Jump to content

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 09/16/2021 in all areas

  1. Maven already said this, but I think it bears repeating (and emphasizing). Don't run over to a coach, especially not an AC, and especially not to discipline (which is what a warning is). Now of course, a manager coming out when he is permitted to is a different story. If he's calm as he comes out, I have no problem with you meeting him half way, but you should NOT go the whole distance. Additionally, there are ways to have conversations with coaches that don't make you look, like Maven said, like their lapdog. Call them over and pull out your lineup card, or catch them in-between innings as they are walking past you. Just don't go to them. These situations should have been handled from the spot you were when they occured. "C'mon, Blue! That's a balk right there! All day! Let's go". Depending on the temperature of the game, I might respond something like "I don't have a balk/That's not a balk" (depending on if I know what they want to be balked) or "Hey! None of that." Regardless, that's definitely an inappropriate comment for a base coach to make, so If they come back with something, I'm shutting it down for sure (but again, the temperature of the game determines the exact response). Importantly though, I didn't move. The coach was in the wrong, so I don't care if everyone hears the exchange, he was the aggressor.
    3 points
  2. The problems start here. Right or wrong, we can't allow that, and it's more likely fishing for a call. "Knock it off, now." Now, instead of ejecting him for violating the instruction you should have given, you look like his lap dog. Not only is fishing allowed today, but he gets you to come to him. This, we can ignore. It's mere venting. That's not ignoring. Did you offer him a backrub while you were over there? You said you were busy officiating the game, which they already knew. They probably knew the count just fine, and were just trying to disrupt F1's rhythm. I expect they had some laughs back in the office about how in your head they were. Answer questions, ignore statements. But don't ignore disruptions. It seems to me that you might have an issue with caring too much (that is, at all) about whether and how much coaches like you. None of them like you. Some hate you. That's OK, because you don't have to listen to the whiney kids or their parents.
    3 points
  3. In the stretch, the hands must be apart. When set, the hands must be together. When F1 checked 1B, he didn't move his hands. So it wasn't a move to come set.
    2 points
  4. I would have handled this as you did, MT73. I'm not going to impose the IFF call after the fact because both teams apparently relied on the pre-game understanding, however misguided that was. Besides, this was an U9 game, for pete's sake, not the WS. For whatever reason, the umpires in your case were relying on the coaches for the local rules. Consequently, they thought they were calling the game by the tournament rules, although they were misinformed. I'm curious: was the pop-up caught or dropped? Did the IFF no-call affect anything?
    2 points
  5. Here's a very long clip of the play w/ both home & away feeds. The AZ announcers seem to have no idea what's happening...the Houston crew does a much better job of recognizing what's happening.
    2 points
  6. I would try different HSM styles and/or sizes before giving up on them. Or see if you have eye protection options that work better. Catchers wear sunglasses under HSM's all the time, so it seems like you should be able to find a workable solution. Good luck!
    2 points
  7. Gotta love Fall ball. As new catcher approaches the dish...... "Coach, I'm not wearing my glasses!" "Oh, don't worry about it" Me: (*#$#%!) Pictured: My newest Jr umpire on the dish. 11 year old Doug Harvey's great grandson. .
    2 points
  8. Depends on how you define "umpire". Impartial, probably paid, third party? Volunteer parent from the home team (or each team)? Self-governed by committee/vote...or biggest kid wins arguments? I've played many a game in the school yard, with scores, standings, and even seasonal stats, without a defined umpire. It's amazing how few times over 30 or 40 lunches and recesses you really come across a play close enough to warrant an impartial arbiter....the same was true for hockey, soccer and football. It's pretty remarkable what kids will do when there are no adults in the way.
    2 points
  9. I think this is why OBR/NCAA call time when the previously obstructed runner is tagged out at a base he was protected to even though there are other runners that could be played played on, acknowledging @Senor Azul's differing opinion that you wait for all playing action to end. CCS shows a recent OBS where time was called when the previously obstructed runner was tagged and we still had runner/s advancing on the bases. They also reference the WS OBS and that Lentz correction Demuth wishes that he had used the correct mechanic of calling time on the tag out instead of signaling safe: Kulpa-Lentz's Obstruction Shades of Joyce-DeMuth | Close Call Sports & Umpire Ejection Fantasy League But CCS is also remiss in quoting the rule wording of "no further action is possible" when there still was a runner.
