Interference Question

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by rwest

You should consider newbies as new born babes. They have to learn to crawl before they can walk. A little more spoon feeding at the beginning is appropriate. To your questions regarding a mentor, the answer is yes to all of them. A good mentor will adjust his approach as the umpire grows. At first, he should answer questions directly. Then as his understanding is strengthened, he should probably start asking questions that will get the umpire to think. Then he could direct the umpire to the appropriate rule.

My mentor answered my questions directly instead of telling me where in the book to look for the answers. My first year I asked a lot of questions. No so much my 2nd year and I didn't ask any my 3rd year. Learning to umpire is a process. I think we can show a little more patience to the newbies and give them more of a direct answer and explain the reasoning instead of just say read rule x.y.z. Then as they grow in understanding, we change our approach. Just like parenting! We answer questions directly when they are young and then as the get older we ask questions to stimulate their thinking.

As to your Chinese fish proverb! I'm assuming you mean "give a man a fish feed him for a day; teach a man to fish and feed him for a lifetime". Well, how are you going to teach him? Tell him to "Go read a book"? How about showing him and teaching him what bait to use for the fish he is after. What's the best time to fish and why. How to cast.

He is not a baby and I'm not going to treat him or anyone else like they are a baby. If that is what they want, I would suggest a nursery.

He was given the answers and references.

Whether you want to admit it or not, in today's world, NO ONE thinks it is important to actually learn this stuff. It is unbelieveable how many people take the instruction as if it were a suggestion, not direction.

Like it or not, if you want someone to excel, they have to want and work to learn, force feeding doesn't help. This is how you end up with "veteran" umpires ruling or being talked into ruling the hands as part of the bat; an IF is a dead ball; its one base from the infield, two from the outfield, etc. This often happens simply because that umpire never had to make such a decision and was never "given" the exact ruling.

Don't like chinese proverbs? How about Algernon Sydney?

[rwest]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

He is not a baby and I'm not going to treat him or anyone else like they are a baby. If that is what they want, I would suggest a nursery.

He was given the answers and references.

Whether you want to admit it or not, in today's world, NO ONE thinks it is important to actually learn this stuff. It is unbelieveable how many people take the instruction as if it were a suggestion, not direction.

Like it or not, if you want someone to excel, they have to want and work to learn, force feeding doesn't help. This is how you end up with "veteran" umpires ruling or being talked into ruling the hands as part of the bat; an IF is a dead ball; its one base from the infield, two from the outfield, etc. This often happens simply because that umpire never had to make such a decision and was never "given" the exact ruling.

Don't like chinese proverbs? How about Algernon Sydney?

Its not the force feeding that makes veteran umpires rule such things. Its being feed the wrong answers. I doubt very seriously if you forced fed anyone regarding those rules above, that they would get them wrong. You would give them the correct answers.

I like that proverb and have used it a great deal. I just think that at times the direct approach is best instead of "Go read a book". Whether you like it or not, different teaching styles exist because we all learn differently. One size does not fit all.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by rwest

Its not the force feeding that makes veteran umpires rule such things. Its being feed the wrong answers. I doubt very seriously if you forced fed anyone regarding those rules above, that they would get them wrong. You would give them the correct answers.

I can tell you I spend a load of time every year offering everything I can to any umpire or prospect who is willing to sit and listen. And it is unbelieveable how many couldn't come up with the correct ruling if their life depended on it. We talk about, we go through the rule with the book open and then offer examples. That is my idea of "force feeding". However, none of it makes a difference if the person isn't willing to actually get into the book and voluntarily absorb the information.

I have found that more than less will choose to accept the easy path and not follow up on their own.

I like that proverb and have used it a great deal. I just think that at times the direct approach is best instead of "Go read a book". Whether you like it or not, different teaching styles exist because we all learn differently. One size does not fit all.

No argument, but that was not the case here. The newb was given the answers and then told where to find them.

What happens when you make a ruling and there seems to be a viable question on the field that makes you think twice about it? Do you check the book after the game, or do you just assume you must have been right and there is no need to check?

I guarantee if it is the former, you will get this ruling right every time the rest of your career, even if you kicked it that one time on the field.

If the latter, you may feel solid, but if you kicked it this time, you are doomed to repeat that failure.

[Steve M]

Interesting that ther is no late/current reponse from our original poster - nsc_wa - if I remember correctly.
From folks I know, I can tell you Mike is not a friendly teacher - but he is a very good teacher. He is thorough.
From those who whine that he and others are too harsh, they have not hear me ask what do they rule book and manual say? My frequent suggestion is to RTFM - translation is - Read The F-ing Manual.
After one has does that - RTFM - I will gladly answer/address any question that remains.

