HokieUmp

"Grumpy Old Man"-take coming.... THIS thread alone is why I can't stand replay, even in this version. I would prefer it be limited to fair/foul at the poles, and for maybe "HR or not?" situations where stadiums have a nook/cranny deal. Put it this way: when I woke up this morning and decided to catch up at U-E today, I didn't think I'd read about a dozen posts on the esoterics of gloves and laces and "was that guy tagged" - when it's one of those "I know it when I see it" plays - and yet here we are.

I see your side of the argument, but I just won't agree with it. Here's the problem, Arch - if I can use your "first name" - as I see it: you strike me as a guy that likes people. Sometimes, this is a lot easier gig if you don't. That sounds glib, and I'm not gonna lie when I say I'm using it for comedic effect. But I tend to go out on the field not looking to make it a good time or a good day for the players and coaches. I'm not looking to make it a bad day, either - I'm out there to call the game according to the rules. If I want it to sound noble, I could say I'm out there for the game itself. Sometimes, it DOES end up being just a good time for everyone involved. Most of the time, it's a "neutral time" - everyone gets, or doesn't get, what the day gives them. But my EJ totals are pretty tiny for the number of games I've done - other than the 30-dudes-at-once game I wrote about back in April or so - and I tend not to have too heated a time with participants in general. I try to be READY for it, if it happens, but it seems rare. I'm not sure why, but I've learned to ride that luck. But to get away from my freshman philosophy discussion, fact is, ERR'BODY knows it's two bases on a ball thrown out of play. So it's simple: dude's on second? Show him the way home. Otherwise, you've "coached" him if you say otherwise. And/or you're coaching the defense that "..... hey, something's kinda funny here!" So don't do that.

I'm not sure how I feel about a lot of this debate. I've already umpired for about three times longer than I ever played the game, and didn't live around enough kids for the "sandlot" variety. So I probably don't have the same perspective on this as other people. What struck ME the most about this post..... Max (or do I use "Mad" instead?), I'm a decade OLDER than you, and yet that was about the most get-off-my-lawny post I've read in some time. Arguably heading towards "yelling at clouds." Which surprises me a little, because - and this is on me, sure - I have a certain "image" of everyone on here, and that's not fitting the M-O. Maybe it's your libertine fashion choices that cloud my judgment - I'll wear that. Let's face it, guys: times change, and will keep changing. The "go away 'til dinner" life disappear a long time ago. Between people doing horrible things to kids, and the paving of America (looking at YOU, San Antonio and Bexar County!), the unattended gang of kids just playing won't happen. So it's gonna be organized ball. And yeah, people don't like to lose, and parents don't want their kids to 'lose.' It is, as they say, what it is. The country and the planet will continue on - or, at least, it will continue on until we kill it off ourselves, but "everyone gets a trophy" AIN'T gonna be the murder weapon of human life. Is that overly philosophic, or otherwise over-thinking it? Yeah, probably. But with a hurricane bearing down towards my future retirement home - where we just spent 8-9 months and a BIG bag of cash repairing our house from Florence LAST September - I could use something to keep from refreshing the Weather Channel radar page every 15 seconds or so.

It's weird, right? You go on an umpire site - one where people actually DO care about the craft of umpiring - to rip a dude, and then enlist us in how to make him look like a [redacted] at a future game with some grandstanding protest (when the game hasn't started, ergo, nothing to protest yet). And when the not-unsurprising feedback comes out, it's OUR fault. (By the way, if you asked coaches 'are you better than the average coach,' 90% would say they are, so ..... yeah.) Huh. That IS weird. (Not gonna lie - I REALLY hope you're with a program somewhere here in Texas.)