    2 points
  10. Wolfe, This would only apply if the obstruction caused him to miss 2nd in the umpires judgment correct? He doesn't get a free pass if he is obstructed 10 ft off of 1st base and then just steps right over 2nd on his way to 3rd.
    2 points
  11. Ahhh .... this is very near and dear to me as I am the same way (not like I used to be, but). It's ok to 'try to be liked' as you say. But, as others have said, being an umpire, it's impossible. I've always been stubborn and thought: "I know I can't please everyone, but dammit, I'm going to try" .... I've given that up, because it's not worth trying, because in this "profession" it's impossible. Become "liked" by doing a good job, looking the part, being approachable, hustling, etc .... you won't feel as though you're "liked" ...but YOU WILL become respected, and that my friend is about as close as you're going to get being an umpire. It's ok to be this way on a personal level ...you just have to realize it's unattainable as an umpire
    2 points
  12. My professional opinion is 7, 8, and 9 years old is too young for structured, age-segregated, regimented, “hey, we need an umpire for this” baseball. It should start at 10 years old, be 50-70 in distances, and be rather simple and straightforward in its rule set. Perhaps a 4th foundational rule set could be drafted (YBR?). If a “gifted” 9 or 8 year old wants to participate, then he (or she) and the family can do so with the full knowledge of what they’re getting into. Thing is, when kids are (or were) left to their own devices, and start up a baseball / stickball / wiffleball game… they don’t care what ages and skill sets the teammates or opponents are. And, they make up rule judgements as they go. They pretty much don’t need adults.
    2 points
  13. Interference by a retired/scored runner. The ball is dead, the run counts (had he been ruled safe), and the runner who would have been played on is out. No. Interference with a thrown ball must be intentional. Play the bounce. Same rulings, all codes.
    1 point
  14. I wouldn't have even given this a second look. He never stops when bouncing, I have a clear stop before the pitch...am I missing something?
    1 point
  15. Channel the Japanese Umpire in you with this Chris Hickman BUNDLE… SSK Japanese Plate Shoes NEW size 28.5 Mizuno Black Ball Bag NEW $175 shipped to the lower 48 states only….Good luck https://photos.app.goo.gl/xZGYfx9kMMta47B9A
    1 point
  16. ...but not to you, lest they go over their monthly data allocation.
    1 point
  17. You are, unfortunately, never going to find it. The reason you will never find it lies in the purpose of NOCSAE's existence. Sure, on paper, NOCSAE can state they are striving to improve safety and protection of amateur athletes, but their purpose is to alleviate liability of the manufacturers, especially in regards to a class-action lawsuit. NOCSAE is comprised of representatives of several professional medical review boards, experts therein, certified equipment managers, certified equipment reconditioners, coaches, and a representative of each of the (acknowledged / licensed) manufacturers, as well as an NCAA and NFHS rep. The primary focus of NOCSAE is to mitigate or eliminate head injuries in sports requiring helmets and/or involving head trauma; as to this goal, this usually involves football, baseball, and lacrosse. Do note – none of the professional sports leagues are represented within NOCSAE, nor do any of the manufacturers necessarily want them to be included. The reason for this is that professional (ie. adult) customers can make their own research and decisions when purchasing their equipment. However, amateur athletes – especially those at public-funded schools – cannot afford that luxury, and are often using institution-issued gear. Thus, the institutions must perform due diligence with the manufacturers to assure (or certify) that the produced gear meets safety criteria that a governing body – in this case, NOCSAE – ratifies. Why am I explaining all this? Because, if the ulterior motive of NOCSAE's certification is remove litigious liability in the instance of an injury, you – the parent and/or legal guardian – might be able to have a lawyer draft you up an exemption letter. Think this out with me... A traditional "two-piece" mask and hard hat (AKA skull cap, AKA earflap-less batting helmet) is and has been just as protective as HSMs regarding frontal concussive impacts. However, to achieve NOCSAE certification, the piece of gear must impede or reduce impact forces that has been determined by physicians to a number (I can't remember it off-hand) that breaks cranial bones and produces hemorrhaging, and prevents visible head injuries (bruises and lacerations). It's on this second point where traditional "two-piece" masks fail because they don't cover the ears, and the ears are definitely considered part of the head. As such, side impacts (such as when a catcher turns his head, or a ball