[umpire12]

"No argument, but that was not the case here. The newb was given the answers and then told where to find them"

actually, no...he was given the wrong answer. he asked which section of rule 8 would satisy his interference question. he was told 'the interference section'. we all know there is no 'interference' section in rule 8. how frustrating it must be to be told by a verteran umpire that the answer could be found in the ' interference' section of rule 8 only to find there is no such section. also i , like nsc wa and others found the initial response to be more of an attempt to give his cronies a giggle more than to actually to help and support him. it was embarrassing to read it . yes, debasing is a good word for it. its an all too common occurance on this site

[Dakota]

No, I'm right.

No you're not, I'm right.

No, you're wrong, I'm right.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by umpire12

"No argument, but that was not the case here. The newb was given the answers and then told where to find them"

actually, no...he was given the wrong answer. he asked which section of rule 8 would satisy his interference question. he was told 'the interference section'. we all know there is no 'interference' section in rule 8. how frustrating it must be to be told by a verteran umpire that the answer could be found in the ' interference' section of rule 8 only to find there is no such section. also i , like nsc wa and others found the initial response to be more of an attempt to give his cronies a giggle more than to actually to help and support him. it was embarrassing to read it . yes, debasing is a good word for it. its an all too common occurance on this site

Maybe I was thinking of the 6 other test questions asked. But in that case, ncs_wa offered and answer and that was addresses. And as I pointed out, there is an interference that references rule 8. Yeah, it's not in rule 8, but the book is more than a rule number.

Mike's response was a teaching point. Maybe some believe the tests should just be published with the answers and assume the participants will actually take the time to look them up. I've been doing this too long to know that is not happening with the majority of the umpires, including veterans.

Personally, I think it is a damn shame that this umpire isn't or wasn't being given the time of day by his own association, assuming his account is accurate and there is no reason to believe it is not. I'll give him credit for trying to find the answers, but is this really the place it should be?

I remember when we used to have folks on McGriffs that tried to poach test results simply because some were too lazy to do the work. Is that the guy/gal you want as a partner in a game?

If nsc_wa keeps it up, there shouldn't be a question as to being a knowledgeable umpire, but there is a need to learn how to do it, not just get the right answers on a test.

[rwest]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

I'll give him credit for trying to find the answers, but is this really the place it should be?

Absolutely it should be! Without a doubt! I have been umpiring for 9 years now. I know there are those who have more experience then I. I just mentioned that to indicate I'm no rookie. However, 9 years ago I joined this site and I'm glad I did. I learned a lot on this site. I used it more heavily than I do now. If he can't come here to learn where should he go? Yes, his association should be teaching him, but this is a secondary learning tool! In some cases it is easier to come here and post a question than it is to call someone in the umpires association. You get more for your trouble. You can get multiple responses with just one question. There's great dialogue. Sure at times it digresses into a pissing match, unfortunately. But for the most part it is good debate.

One thing we veterans need to remember is how it was when we first started. Some veterans here can be a little too dismissive of the rookies in my opinion.

[MNBlue]

Originally Posted by Steve M

Interesting that ther is no late/current reponse from our original poster - nsc_wa - if I remember correctly.

Perhaps one of our members took the discussion with nsc_wa offline so he could ask questions without feeling embarrassed. Or maybe he took Sean's advice and found someone local to help.

Just a thought.

[Steven Tyler]

Originally Posted by Steve M

Interesting that ther is no late/current reponse from our original poster - nsc_wa - if I remember correctly.
From folks I know, I can tell you Mike is not a friendly teacher - but he is a very good teacher. He is thorough.
From those who whine that he and others are too harsh, they have not hear me ask what do they rule book and manual say? My frequent suggestion is to RTFM - translation is - Read The F-ing Manual.
After one has does that - RTFM - I will gladly answer/address any question that remains.

Mikey thinks he is teflon. Talk to him in the same manner he talks to others, and his defense mechanism meter goes off the charts. I've seen him, and others go off on a new poster for asking questions on the baseball forum. They then label such poster a troll. The baseball forum became a joke to me because bob jenkins allowed it to become one.

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by Steven Tyler

Mikey thinks he is teflon. Talk to him in the same manner he talks to others, and his defense mechanism meter goes off the charts. I've seen him, and others go off on a new poster for asking questions on the baseball forum. They then label such poster a troll. The baseball forum became a joke to me because bob jenkins allowed it to become one.

You and mbcrowder have had an ongoing, seemingly personal, dispute on the baseball board. Please keep it there.