Register or Sign In to remove these ads

HokieUmp

Moderators
  • Content count

    686
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    11

HokieUmp last won the day on December 3 2016

HokieUmp had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

268 Good

About HokieUmp

  • Birthday July 20

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Williamsburg, Va.

More information about you

  • Your Association Name
    EOA, PBUA, WYBL
  • Occupation
    Computer-type guy
  • Types/Levels of Baseball called
    Many
  • How did you hear about Umpire-Empire?
    Other (explain below)

Recent Profile Visitors

6,321 profile views
  1. And that's where the .... reviling? revile-ation? revile-arama? .... okay, the point at which I revile a coach. (English is hard.) They don't listen - yes, that's a blanket statement, one I expect Rich to address in 5... 4... 3.... - but I really don't mean they never listen. But in the specific kind of circumstances to which we refer in some of these posts, they don't, and aren't, listening. You've made the call; they've chirped about it and/or come out; you've explained it; they've then told you you're wrong, or full of [redacted], or whatever. What they tend NOT to do - again, in these situations - is understand knowing the rules is "not their job," and let us do our jobs. Accept that we're right (with the exception VolUmp has mentioned), or at least accept that the call we've made, barring a protest procedure that allows to protest on the spot, is the call that's going to stand, and bloody well move on. Thing is, for the philosophy you mention: "coaches coach, umpires ump" - I don't buy in 100%. Coaches DO coach, but coaching isn't just looking good in baseball pants and spitting seeds, it's teaching. Not just the skill sets, but the rules of the game in which those skills are used. Otherwise, you get generations of players that don't know jack about the rules of the game in which they play, and crap that like propagates. So that's why I might "revile" coaches; they're generally given rulebooks at the state of the season, too - maybe crack it open once in a while. Teach the game.
  2. So, on the Southside of the James River in Virginia: $75 JV; $85 V. No solo games.
  3. Yep. And we should. To get around the moral dilemma you present, it's simple: you ALSO revile the roughly 65 dudes in your group who don't seem to know it, either.
  4. I gotta run with a response similar to @MadMax. You HAVE to contact the TD and report this team. Personally I don't know that it does much good - since most, if not all, TDs are in it for the team fees, there won't be much done. But I'm a cynic. The other thing I would also suggest: light that TD up. Why? More than likely, he's the one that gave you up to the team in the first place. I mean, maybe you're well known enough that he didn't. But if you even suspect he's the source, blast him early and often. Remind him there are plenty of unreasonable people in this world who take relatively meaningless events FAR too seriously.
  5. The context is "this person just did something really dumb, and needs a course correction." And yes, it's automatic. (And yes, the first one was certainly outside. But at that age, you're getting what you get. "They give you that metal thing for a reason, son.")
  6. Happening at home - I'm blocked at work. It happens to me when I move around - not this login so far, but nearly every time I changed a page. Kept claiming that suspicious activity was happening from my IP. Might be, but not from me.
  7. And Jesus said "Dude, my Achilles is REALLY hurting."
  8. I don't condone those actions, unless it's pro-rasslin. Having said that: runner #2 gets blown up worse than the first one. So, don't players watch what's happening on the field? Meaning: you see a teammate get blown up like that on the plate, and you're not at least a little cautious coming through? Maybe you don't tempt fate by being right on F2?
  9. That 'cause the number's too big, or just too hard to concentrate these days??
  10. "Did anyone get that on their phone??" Otherwise, it's nothing.
  11. Sorry, but the way I read this, the coach had come out - so we're already in the dangerous waters of arguing balls and strikes. (In fact, it seems to me - again, if I'm reading the OP right - that what the PU should be saying immediately is "You can't argue balls and strikes, especially coming out, and if you continue out, you WILL be ejected." And the "appeal" comes while he's already doing something he should so very much not be doing. So, are you saying that you're okay with still allowing this appeal? I will have to disagree here, fellas. There's no appeal to make, by rule or otherwise, since we'd never GET to his appeal. Fruit of the tainted tree, or something. And then I'd let my partner have it after the game. [NOTE: I don't disagree with Ken, et al, in the sense that certain rulesets DO make it required if asked.]
  12. Alright, *I'm* your huckleberry...... 8 games in one day? Why, that's nothin! I've done 16 games in one day, umpiring the bases on one field while simultaneously working the plate on the field next to it! And then, without even changing shirts, I jumped into my time machine, went back to the start of the day, and umpired them ALL OVER AGAIN - from the opposite position as the first time! Your move, @Matt Hoey.
  13. I like what the ump in the OP said, and I'm okay with the lack of response to the last remark. Given my usual level of smartassery, though, my likely response would be: "Okay, and after you get beaten senseless, what's left of you will get ejected."
  14. Sounds like he wanted to go big AND go home. (I remember *my* "Conjunction Junction," thank you very much!) I would have loved to see it play like this: Coach: "I've NEVER heard of that!" Umpire: And since you're retiring, now you never will. [ejects] And scene.
  15. So, the rule in question has been covered. But MY query is: "grounds for restriction"?? He demands to be shown a rule in the book AND refuses to leave? That's only good for a restriction?? .... And I'm surmising, from the all-caps, that he made his declaration for most, if not all, to hear. Seems like a restriction is the least of his concerns. Why in the absolute %@#$^#& wasn't this guy run? I get it - playoffs. But that doesn't buy them extra warnings or the right to rant more before earning a dismissal.