ricochets to find its way there, or a batter has a "loose" follow through, or lets go of the bat) bring with them a much higher risk. So, as callous as it sounds, accept (officially, legally) the risk. Perhaps a lawyer can draft for you a legally-binding document that waives liability for your son (specifically; no-one else on the team could use this) to use a conventional two-piece. Again, the reason for the NOCSAE certification is to limit (remove) the liability for a player to sue a school and/or manufacturer for issuing them gear that "would have prevented this injury" (or failure therein). This document would have to be presented to the school, retained by the coach, and also presented to the UIC (in Fed, it's the PU) prior to that game (the reason we umpires get conjoined in this liability crap is because we are the Fed's "enforcers"). This isn't unprecedented. Many amateur leagues and tournament series utilizing NFHS rules waive or ignore the NOCSAE requirements because they themselves are not issuing the gear. Instead, the participants are bringing their own gear and are (purportedly) making their own purchasing decisions. There's a whole bunch of other legalese in this, but that's the gist of it. Now, from the other perspective or approach... Have you (more so, your son) truly tried keeping the HSM on as much as possible? I was a catcher for 16 years (and have been an umpire for 13 years), and while I never used a HSM during that time (as a catcher, they became prominent after my high school days), it never ceases to amaze me that coaches / fans think and project that a catcher must take that mask off every time a pitch gets away from the mitt, or becomes a batted ball. I've lost count the piles upon piles of HSMs (and, to be fair, TMs) that have been catapulted off the catcher in front of me to land at my feet... on a ball that is already over the backstop, or rolling just over ~there~ while no runners are on base! It just becomes engrained habit! Well, stop engraining it! How often do we see MLB catchers catapult off their HSMs? Relatively few times, actually. They certainly don't fling them off so as to throw during a steal attempt (no time!), they typically don't fling them off on a pitch in the dirt (again, no time!), and even on most pop-ups, they leave the HSM on so as to pursue the pop-up as rapidly as possible. Most pro-grade HSMs (think All-Star and Easton) have minimal cages on them to maximize visibility. Why's that? Not only because visibility is an utmost premium in the pro game, but also because these HSMs aren't being dumped on the ground on a repetitive basis like shared, issued amateur HSMs are!!!! I spent several years as a hockey goalie, several years as a Wide Receiver, Punt & Kick Returner in football, and even tried my hand at lacrosse. In each of those, you're looking for a (moving) ball (puck) through a wire cage anyway... right??!! So why this obsession with dumping off the mask for baseball??!! So, another option, as @ousafe has mentioned is to get a really, really good HSM and leave it on as much as possible. From my experience and knowledge base, All-Star and Easton have the most minimal of cages so as to promote visibility. Going further, I got my hands on an UnderArmour Converge HSM (not the Victory!) and it is noticeably wider and more accommodating in the eyes area, with less intrusion(?) on the flanks, so maybe your son would be able to flick this HSM up and off without disturbing or unseating his glasses? Wow, I pushed the word count on this one... thanks for keeping up. Got any more questions, drop us a message.
    1 point
  18. I can only add that on Type 2 obstruction, professional baseball has wanted "time" called when an obstructed runner is subsequently tagged out (if still "protected" by the umpire at the time he was tagged out). It doesn't matter if all playing action had not ceased. This was how it was taught in umpire school in 1997 and this is set forth in the sixth edition of the Jaksa/Roder Manual (which was our umpire school textbook). I even put a bold underline under that passage in the J/R so that I would remember it as the "exception" to the rule on our umpire school test.
    1 point
  19. And just to add to it: I am very, very familiar with that Sox/Cubs play. I've had it saved as a video file for years as I use it to teach obstruction, type 2. I have used it for nearly 15-years to teach both (1) that a runner can be protected returning to a base and (2) when to call time on type 2 obstruction. I have picked apart this video over and over and over again for years. So, I immediately knew that the reasoning they gave at the end of the play was wrong. And, this is the second time in two years that I have posted a comment on closecallsports.com pointing out that their interpretation was wrong (or not fully correct)...only to not receive no reply (or, in the case of yesterday, have my post marked as "spam"). I'm done with commenting on their pages.