The quote: "I can accept a half ball out of the zone, but when you start calling a ball out, a ball in, a ball up and a ball down, you've expanded the strike zone 60-70%. To say "I have a wide zone" is a cop out, because you've made the zone subjective." Bolded emphasis yours, as I just cut-and-pasted. Maybe it's a terminology disconnect, but that quote equates a ball in every direction equates to a wide zone - at least in the "out" direction. That ball that grazes the zone is a ball out, to me, at least, and from what I'm seeing here, I ain't alone. To be more conciliatory than is my wont, I will say we might be talking at cross-purposes here. But for a less conciliatory part, see the part I marked in green. My response: GFY. Period. I say that for several reasons: 1) as I mentioned before, MiLB guys - pretty current ones - are saying that grown-ass, PAID players, have an expectation of 2 balls off the plate. If you, your combination Spartans/SEAL Team Sixers, or your spy behind the plate (from like 25 posts ago) can't hang with that on the outside, when those dudes can, then yeah, that's problematic. 2) By your criteria, I'm a bad umpire. Except for one problem: I'm good at what I do. Really pretty good, actually. If you knew me or my life, you would know that I'm not exactly the biggest braggart about my success, my life, my job, or my career in a broader sense, but I allow myself a decent measure of ego when it comes to umpiring. I'm not gonna flash my resume or background, because I know there are guys that could match or beat it handily here, but I can do this gig, and I KNOW there's nothing your kids would show me that would make me back down One. Step. So I'll leave the the nicer responses to the nicer people on the board, like the boss (Umpire In Chief) and Biscuit, since they're generally nicer than me. But you got what you got - people have said it: "you got proof? take it to someone" or "go to other tournaments, if you can avoid this guy/others" (if it's a wider issue). That's what you can do, and that's mostly it. Take what you need from it.

Oh, [redacted], now you've done it, @yawetag. You've just crushed a dude.

I"m just pointing out that, if you want to just squeak by, getting the story complete before, say, THE ENTIRE WORLD spoils it for you, you might .... speed up the process a touch. Just saying. (And besides, considering movie effects of the mid-50s, it's not that bad!)

The movie is 63 years old, for [redacted's] sake!! You got enough internet to get here, doncha??

Green part: Keep working hard, and let it remain a mystery. Red part: They don't. Don't talk to/deal with the fence.

(Quoted post edited to save space.) My turn. Now that I know what the age range is, I can properly snort my beverage out through my nose at some of this. Imma let you talk about "elite" players and all that, because you're on a roll, but when you're talking about 10 and 11 year old kids - nah, dude. Just ..... no. I have no doubt there are good players - it's always the way of things - but let's not Roy Hobbs these guys. (I mean, 2 K/inning can happen with a terrible pitcher, if the hitters aren't all that great, too, so there you go.) And, to overemphasize a point ..... 9, 10, and 11 year olds. Dude. Dude. Speaking strictly for myself, I'm perfectly open to the idea there's bias. There are two problems, though. One, you gotta PROVE it to others, not just say "he DOES have a bias agin' us." It's got to be something you could show. And two, if you're talking about the traveling circus of tournaments that goes from town to town, is there really anyone in charge of that? More than likely, there are different "promoters" that run these deals from weekend to weekend, and there's no organization that ties them together, so any blanket ban or something wouldn't work on him, even if you CAN prove something. I'm glad that you can accept a half a ball out of the zone! I, and the rulebook authors, are pretty relieved. Now, once you accept that just the edge of the ball swiping the black - ie, THE WHOLE BALL BASICALLY NOT BEING IN THE ZONE - is *also* a valid strike, you're golden. Yes, I'm being really SH*#ty here, but since you hate this dude so very much, you're ready to leap over anything he says, and believe that a ball that clips the black is a "wide zone." It is not. That's a strike zone, per rule and/or interpretation. And again, I want to say again he's inviting some of this on himself, by saying ANYthing like that at the plate meeting. I also will tend to give more than a ball to the outside, especially down in that age group, if I work them. But I'm sure as hell not saying anything to you about it. Why? Because "elite" or not, no one likes a walk-fest. And I have learned, in my hundreds and hundreds of games, ways to lower the odds of that happening. Good luck hunting your white whale. Remember, though - it also ended badly for Ahab.

