making sure the game runs smoothly.

The problem is when these milk toast umpires want to appease everyone by trying to be their friend. They sell their fellow umpires out. Now I have to deal with a coach saying, "Well the last umpire said I could come out." That is as obnoxious as "Well the last umpire let us play with [fill in the blank: jewelry, no chin straps, etc.]. Now I have to deal with a coach who thinks I'm abrasive because I just want to continue the game but the last umpire invited him to have a nice chat.

THIS!!!!! This is the reason why I don't say anything about "if you have a question...come out and talk." It's not part of my pregame, and never will be.

By the way, the meeting went very well....I talked about how the lineup works, pitching rules, the lookback rule..... they were most concerned with those things plus interference/obstruction. I also gave them an email address to send rules questions to if there were any that came up after the meeting that they were unsure of.

Last clarification - though I was just named UIC for USSSA, I do still work PONY and ASA and sit on the board of my local ASA association. If anyone knows how I can change my username to more closely reflect that I wear several hats, please let me know.

[AtlUmpSteve]

Originally Posted by LIBlueASA

Last clarification - though I was just named UIC for USSSA, I do still work PONY and ASA and sit on the board of my local ASA association. If anyone knows how I can change my username to more closely reflect that I wear several hats, please let me know.

How about LIBlue/Red/Etc