Just whose game is it, anyway?

[IRISHMAFIA]

Who do you think "owns" the game?

[DeputyUICHousto]

the players! For without them there wouldn't much of a game.

[Welpe]

Speaking Texas HS...the coaches, they own everything here...

[tcannizzo]

Broad question.
Of course, the teams own the game.
Umpires are stewards of the game and therefore own responsibility for law and order, hence a certain amount of control and ownership.

But I think there is more behind your primary question.

[Skahtboi]

No one "owns" the game.

It is an event that depends on the participation of many, from organizers to grounds crews to players to officials to fans.

You darn capitalists and the belief that someone must own everything.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by Skahtboi

No one "owns" the game.

It is an event that depends on the participation of many, from organizers to grounds crews to players to officials to fans.

You darn capitalists and the belief that someone must own everything.

Then tell me why I constantly hear umpires make claims that this or that will not happen, "In my game" or "on my field".

I've heard coaches make the same claim and, IMO, it doesn't belong to them, either.

I agree, the "game" of softball is not owned........however, IMO "the game" on the field belongs to the players.

Umpires are merely observers with decision-making authority.

[CecilOne]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Then tell me why I constantly hear umpires make claims that this or that will not happen, "In my game" or "on my field".

If that possesive term means "the game to which I have been assigned", then we just need a new shorthand, because even the most anal among us would not expect "the game to which I have been assigned" repeated each time.

If "my" means different approach, different interpretations, judgements inconsistent with others, different mechanics, etc. than obviously that is anathema.
I guess that is the point of the OP.

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Umpires are merely observers with decision-making authority.

As I often tell players who think my position takes precedence or catchers that think protecting me is more important than proper play.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Then tell me why I constantly hear umpires make claims that this or that will not happen, "In my game" or "on my field".

I've heard coaches make the same claim and, IMO, it doesn't belong to them, either.

I agree, the "game" of softball is not owned........however, IMO "the game" on the field belongs to the players.

Umpires are merely observers with decision-making authority.

Agree 100%. Would add that the field/game does not belong to the TD or the 6 board members watching the game (rooting for opposing teams) either. It's about the players.

[Rita C]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Who do you think "owns" the game?

The players own the game and it is my job to make sure it stays that way.

Rita

[Dutch Alex]

Then why, when it's not your game, can you be summed to defend yourself in court about things that happened in what someone else is calling your game?

I do agree that the game isn't mine, nor the coaches. However I have difficult feelings about the game solo belonging to the players...
To me the sport/game belongs to everyone who loves it.

The field however, during a game I work, is mine! The rules are set and it's my job to keep the game going within the rules. As soon as it's "ballgame" the field ain't mine anymore. During a rain-delay, the groundcrew ownes the field. They will let me know when I may start to play again...

[Skahtboi]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Umpires are merely observers with decision-making authority.

Excellent summation.

[Tru_in_Blu]

Does heart surgeon own a patient after surgery?

Does a chef own the dinner s/he's preparing [assuming s/he doesn't own the restaurant]?

Does a State Trooper or EMT own an accident site?

Does a husband own a wife, or vice versa [at least in most parts of the civilized world]?

The answer is technically "no", but there is an assumption and acceptance of responsibility in such relationships.

I refer to "my" dentist, doctor, church, wife, etc. in the sense that I view these particular relationships with various other people and/or organizations as compatible and acceptable by both parties.

"My" regional, local, ASA organization is not owned by me, but I am a part of it. I was trying to think if I ever referred to any games that I officiated as "my game(s)", and I don't think I did. I might check "my schedule" for the games I have assigned, and yes, I own that schedule because it's likely uniquely mine.

I have described games I'm working at the time to the players as my simply being a "reporter". And, since I liked it, will add "with decision-making authority".

[HugoTafurst]

It's al semantics
and I'm anti-semantic

[CecilOne]

Originally Posted by Tru_in_Blu

Does heart surgeon own a patient after surgery?

Does a chef own the dinner s/he's preparing [assuming s/he doesn't own the restaurant]?

Does a State Trooper or EMT own an accident site?

Does a husband own a wife, or vice versa [at least in most parts of the civilized world]?

The answer is technically "no", but there is an assumption and acceptance of responsibility in such relationships.

I refer to "my" dentist, doctor, church, wife, etc. in the sense that I view these particular relationships with various other people and/or organizations as compatible and acceptable by both parties.

"My" regional, local, ASA organization is not owned by me, but I am a part of it. I was trying to think if I ever referred to any games that I officiated as "my game(s)", and I don't think I did. I might check "my schedule" for the games I have assigned, and yes, I own that schedule because it's likely uniquely mine.

I have described games I'm working at the time to the players as my simply being a "reporter". And, since I liked it, will add "with decision-making authority".

Again, most of these express "the someone/something you or I are using", like "my game" can mean "the game I have been assigned".
Obviously, the OP was not about those or about "the game I am umpiring"; but making a point about those who insist on doing it differently than the rest of us.

And as to the other question, the only reason anyone other than players are there is because the players are there. If there were no players, there would be no officials, no coaches, no admins, no concessions, etc.

[NSABill]

It is hard for me to explain.

I was taught that no one owns the game. We may all partake or enjoy in our own manner. The "game" in and of itself should be respected by those partakers in a sportsmanlike manner. There is a right way & a wrong way to do things. I think that is why I umpire. I just try to be a caretaker in the proper manner with the proper attitude.
People that try to own the game or twist it to their own interpretation to suite themselves just gets my goat.
Even the greats as Babe Ruth, Bob Feller, Nolan Ryan etc, are only allowed to enjoy partaking for a short time.
No one owns the game.
It may own some of us.
Just my .02.