Yes another Ump gripe.... (look away if ya need to)

[ms244]

No problem with comprehension here. I fully understand what I have posted. I also know the rules that are in place, and the rules that MTR chooses to enforce. If you want to support that failed ideology that is your choice.

For what it's worth, I wasn't the first person who brought up NCAA in this thread. In fact MTR's response in this thread was to someone else, not me. I simply pointed out the problem of not calling IP throughout the years of TB to NCAA level. But whatever. Like MTR stated in his posts on this thread, there is an agenda. MTR's quote was "The umpires do what they are told". You don't need a rule book if you pick and choose what rules to enforce or if you are going to have the UIC or college coaches dictate what rules you can call, without the fear of losing your job.

 

[Rocketech1]

Ya,.......double WOW here too....

It's the JOB of the umpire to know the rules.
It's the JOB of the coach to coach the teams skills and try and get a win.

I would disagree with the bold. Coaches should also read and know the rules for which their team plays.

 

[Easton33]

I would disagree with the bold. Coaches should also read and know the rules for which their team plays.

I think he is referring to the primary focus of the coach. Of course coaches should know the rules, but it is not his responsibility to know the rules as well as the ump should. The more educated the coach in the rules the better the team will be.

And just for arguements sake, if the coach is supposed to know the rules as well as the ump, then what is the role of the ump? To evenly administer the rule set that both teams have agreed to play by? Or to administer the portions of the rule set the UIC or TD have determined relevant for the tournament? The umps job is to know all the rules and enforce them regardless of what team it benefits or who signs their check. The coach's job is to develop the players in all aspects of the game including the most common rule infractions. Saw two umps blow 2 infield fly rules this weekend. (Which I think is a common rule administered regularly) but the point is that is their job to know all the rules from the most to the rarely encountered.
I am ok with umps occasionally missing calls, they are not perfect, but to intentionally no call a blatant rule violation because they were told not to is pathetic. To the umps that do this and get invited back to the same venue the question stands, "are you getting paid to call or paid because you won't call?". Think about that one, eventually you will realize it is the latter, I which case now you know you are the prostitute of the industry.

 

[cuzmail]

MTR brings up and interesting point with his coaches comment.

IMO (heavy on the O), that the percentage of ignorant umpires is no different than the percentage of ignorant coaches. You just see a lot more coaches at a tournament than umpires because of a the way a tournament works.

Lets take the 4GG 14U Round Robin we are scheduled (and likely to end up being another canceled this season - weather ) this Sunday.
12 teams. I will assume 2 coaches per team.
4 fields. I will assume 2 umpires per field.

Yes, I know some teams have more than 2 coaches. Yes, I know there could be more than 2 umpires per field with fill ins or rotations for game breaks. BUT for the purposes of this example we will run with those numbers. Otherwise the number of coaches will go up proportionally more than the number of umpires further adding to my point.

That equals 8 umpires and 24 coaches. 3 times as many coaches than umpires on site. 3 times the opportunity to hear an uninformed individual question a rule. So umpires aren't exempted from ignorance they are just out numbered.

There is no doubt MTR hears more dumb questions from coaches than umpires at tournaments. There are simply more coaches around tournaments.

Ignorance of the law (or rules in this case) is no excuse regardless if you are a coach or an umpire.

 

[MTR]

Actually, MTR, it appears that while you are a consistent proponent of adhering to the rulebook, you seem to condone succumbing to the idiosyncratic wishes of all powerfull tourney directors if that's what it takes to cash a paycheck.

Yes, I've been teaching umpires for a couple decades. And I've been taught by some of the best in the country. And I like using the rule book. It gives everyone an idea of what to expect on the field. When umpires are directed by folks running a tournament to allow something or not call something, that is their privilege. And that, too, is covered in most rule books, from MLB down to allow for individual groups, tournaments, conferences to amend/adjust the rules as they see fit. In the ASA book, it is Rule 12. Even for championship play, the local commissioner may use or omit whatever rules they choose.

Are you aware there are hundreds of leagues/conferences/local associations that discard part of the rules involving bats and ball? I'm sure someone reading this is thinking that is a lawsuit waiting to happen or that in negates the insurance. I have no doubt somewhere along the way a lawsuit will come down, but Bollinger openly notes, at least to the umpires, that while they are not fans of not using rules involving safety, the insurance is still intact.

IMO, if umpires banded together and refused to comply with the written or unwritten mandates to not enforce certain aspects of the existing rule sets, the IP rule would get addressed definitively once and for all.