Coach, a lot to unwrap here. 1. When and how should you do it? Well, how about not at all, and therefore, the "how" is moot. But if you're gonna do you, depends on the ejection policy of these tournaments. Since you're gonna get run - or *should* - if you do it, minimize any follow-on penalties they might have. (You might have figured out I'm against this. Making a point or not, *I'd* dump you with either the pulling the money out, or the associated comments. And I'd sleep like a baby.) If it comes with an extra penalty, plan accordingly. 2. Again, you haven't said what age group, but I'll channel The Rock for a minute: "it doesn't MATTER what age level!!" (This is pre-"Fast and Furious" Rock, for the record.) I know other guys are saying they'll call the plate, and they can do them. But as has ALSO been pointed out, it automatically includes one ball off the plate, since only the edge of the ball has to hit the black, by rule. So your offense at a ball out is ..... wrong. And depending on the age group, it's GONNA go wider. I've had MiLB guys talk about players at that level expect a 1-2 balls out - that may or may not still be valid. But if the dudes that are getting paid to play have that expectation, then you and YOUR guys better bloody well not get peeved at a guy saying "a ball out." No one needs or wants a walk fest. 3. I'm not a fan of the speech thing at the plate. At all. Even if I agree at the philosophy, I won't advertise at the meeting. I had a coach ask me once at the meeting about my zone. "We'll all find out in about five minutes, won't we?" was my response. Hopefully, that coach got my (maybe not so) subtle version of "None-ya, and don't ask." All I have to do is make some Grand Proclamation, and I've just handed them fodder to run with during the game. 4. You'd likely be throwing away $100. I mean, it's not "his own" zone, but balls/strikes aren't even allowed to be argued BY RULE, never mind protested. Judgement call, right? I know you're gonna try and tell me "misapplication of the written rule of the zone," but..... no. I can PM you my address, if you want to waste $100, and you can just mail me the money.

I just wanted to tighten up your post a little, so that my reaction will make sense:

I would hope, Rich, that you're estimate is too LOW. But having met other people before, I'm also afraid it's not.

Split the difference. One hand on a hip, the other behind your back. For bonus points, stick the "off hip" out as you stand there.

I'm gonna take a different tack here. Instead of joining in the discussion of whether it should be called or not, and SH*#ty-end-of-the-stick, etc, my question is this: Why in God's name does the LL Rulebook even have such a stupid-ss rule, written in such a stupid-ss manner, in the first place?!? To elaborate: signs and signals have been part of the game of baseball, if not from the beginning, then from a LOT longer than any of us here have been part of the game. Why does LL have some full-of-itself, upholder-of-morals rule written in? Is the stealing of signs considered the "gateway drug" of criminal behavior? Has there been a direct connection made between relaying pitch selection and meth use? Am I missing something here? Three actual baseball points: 1) Knowing what pitch is coming, and/or where it might be, doesn't translate into the ability to actually hit it well. Still gotta have skill. 2) That's why catcher signals to the pitcher are a little more complicated than just giving one number. 3) Where's the clause in the LL Rulebook about stealing the 3B coaches signs and relaying them to the rest of the defense? Sorry, this is a non-issue to me.

Why? Because [redacted] him, that's why. And I'd love it if that sentence made it into the ejection report. Because MLB umpires are better people than I, that sadly won't happen. (I say that as an umpire, because of all the Yankees bull[redacted] this year, but more importantly, I say that as a massive Yankee hater.)

I know it's probably not true, but I WANT to believe that's Quebecois for "how ya' like THEM apples??!?"

Gonna be "that guy." This is Korean baseball.

Disagree, a little. Let me try and sound it out, and see if I'm just full of sh*# or not. For one thing, I don't think it's "you only regret the EJ you don't get." Not ONLY - yeah, you definitely regret ones you don't get, because you've let some nosepicker leave a game, thinking that way - whatever it was - is the way he can, and should, act on a ballfield. AND you've left that mess for some OTHER guy to deal with, who will ALSO get a side order of "I've never been ejected for [X] before!!" But even when you eject, there's sometimes a feeling of regret, because you may well have been able to otherwise deflect the situation to something less volatile. But you SHOULD work on ejections, because sometimes that's what's needed, and it's really the only solution to the problem. For me, at least, drawing a line with the bat is a punched ticket. It's only happened to me once, and there was no real precursor to it. Dude didn't like a pitch, and fussed a little. I told him it was a good pitch, and I think I added something about getting back in the box. He then takes the bat and draws a line past the outside of the plate. Whoosh - gone. There was no real "reaching that point" - we arrived right ON "that point." It's nearly 11:30pm local, so I'm a little rambly. But I just was struck by the way that was phrased, and I don't quite agree with it. But I WILL say that, in 11 years I've been on this site, I would love to have a dollar for every time the community was asked "Should I have ejected when ....?" And I've love to have ANOTHER dollar for the number of times the collective answer was "yeah."

