Jump to content

lawump

Established Member
  • Posts

    1,161
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    74

lawump last won the day on January 19

lawump had the most liked content!

4 Followers

About lawump

  • Birthday July 15

Profile Information

  • Location
    South Carolina
  • Interests
    umpiring and lawyering

More information about you

  • Your Association Name
    Carolina Baseball Umpires Association; NCAA
  • Occupation
    Attorney
  • Types/Levels of Baseball called
    ex-MiLB umpire; NCAA Div. 1; Am. Legion (2015, '17-'19 World Series)
  • How did you hear about Umpire-Empire?
    ABUA (umpire.org)

Recent Profile Visitors

8,595 profile views

lawump's Achievements

1.3k

Reputation

2

Community Answers

  1. https://www.sbnation.com/mlb/2021/12/21/22848036/drunk-umpire-mexico-flipped-off-fans-fight-ejection
  2. This is a great post. Another way to say this would be to state what Joe Brinkman said during week 1 of the 1997 Brinkman/Froemming Umpire School: "Don't take the sh!tty end of the stick." If there is some doubt as to whether or not the runner would have scored "but for" the obstruction which argument would you rather have after the play: (1) an argument with the defensive coach who is mad that you scored the run or (2) an argument with the offensive coach that you let the out stand??? Unless you are 100% sure that the runner would not have scored if he had not been obstructed, I am taking argument #1 every time. I can handle this argument because I can end it every time with, "skip, if your player didn't screw up and obstruct the runner we wouldn't even be here!" Electing to take argument #2 is "taking the sh!tty end of the stick." Which leads to the second words of wisdom uttered by Mr. Brinkman during the first week of umpire school: "penalize the team that screwed up!" His point was that if you penalize the team that screwed up you can always end the argument by saying, "skip, if your player didn't screw up I wouldn't have had to make that call!"
  3. When the wife hits you on the back of the head in the middle of the night to wake you up as she says, "you're not at the ball park, stop umpiring!" (I've been known to loudly call games in my sleep.)
  4. Confrontational? yup. I pretty much implied that in my post. Sometimes we have to confront the bad behavior. Rhetorical? Absolutely not. I will get an answer; the delivery of the question will make it clear that it is not rhetorical. One time I actually had a head coach meekly reply "no", walk away, and not say another peep the rest of the game. He got the message and he managed to not get ejected. Miracles do happen.
  5. The enforceability of a waiver of liability form executed by a parent on behalf of a minor child varies significantly from state to state. In some states, a parent cannot waive or compromise a child's cause of action (such a form would be worthless). In other states, the parent can do so. In short, the success of such a document depends on where the party is located.
  6. I was on the Umpires Manual sub-committee. I know that we proposed, and it was approved by the full rules committee, to put a comment in the Manual that umpires should ask the coach whether they want to take the result of the play or the penalty. (I am positive this happened as I remember the discussion in the room...and there was very little disagreement with this philosophy (for the high school game)). With that said, it appears that it was not published in the umpire's manual. (This is not the only example of this happening...something being approved for publication (such as a case play or umpire manual edit) but being missed. It is an innocent mistake.) I am going to work to bring that to the Board's attention to see if they can add it to the next Umpire's Manual. I can assure everyone that it was 11-0 in the room for umpires to bring it to the coach's attention. Sorry for the slow reply. Been under the weather for the last three weeks. (Non-Covid!)
  7. "Strike!" Batter: "Where was that at?" "I don't know, but it sure sounded good!"
  8. Let's just say I learned what the term, "big league curveball," means. It's also the day when I truly learned why they stress timing so much at umpire school when teaching plate mechanics.
  9. And that's the issue. Maybe what should have been written earlier in this thread is that the MLB umpires are better than the computer at calling pitches at "game play" speed. There's a reason an MLB umpire doesn't receive his plate zone evaluation from MLB until the next day...MLB has to go back and re-calibrate the results in order to correctly evaluate each pitch. Please know that I am not a computer engineer so I may not be using the correct terminology...but this has all been broken down on www.closecallsports.com many times over the last few years. The computers are not good enough (at least not yet) to give instantaneous results which are better than an MLB umpire. It takes MLB nearly 24-hours after a game to get the final computer results. And, even then, it does not eliminate the computer's margin-of-error completely (or, to put it another way, the margin-of-error, even after all the post-came calibrations are completed, is still not statistically insignificant).