    1 point
  20. 6.1.1 J With R1 on first base, F1, from the set position and prior to bringing his hands together while in contact with the pitchers plate, (a) abruptly and quickly turns his shoulders toward first base in an attempt to drive back the runner or (b) casually turns his shoulders to observe the runner at first base. Ruling: legal in both A and B
    1 point
  21. I think you are missing the “hands coming together “ part of “coming set”. ?
    1 point
  22. Yes, IFF can be called post-facto, your Humble Opinion notwithstanding. Were the conditions for IFF met? Yes. Did the batted fly ball qualify as an IFF? Yes. Obviously, the ball wasn't caught, and as you said, a "series of runs were scored off several throwing errors". So, chaos ensued, and no outs were recorded on the play as it happened. This would be an entirely different discussion had the defense let the ball drop, and turned a triple play by forcing runners to advance that weren't (by IFF rule) under obligation to do so. Thus, a very appropriate judgement to make on this play, even post-facto, is to call the BR out on the IFF. The ball wasn't caught, so any tag-up responsibility is off the table. Any advancements or runs scored by the offense (other than the BR) are valid. It's not like this ends the inning – there'd only be 1 out or 2 outs, now. Your Humble Opinion or not, there isn't a grounds for a "do over". That was a Fair batted ball. The umpires did not call "Foul" or "Time" during the play (thereby killing it / making it Dead), so the play has to stand. There wasn't an act of nature or of God that disrupted the play. So, you're correct in saying that there is no do-over, but it's not based on your Opinion.
    1 point
  23. I'm curious - what is your role here where you're instructing both the TD and the UIC? Are you the guy the TD hired to supply the umps? In any tournament I have run this call is either coming to me or the UIC, and we're collaborating on both how to handle the ruling of that game, and then ensuring it doesn't happen again. The ruling should have come from there. It's nice to see you, as presumably responsible for the supplied umps, taking this action when necessary...I'm just surprised you needed to (or that you were the first call). As TD the UIC is accountable to me, and I'm accountable to...my wife. I assume nothing. I even started my post with some questions. Beyond that, I'm simply using common sense and deductive reasoning based on my experience in the game, as a participant and an observer, to come to the most likely scenarios and conclusions...knowing there are always exceptions. DC isn't asking for an IFF if his fielder caught the ball...nor if his team successfully pulled off a triple play. It's pretty easy to deduce why he wants IFF called here. Whatever happened in this pre-game agreement, regardless of how the conversation occurred, DC was certainly prepared to argue the tourney rules, and the incorrectness of that agreement, by the time the scenario came up in the game. If I were to speculate - at pre-game he wasn't the coach that told the umpire there was no IFF, and he wasn't sure himself so he didn't argue it. He went to the bench, looked up the rules,(maybe mentioned it to the Assistant, who got curious), found the IFF rule, and decided he'd deal with it only if it came up (and hey, maybe it will work in his favor until then)... if he actually vehemently argued pre-game that there was no IFF, I'd could see telling him 'tough luck' when he argued the opposite later in the game. Regardless of any of that, it doesn't sound to me like it was an "agreement"...it sounds to me like the ump asked the coaches about the rules (which I have run across many times - I get it, with all the variety between leagues and tournaments), and it sounds like at least one of the coaches misinformed, probably unintentionally, the umpire. That was not an agreement to play without the IFF, it was a misunderstanding of the rules based on bad information. As such, it should be treated like any misunderstanding/misapplication of the rules - via appropriate protest procedures. I guess it depends on what you define as "often"...it's certainly not as often as the next age bracket, and the one after that. Physiologically speaking, a lot of kids at this age haven't fully developed depth perception so those routine fly balls ain't so routine. And only time solves that. But, as you allude, that's beside the point. There will be exceptions, but at 8-10 years old, in my far-too-long experience, they typically haven't developed that level of strategic (devious?) thinking yet. They just want to catch the ball. It would also be extremely rare to see that approach coached at that age - you're still dealing with basic drills at this point. So, whether or not there's an IFF rule has very little bearing strategically, or tactically, on how the defense plays. With very rare exceptions at those younger ages the IFF rule is not protecting the offense, it's rewarding the defense. I'll take the once in ten blue moons accidental double play over commonly dropped/misplayed balls that are IFF auto-outs for an eight year old that is thrilled just to get his bat on the ball, simply due to a rule created because of a loophole exploited by adults. Even at 12-13 years old, even on club teams, it would be uncommon to find an infielder who is savvy enough to recognize the play, and skilled enough to pull it off (and have teammates aware and skilled enough to help him turn the DP/TP). I like seeing those tournaments and leagues that drop IFF for the younglings. It's not about when those fly balls are easily caught. It's about when they can be turned into cheap DP's. You don't need the rule until you reasonably and realistically need to start protecting the offense. Club ball that may be about 12...rec ball it could be even 14. IMHO.