Point 0, made already, but I'll say it again: never work solo. I realize that's not intentional, and it can't always be helped, but if the team is booing you, then certainly impress upon them getting two guys. And yes, there were plenty of ejectable moments earlier in your post. Honestly, the biggest failing was not getting SOMEbody. LRZ is spot-on: while you might regret having to GET to the point of an ejection (and might be able to find where "it all went wrong"), you won't actually regret the ejection itself. You regret the EJs you know you SHOULD have made, but didn't. Besides, if they had a coaching staff like a football team, no one's gonna miss the outside-linebacker-coach when you gun him. One head on a pike makes things a LOT quieter.

What the absolute [redacted]??!?

As a former pro-rasslin' fan, that's easy. Double count-out - happens all the time!

You absolutely can. I just turned 54, and I'm certainly not on edge of the age-graph in my group here!

For the basic question - for HokieUmp, LLC only - my only advancement is to the college ranks. And for the "why is it hard" question, it's several things, but mostly, the answer would be "*I'm* the problem." The first time I was in Virginia, there was still some "old boy" hindrances, in that the commish and others seemed to feel they had to vouch for you, or otherwise "sign off" on those that wanted to go the college route. And they held pretty firm to dues-paying - but in my opinion, sometimes overly so; if someone's good enough, they should get that look, regardless of tenure. @Umpire in Chief could speak to that, if he wants - we were in the same group a number of years, and he was one of my first partners in EOA. That seemed to change in my second run - they weren't as concerned. In fact, the attitude seemed to change to "if you want to do college, do it - it makes us look better!" And that's when I thought about it, but chose not to. Why? Well, at least in Virginia, it seemed, the college games were controlled by a couple guys. And they all wanted you to attend their clinics. Smart or hard-headed, I chose not to attend yet more clinics, and spend more money, for a "firm maybe" of anything coming of it. This will never be my living, but something I want to enjoy. And doing what I just mentioned was going to push more of the joy out of it. Do I lack ambition? Probably, based on that and my "real" job. Can I still get games? Yeah - and not just because of a shortage of umpires, but because my assignors know they can send me about anywhere, and there likely won't be a SH*#storm nor a series of phone calls about "THAT F*#King guy!" (I *am* now a cowboy, though, per my War Story.) And moving doesn't help, since one "restarts" every time one moves. Since I started in 2003, I've lived in Australia (03-06), Virginia (07-11), Japan (11-14), Virginia (14-18), and Texas (-present). And health can stop people, too. But for me, I guess I allowed it to be harder, and was unwilling to do the things needed to work with a totally different group.

After living here for about a year in my second stint in Texas, I became a cowboy this weekend! And on my birthday, no less! Did a pair on Saturday, as part of the "Five Tools" tournament in our area. (And insert your own joke about 'five tools' here.) I was base guy for the first one, and the head coach for one team had something to say about a called-third by my partner from the 3B box. Then he called time for an "offensive conference" - which was really just an excuse to give him more crap. I mean, he wasn't even pretending to talk to the player, and got all point-y. So not long after, my partner says "Get off my field!" Problem is, I spent a blank moment or two, thinking how much I dislike that phrase before realizing "Oh SH*#! I gotta go DO something now!" and head down to the dirt circle, where they're still 'chatting.' I had to kind-of step over their legs to get in-between them, so my partner can peel off. That gets me thisclose to the coach at that point, which was awkward - the first thing he said was something like "Give us some space!" But then he says "What're YOU doing here, cowboy?" [I MADE IT, Ma!] "I'm here to rodeo, coach." <-- I said that more than once - I said it before he mentioned cowboy, when we were talking over each other, but then I said it again. He got irritated (more, anyway), and said something like "you don't use that terminology!" after saying something else I never really heard. I told my wife the story that night, and we were both a little confused about that, but I have theory today: I almost think, that with my distinctly East Coast voice, and my use of rodeo - thankfully, I didn't use the phrase "rodeo clown", like WE all use - may have made him think I was mocking him, as he was VERY Texas. But he left, and I didn't have to walk him all the way to the dugout. I'm not even sure how righteous the EJ was, or if it was early or late, or what. I just know that I got called 'cowboy.' Happy Birthday to me, indeed.