running a clinic

[ASA/NYSSOBLUE]

Originally Posted by NCASAUmp

What's the general level of the umpires in this group? Are we all talking 30-year vets who just need the occasional brush-up, or are they predominantly rookies?

Gotta gear it towards your audience.

Rookies are MUCH easier to teach

[NCASAUmp]

Originally Posted by ASA/NYSSOBLUE

Rookies are MUCH easier to teach

Agreed. A lot of vets don't seem to be able to keep quiet during rules clinics. They always have to interject something. It's annoying as hell.

The rookies usually sit there nice 'n' quiet.

[Andy]

Newer/less experienced umpires - stick to the basics, Mechanics, signals, rule interpretations, uniform, looking and acting professional, game management, lineup card management.

Vets - philosophy of umpiring...the "why we do things the way we do", being aware of how you move on the field, being aware of what you look like on the field, how to deal with coaches and players, body language, little things that take you to the next level.

[SE Minnestoa Re]

Game management is a big one. More umps get in trouble for poor management than for poor calls.

[ASA/NYSSOBLUE]

I'll tell you a small problem that we have in our new officials clinic for high school ball - when we have more than a couple of people who work that OTHER game, the one with the small ball, that come to the clinic to be softball umps. The almost to have unlearn everything they know as baseball umps - different rules...different mechanics....and in some ways a different attitude....they never entirely adapt, and you still see them after a few years still doing baseball mechanics in softball games.

I would almost rather have people with clean, unfettered minds...

[LIUmp]

The general level of the group is mixed obviously. All of the people we will have there will have worked at least 1 year. But the "quality" of umpiring is a whole other story. We're not talking solid for the most part. More than half of our organization is a fair to weak umpire.

Do I split them up based on years of experience? On level of umpiring? On experience of game calling? On quality of prior year's performance? Then the topics can be geared more toward what will be most helpful for them all.

What topics? Any other ideas?

Thank you all again!

[Andy]

Are they "fair to weak" even though some have been umpiring for a long time?

I'm going to take some liberties here and read between the lines, so to speak.

If you have an established group of umpires and the majority are as you say, I take that to mean that you have a group that is mainly just there to pick up some part time work and is not really interested in getting better. Or, it could be that this group has just not had any real quality training in the past.

It sounds to me as if your best bet is to split them based on years of experience, since that is a concrete number that nobody can argue with.
If you use "level of umpiring" or "quality", those are very subjective and you could ruffle some feathers by how you place people in certain groups.

At this level, I would recommend sticking to very basic umpiring topics. Mechanics, signals, how to be and look like an umpire.

If I am way off base on my assessment, I apologize...just what I am picking up from your post.