    1 point
  24. I've seen catchers, including at least one in MLB, keep the HSM on when fielding a fly ball. Try one on - the vision is much better than a traditional mask.
    1 point
  25. Ok, but Gil has his own "page/section" ....
    1 point
  26. You assume a lot of "facts" that may or may not be true. Absent those assumptions, I would not allow a coach to game the umpires and other team. YMMV.
    1 point
  27. Yep. Crap video in OP. F1 obviously stepped off before the feint to 3B. Legal.
    1 point
  28. Ordinarily on an out-of-the-park home run the runner(s) would be allowed to score even if the batter stopped at first. So the batter would receive credit for an RBI single. But circumstances can change the scoring of the play. For example, in the 1999 National League Championship Series (NLCS), Robin Ventura hit an out-of-the-park walkoff grand slam home run but received credit for only a single and one RBI. He was mobbed between first and second base and never proceeded any further with only the runner from third base actually crossing the plate before the celebration prevented the others to run the bases. According to Baseball-Reference.com, there have been at least two other instances of "grand slam singles." Both occurred when a batter hit a grand slam but subsequently passed the runner ahead of him on the base paths, which according to the rules of Major League Baseball causes the runner who passes his teammate to be called out. This happened on July 9, 1970, when Dalton Jones of the Detroit Tigers passed teammate Don Wert in a game against the Boston Red Sox, leaving him with a 3-RBI single. It also occurred on July 4, 1976, when Tim He-who-shall-not-be-named of the Philadelphia Phillies passed teammate Garry Maddox during a 10–5 win in the first game of a doubleheader against the Pittsburgh Pirates, leaving him with a 3-RBI single. In both cases, the other three runs still counted because only the player who passes his teammate is called out. The three baserunners are able to score. Both of these hits took place with fewer than two outs.
    1 point
  29. In OBR, the play would be killed on the tag attempt of R1 at 3rd. 6.01(h)(1). So while the subsequent throw into RF might happen - and would be extremely entertaining - it would be irrelevant.
    1 point
  30. I too try to be discreet in my communications with coaches. However, I also match the coach. If a coach mentions something quietly while passing by ("Can you keep an eye for balks?") I will respond just as discreetly. If the coach is yelling across the diamond that I am missing something, I have no issue yelling at him right back. The coach made it "public", not me. As for the polite comment, that is a nothing burger.
    1 point
  31. I was out of town this last weekend and haven't umpired in almost two weeks. Driving home, I was feeling tired. We had some friends over Monday and I went to bed around 9 - I usually am up until 2am. Tuesday, I woke up and called off a volleyball game because I felt awful. I slept pretty much from Monday at 9 until Thursday at noon. Wednesday, I woke up thinking I was dying. I was convinced I had covid (I got vaccinated) and went to the hospital. I took the self temp and it came up normal twice there, so I went to the store and bought pedialyte. Almost immediately, I could feel my energy levels coming back. So even if you're not out in the sun a lot, or doing a lot of games, don't ignore the hydration.
    1 point
  32. You're missing the point. There is no rules basis to call interference even if they do react.
    1 point
  33. Non-sequitur... So, when your name is FIELDIN CULBREATH and you show up for pro school...like...do the instructors just check to make sure you are there, check your name off for roll call and then send you home with a refund and tell you to wait by the phone for the MLB tailor to contact you regarding uniform fittings? Mannnnn...I've never seen the guy work but, if ever there was a person BORN to be an MLB umpire, it's a guy with that handle... ~Dawg
    1 point
  34. Good God, Max! Are you INSANE??!? By 10 years old, all the good PAC-10 and SEC scholarships are gone!! Do you really want MadMaxJr going to a ...... <shudder> Sun Belt Conference school??!??
