What makes the perfect umpire?

[EdLovrich]

Umpires, we hope they are perfect in their first game and get better every day afterwards. They strive for the very same thing. But what makes the perfect umpire? Some would say it is about calling the rules as written, others want umpires to exercise judgment and discretion, especially at the younger ages or in rec ball.

Some think exceptional play should be rewarded, such as when a pitcher is hitting her spots consistently and just misses the outside corner. Heck yeah, ring that up! Others might think that an umpire should call nose to toes and dugout to dugout if young pitchers are having trouble finding the zone at all, who wants to see 2 inning take 75 minutes and be a walk-fest?

Recently in these forums, some have said umpires think they are mind readers, guessing at what a player is thinking when they throw a ball. But, aren't umpires required to rule on intent?

Umpiring is both a science and an art, the science part is the written rule, the art is the spirit and history of those same rules, why does a rule exist? How and why has it changed over the years? What were the rules committees of the various sanctioning bodies trying to accomplish? The best umpires know the answers to these questions and are able to weave that into each and every decision they make.

Criticizing umpires is part of the game. After all, they are human. They do make mistakes. Criticism is helpful to an umpire, it makes him or her look back over a game and realize where they could have been better. But, how and when do you give that criticism? One thing to remember is this, most umpires have been a player and/or coach in their lifetime. When was the last time you heard an umpire question the decision or performance of a player or a coach during a game, if at all? How many players or coaches or parents have been an umpire? When was the last time you heard a member of any of these groups criticize an umpire?

I would love to hear feelings about what you think makes a 'perfect' umpire. Is it, “Call the rules as written, all the time every time?” Or is it, “ Have a feeling for the game and exercise discretion, we trust you enough to do that?”

Put some thought into it, but remember, you can't have it both ways.

 

[_MIA_]

Bad hearing.

 

[quincy]

Consistent.

Do not care what they call, just be consistent.

 

[KrisHur]

Agree with Quincy - consistency. Sometimes it appears that strike zones seem to relax for bad pitchers while good pitchers have a more stringent zone.

p.s. now that DD is older it's not as much an issue but any ump who asks a coach to stifle screaming, bench banging, fence rattling, rude chanting teams. When the coach has no class, it is nice to see an ump try to enforce sportsmanship.

 

[Tango]

Consistent. I like someone who takes control of the game but it isn't about him or her. I like an umpire that will tell you I may have missed it but that's what I saw. Then not put up with any bull. Was a head football coach for 17 years, head baseball along time ago, and now coached softball at many levels, still the same deal. I like to know where the lines are before we start. In softball the female umpires that we have had are awesome.

 

[Gambler Bob]

I want the umpire to agree with everything I want. I also want the umpire to changes his mind when I tell him that my batter was safe at first base when he called her out. I also want a bigger strike zone when my pitcher is on the mound than the opponents pitcher.

 

[Bullseye]

Umpires, we hope they are perfect in their first game and get better every day afterwards. They strive for the very same thing. But what makes the perfect umpire? Some would say it is about calling the rules as written, others want umpires to exercise judgment and discretion, especially at the younger ages or in rec ball.

Some think exceptional play should be rewarded, such as when a pitcher is hitting her spots consistently and just misses the outside corner. Heck yeah, ring that up! Others might think that an umpire should call nose to toes and dugout to dugout if young pitchers are having trouble finding the zone at all, who wants to see 2 inning take 75 minutes and be a walk-fest?

Recently in these forums, some have said umpires think they are mind readers, guessing at what a player is thinking when they throw a ball. But, aren't umpires required to rule on intent?

Umpiring is both a science and an art, the science part is the written rule, the art is the spirit and history of those same rules, why does a rule exist? How and why has it changed over the years? What were the rules committees of the various sanctioning bodies trying to accomplish? The best umpires know the answers to these questions and are able to weave that into each and every decision they make.

Criticizing umpires is part of the game. After all, they are human. They do make mistakes. Criticism is helpful to an umpire, it makes him or her look back over a game and realize where they could have been better. But, how and when do you give that criticism? One thing to remember is this, most umpires have been a player and/or coach in their lifetime. When was the last time you heard an umpire question the decision or performance of a player or a coach during a game, if at all? How many players or coaches or parents have been an umpire? When was the last time you heard a member of any of these groups criticize an umpire?

I would love to hear feelings about what you think makes a 'perfect' umpire. Is it, “Call the rules as written, all the time every time?” Or is it, “ Have a feeling for the game and exercise discretion, we trust you enough to do that?”

Put some thought into it, but remember, you can't have it both ways.

Umpires do not have consistancy with eachother.
Your post neglects that.
Thats the downfall of umpires.

 

[Traps71]

Umpires do not have consistancy with eachother.

Isn’t this partly what makes the game interesting (and, yes, at times, frustrating)?

Each plate umpire is going to call the game a bit differently. Part of the challenge for pitchers, catchers, and batters is to understand as quickly as possible how the umpire is calling the game and adjust. Higher level players have the ability to adjust and will.

We saw two different types of umpires this weekend in our first double headers of the season. One with a very tight zone, would not give the call at the knees or much on the corners. He called the game consistently. It was a tough day for strike percentages, but the pitchers mostly adjusted. This is 2nd year 14U.

The other umpire, a female, had a more liberal zone and was generally consistent. She was giving the high strike and even the borderline high strike, which has been rare in my travels. A little more liberal on the corners than the previous umpire. Also did not give much down. Again, have to be able to adjust.

 

[ANNASDAD]

I love interacting with umpires, always have. I've only ever had an issue with one particular ump who called TONS of our HS games, this guy was 6'8" tall and had a terrible time getting into position! If I had a dollar for every strike he called above Anna's head.....I'd probably have $70 or $80. He was a nice guy, just not a very good ump!

Just once at the coaches meeting at home plate, I'd love to hear the plate ump say "look guys, I'm a pitchers ump, I give a ball + off the plate, you better tell your girls to swing the bat!"

Take this with a grain of salt (being a pitcher's dad), the thing I hate probably more than anything is a ump that makes a girl throw the ball through a pie plate straight down the middle, it's dangerous for both pitchers, and a pretty good clue the ump doesn't have a clue!

 

[Bullseye]

Isn’t this partly what makes the game interesting (and, yes, at times, frustrating)?

Each plate umpire is going to call the game a bit differently. Part of the challenge for pitchers, catchers, and batters is to understand as quickly as possible how the umpire is calling the game and adjust. Higher level players have the ability to adjust and will.

We saw two different types of umpires this weekend in our first double headers of the season. One with a very tight zone, would not give the call at the knees or much on the corners. He called the game consistently. It was a tough day for strike percentages, but the pitchers mostly adjusted. This is 2nd year 14U.

The other umpire, a female, had a more liberal zone and was generally consistent. She was giving the high strike and even the borderline high strike, which has been rare in my travels. A little more liberal on the corners than the previous umpire. Also did not give much down. Again, have to be able to adjust.

My point is that umpires are not perfect and often want to sight the rules in their own way which differs from game to gamr. There in lies the problem. There is no such thing as a perfect umpire and that is partially why.