  10. Whatever the size of the difference, this difference can pucker an umpire's cheeks faster than anything else: All I know is that one day I went to rub up the baseballs before my plate job and instead of them reading, "New York-Penn League," they read "American League". I asked the clubby what was up. His reply was, "you didn't hear? Gooden has a rehab start tonight." And that's how I found out (through the label on a baseball) that I was umpiring my first game with an actual MLB pitcher. Talk about not being able to fit a pinhead up my a$$!
  11. My two cents (to add to all the great advice above): Upon hearing this, I would have done one of two things [Which of these I would have done would depend on the level at which the game is being played, how the game has gone so far (meaning, how the coach has behaved so far), and my prior relationship with the coach (and, yes, I know that each day is a "new game"...but coaches who have a history of proving they can't behave get a shorter leash.)]: 1. I would have responded with, "ARE YOU ACCUSING ME OF CHEATING?" (I would shine the spotlight really bright on him.) Please note that me saying this would not be in a "meek" tone of voice. It would not be said in a "polite and quiet voice" as you said you used when responding to the coach. I can assure you I would be saying this loudly, somewhat aggressively, and with a good stare down. Any response from the coach other than a "no" gets an immediate ejection. If he says, "I'm not accusing you of cheating blue, I'm just saying..." I would cut him off and say, "you are accusing me of cheating because you are saying I am intentionally making wrong calls because you think I don't like you. That's accusing me of cheating. This is your warning, if you continue to argue today you are going to be ejected!" Again, if he makes another peep...he's done. 2. Alternatively, (using the criteria set forth in the first paragraph of this post) I might have ejected the coach immediately. If/when he throws a fit wanting to know why he was ejected, I would reply, "you yelled for everyone to hear that you think I'm a cheater". (And you can bet that I will make sure my ejection report states everything he yelled and that it was yelled in a manner that was audible to everyone in attendance.) Of course, he'll deny that he called you a cheater. To which I would reply, "you just screamed that I was making calls against you on purpose because you think I don't like you. That's calling me a cheater. You're done!" Just to be clear, the language the coach yelled (which I quoted above from your post) meets one of the three P's (personal, profane, prolonged) in that it is personal. He used the word "you" numerous times. Not to mention he used "you" in the context of accusing "you" of cheating. In any event, this whole situation had to be shut down at this moment (when the language I quoted above was yelled by the coach). This should have been done either by giving him a warning as set forth in #1 above (and then ejecting without further warning for any further arguing), or by ejecting him immediately. You have rulebook and/or casebook support to use either of these methods at every level of baseball.
  12. South Carolina has something (even "just" travel ball) from end of January to the beginning of December. Basically, the weeks around the holidays are the only time that something is not going on.
  13. lawump

    "RemDawg"

    He admitted he was not fair to umpires as a player. But as an announcer (one whom I listened to regularly over the years), I found him (and his play-by-play partners)...while not perfect...to be far more fair to umpires than most announcers today. He would definitely go out of his way to say when he thought an umpire was having a good night. Sometimes, he might say when he thought an umpire was having a bad night, but he never blamed the umpires for a Sox' loss, and he never went off on a negative tangent about the umpires. It was more along the lines of, "as a player, you need to adjust." In fact, as I recall (I hope my memory is correct) the boys over at closecallsports.com even praised him once or twice for correctly understanding a rule or umpire's ruling. He was a true New England institution. https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2021/11/02/jerry-remy-rip/
  14. Number of ejections: 6 Number of times I failed to eject when, in hindsight, I should have: 0 It was a good year. [As the years go by, I begin to believe more and more that these are the only stats that matter.]
×
×
  • Create New...