    1 point
  35. Wood bats make this much harder than metal bats. I would hesitate to just blankety say “I’ll just send to first”. Instead, slow down, call time since it’s dead whether it’s foul or a HBP, and process everything. What did you hear? What was the reaction of the batter? Honestly, i had one this year, college game, guy got hit on knob, didn’t react, I hear from his dugout “didn’t that hit you ?” And he looked at me, and then started shaking his hand. I laughed and said “nice try” I have never seen someone get hit on the fingers and it didn’t hurt; so while a super savvy player can “act”, most give it away in that moment of human reaction. It’s not foolproof but hope this helps. I will agree that if after taking your time and processing everything, you can not determine it was a foul ball, then yes, award first, and if needed, ask partner if they have anything if it’s contested
    1 point
  36. Thunderheads, go ahead and lock it up. MAN, I kill me.
    1 point
  37. FWIW, and without any specific examples or references, I think more threads should be locked earlier.
    1 point
  38. I do find this irritating, as it amounts to the coach arguing with a judgement call. Good baseball guys just don't do it. Funny, but I've never had a coach hammer or verbalize a runner out. Depending on the state of the relationship with the coaching staff, I'll sometimes say in a friendly way, "hey coach, if you're going to keep using umpire's signals, I'm going to start waving your runners around". Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
    1 point
  39. While staring him down after your call on the banger, “You missed that one, coach.” “You know we’re not looking at you when you safe your own guys, right?” “How come you’ve never given a punch-out coach?” Mostly, he needs ignored. Unless it includes some hysterics or unacceptable vocals. But if he looks like a fool flapping his arms, I really don’t care. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    1 point
  40. LIke this one perhaps?: What mask/CP is best for ___________ level of ball?
    1 point
  41. When you've decided to act, make your first move a "stare" into the dugout. This notifies them that you've heard their message, which can be a clue to the clued-in to STFU. It also provides an opportunity to see which dog is barking.
    1 point
  42. This is what the website umpirebible.com says about verbalizing the call for a pitch out of the zone—I take it to mean on each occurrence. Ball There is no signal for a called ball. Instead, simply verbalize the call, "ball". Call the ball while still down, then come up. On ball four, don't point to first base, just say "ball." If the batter doesn't head toward first base, you can simply say to him "that's four."
    1 point
  43. 1) SLOW DOWN - there is a tendency to think that because the action is happening faster, calls need to be faster as well. They don't. In fact, they can be slower. 2) A couple of habits I got into (that I picked up from this site) before I moved up, which really helped... When the pitcher starts his motion, I pick a spot maybe 10-15' in front of the mound and look at it. From there, I only move my eyes. That angle for my head is a pretty good spot where my eyes can look up to see the release of the pitch, and track it all the way into the catcher's glove. Also, I exhale as the pitcher is making his delivery, and leave my breath out throughout the pitch. Getting into these two habits really help with both concentration and timing. 3) The catchers are also much better when the velocities go up. Once you hear the glove pop, take an extra moment to see just where that glove is. There are times when I'm tracking the pitch in, and (e.g.) it looks like it's coming in low, but the catcher sticks it, doesn't move, and when I take that second look, it's at the bottom of the zone, rather than below it. Personally, because I had good habits before (again, thanks to this site for instilling them in me), I really had no issues moving from HS to college. My first college plate, I was as nervous as a cat in a room full of rocking chairs, and I got about 4 pitches in and my brain said "ah, this is baseball - I know how to call baseball".
    1 point
  44. That's ironic coming from people in a profession dedicated to integrity. All income is reportable (not necessarily taxable, but reportable). If you are honest on your tax returns, there is no reason to care whether you get 1099s. The people you work for have an incentive in order to avoid the paperwork, but the only reason for an individual to want to avoid a 1099 is if (s)he is trying to engage in tax evasion (not avoidance, which is legal, but evasion, which is not). And oh, boy, how I will never forget practically being strung up in the parking lot for making these same comments at an association meeting a couple of decades ago.
    1 point
  45. If a coach doesn't inherently understand the limitations of a one many crew he is either a class A moron, or is literally coaching his first game of his life. I'm a coach - you have no requirement to tell/warn/prime me to the potential pitfalls of a one man crew....nor do you have to assure me you're going to do your best. My assumption is you have a job, you're paid to do that job, you're going to fulfill your professional duties to the best of your ability. The fact that you're alone, rather than with a partner, is not going to impede your ability or desire to hustle, and i don't need to be reminded of that. As a coach, my only ask (which I would never say between the fences, but will in casual conversation outside) is to not guess, project or extrapolate...call what you see, don't call what you don't see. Everything else comes out in the wash.
    1 point




×
×
  • Create New...