- Feb 20, 2019
- 109
- 28
I like to believe every umpire calls every game without prejudice, bias or undue influence. However, I've been around the game far too long to be that naive.
Recently, I heard the opposing team's coach, who also happens to be the league president, quietly ask the home plate umpire to give his team a "generous" strike zone as his team took the field. The umpire complied.
I've seen numerous other calls go in favor of teams whose coaches have prior relationships with the umpires (tournament directors, league directors and/or simply coaches that have been around a while). I've also seen the reverse occur - coaches with a history of arguing or complaining get calls made against them.
Some of the above is simply human nature; you develop a relationship with a coach who is polite, respectful and has demonstrated a clear knowledge of the rules. It stands to reason, that coach is more likely to be listened to when a question is asked than a coach where no prior relationship exists.
My questions for umpires are these:
Have you ever intentionally overturned a call or given preferential treatment to a team based on your relationship with the coach or the coach's position as a league/tournament director? If so, how often?
Have you ever been threatened with, or feared, there would be repercussions if you did not give preferential treatment to a certain team or coach? i.e. If you make bad calls for a certain team, you will be assigned to fewer games.
Have you ever assumed a coach knew a rule better than you and, therefore, overturned your call based on that coach's stating or interpretation of the rule?
My question for coaches is:
Have you ever used your position and/or relationship with an umpire to elicit preferential treatment and/or a ruling that you knew was wrong?
Recently, I heard the opposing team's coach, who also happens to be the league president, quietly ask the home plate umpire to give his team a "generous" strike zone as his team took the field. The umpire complied.
I've seen numerous other calls go in favor of teams whose coaches have prior relationships with the umpires (tournament directors, league directors and/or simply coaches that have been around a while). I've also seen the reverse occur - coaches with a history of arguing or complaining get calls made against them.
Some of the above is simply human nature; you develop a relationship with a coach who is polite, respectful and has demonstrated a clear knowledge of the rules. It stands to reason, that coach is more likely to be listened to when a question is asked than a coach where no prior relationship exists.
My questions for umpires are these:
Have you ever intentionally overturned a call or given preferential treatment to a team based on your relationship with the coach or the coach's position as a league/tournament director? If so, how often?
Have you ever been threatened with, or feared, there would be repercussions if you did not give preferential treatment to a certain team or coach? i.e. If you make bad calls for a certain team, you will be assigned to fewer games.
Have you ever assumed a coach knew a rule better than you and, therefore, overturned your call based on that coach's stating or interpretation of the rule?
My question for coaches is:
Have you ever used your position and/or relationship with an umpire to elicit preferential treatment and/or a ruling that you knew was wrong?