You cannot even get umpires to agree with what and how rules should be applied or where they need to be to make the call, I doubt they are going to "band together" to change the rule. Personally, I believe many umpires would just as well see the IP go away. However, and again a judgment call, as has been noted before, umpires refusing to call OBS in HS and other levels that demanded a base award on all OBS rulings did eventually get NFHS to back off of it, just like they did the automatic ruling on missed bases or bases left too soon. However, I believe that was more NFHS moving toward other rule sets than the umpire's refusal to make the calls.

I guarantee that if the umpires ever called every rule exactly as it is written, the tone around here would change drastically especially when the pitchers didn't get any warm-up pitches between innings. Like some laws with which we all have to deal on a daily bases, many are more for situational and/or game control than to actually have an effect on the game or how it is played.

 

[Umpire]

Ya,.......double WOW here too....

It's the JOB of the umpire to know the rules.
It's the JOB of the coach to coach the teams skills and try and get a win.

In this compare & contrast,...."Umpire",..... which do you see as NEEDING to know the rules better?

So yes - there are some coaches who might not know the rules better (by the book) BUT did ya ever think that a coach is playing ignorant to the rules to be able to sway the uneducated condition of most umpires!?!?!? Crud, with as many ignorant-to-rules umpires as there are, even mild tempered me might throw a diversionary tactic to an ump just to see how distracted I can get him from the rules to get a leg-up for my team...... geesh "Umpire" wake up and smell the coffee.....

(I want to clarify : I have these expectations for the umpires of TB-A level play : rec ball I would be much less expecting : in TB-A there is so much more at stake)

It is clear from your commentary that you believe that the lesson to teach the players is to try to get one by if you can. Now I know why so many kids are turning out so bad. It is improper, unethical and unsportsmanlike to "play ignorant to the rules to be able to sway the uneducated condition of most umpires." You are supposed to be teaching players to play by the RULES, which clearly so many coaches don't know in the first place. If you think it is proper to distract an umpire and try to get a leg-up on him, then you ought to take a good hard look in the mirror.

I say these comments not as an umpire, but as an adult who sees the worst of society every time I go to my full time job.

If I distributed to coaches the same test I distribute to umpires, I would just love to compare the results.

I guess you also don't think that a "skill" to winning is knowing what the rules are.

 

[Umpire]

If a man of your experience is saying that all travel team coaches don't know the rules because you have stories about dozens of coaches... Haven't you umped thousands of games? With Thousands of coaches? Are you going to do a wide brush stroke over all coaches because of a small percentage of coaches. Thats no better then the coaches who have had a couple of bad umps talking crap about all umps.

I have sat down and read the rules, I could give you stories about umps who don't know the rules too. Where do you think coaches get the wild ideas that the hands are part of the bat, or the LBR means you can't round a bag on a walk, or that if a pitcher hits X amount of players the pitcher must be removed by rule, or the plate is in foul ground.... Many of these fallacies are because the coach believed an ump who called it against him/her.

Please keep in mind that despite calling thousands of games over a large geographical area, I have seen many of the same coaches dozens, and in some cases well over a 100, times. I also am not talking about every mother or father who got a matching shirt that said "coach" on it. I'm talking about the coaches I actually address. The percentage of coaches who are not fluent in the rules is not small. Coaches never have to take rules tests, so they are never forced to read the book the way an umpire is.

In my area, high school coaches get to rate umpires and give commentary. Year after year the umpires who score the worst and have the most comments are the best umpires. Then I read the commentary from the coach who gave them a low score and see that the coach is complaining that an umpire enforced a rule improperly and it "cost the team the game." The only problem is, the rule was enforced correctly and at the appropriate time. So umpire ratings suffer because coaches don't know the rules. I have said for years that if you want to comment on an umpire's rules, mechanics or game management, you ought to take a test first.

 

[ms244]

I say these comments not as an umpire, but as an adult who sees the worst of society every time I go to my full time job.

If you took that RB was trying to "get one over" on an umpire then your comment above clearly states your flawed thinking. Most people look for the good in people. A glass half full vs. a glass half empty mentality. You clearly think that umpires are better than coaches.

I am seeing a pattern with the two umpires that are debating this issue on this thread.

 

[RubberBiscuit]

I think he is referring to the primary focus of the coach. Of course coaches should know the rules, but it is not his responsibility to know the rules as well as the ump should. The more educated the coach in the rules the better the team will be.

"Right on" E33.

I am speaking not to the ONLY things these roles should know INTRINSICALLY but the primary thing.

 

[RubberBiscuit]

IMO (heavy on the O), that the percentage of ignorant umpires is no different than the percentage of ignorant coaches. You just see a lot more coaches at a tournament than umpires because of a the way a tournament works.

I think yer right cuz BUT I again argue "who has the PRIMARY ROLE of knowing and administering the rules"????