A botched EJ situation - how to help partner

[Rich Ives]

How many of you are involved in running a league?

I have run many youth baseball leagues. I am on the BOD of our men's league, which happens to be all umpires. I also work for the county park and rec.

How many of you just show up, do a pre-game., do the game, and get out of Dodge (collecting your chcck)?

Depends on the league but in most if I am umpiring I come, work the game and leave. However, I give my time on other days to assist in keeping the leagues running. I also spend many, many hours teaching and helping to improve our umpires.

I am constantly having RAT thrown in my face - just because I coach.

Only when you say stupid coach things or try to defend stupid coach tricks. I have acknowledged many times your rules knowledge, nor have I ever seen you called a rat.

I am constantly reading that coaches don't know the rules (and a significant number don't) but many (not all - many) of you indicate a refusal to teach (many of you do, but too many refuse). Why? Maybe so you can make statements like "I know the rules better than all of them"? Does that make you feel good? Important?

That is about the worse statement you have ever made here. Any that that could possibly apply to here don't work youth ball.

Coaches take umbrage with your decision, not you personally. They'll be upset with whoever made the call - not because it's you.

Of course, after a while the coaches know who the good umpires are. They also know who they cringe for. You can probably split it into "game management" and "game calling". If you get too bad in either one, being really good in the other won't save your reputation.

That's not been my experience with a percentage of coaches. I certainly have had my share that appreciated decent umpires but others prefer lesser umpires they can run games on.

Something that really annoys me is discussions of rec games/leagues where everyone involved except the umpires are volunteers, and reading umpire complaints about game length - when they're not complaining about it not being real baseball to have time limits.

Guys complain about the pace of the game which leads to long games. That is exactly what Joe complained about last year between Boston/NY. When they play each other they do every time wasting ploy in the book. Badly paced games are hard to work and boring.

Want to start a game on the wrong note? Say "Not on my field". Want to say it the right way? Say "Not in games I'm calling".

I would never say either. I say it is against, insert rule group, rules.

I don't really know what most of your post has to do with the thread but I am simply noting my musings.

I appreciate those who serve and teach and stated that many do. Thank you for doing your part.

See post 26 for the I- know-it-all-and-to hell-with-you" post

"nor have I ever seen you called a rat." See post 96.

[Rich Ives]

it is not the umpires job to teach the rules--the coaches should know the rules--also most coaches(I say over 90%) are parents and do it to be with there kids--as a ump I leave my family to WORK as a ump--when I WORK I get paid, don't you get paid to work?????

Who should teach them?

You get paid? Fine. You consider it WORK as in a job? I suggest you're there for the wrong reason.

But if you're at a rec league no one else does and they put in as much time and effort as you.

[mstaylor]

I really hate the "them vs. us" attitude from both coaches and umpires. I find that it's usually spawned from ignorance, grouchiness, or bad Mexican food. All unfortunate.

For every umpire that walks on the field assuming the guy in the dugout is an idiot, there's a coach thinking the same about you. If that's how you roll, I feel bad for you. Life's too short.

You are absolutely correct. I assure you I know some coaches that I know are idiots, either rulewise or handling players, I know some that are very good and I know some that are middle of the road.

I am going to treat coaches with respect, or at least politely, until they give me a reason to change. I know coaches that are hot heads but knowledgable, hot heads but clueless and both flavors of guys that rarely say anything.

Knowing or not knowing the rules of baseball have nothing to do with how I deal with a coach. If he asks a question, no matter how stupid, I will answer him. If he comes screaming at me, even if he is completely correct, he day is likely going to be short.

Knowledge or lack there of is not what gets you thrown out, lack of decorum does. Screaming at an umpire, getting personal or bringing a rulebook are all forms of lack of decorum. Players have their own list of auto ejections.

[Mr Umpire]

In this thread we have an umpire repeatedly claiming he knows who is and isn't concerned about having to reschedule a game - disputing someone who has been involved in all the issues for decades.

I never said I know your league. Also, you referred to your umpires as "family". But, you seem to act like you know mine. So, turnabout seems like fair play to me.

The only time the umpires were ever concerned with a schedule issue is if they would have to come back and finish it without extra pay. Otherwise, they don't care if it gets rescheduled.

How many of you are involved in running a league?

I haven't but my dad was on the board of one for years. I have heard about the issues. You are not the only one who has dealt with or heard about these issues. Get off the horse already.

How many of you just show up, do a pre-game., do the game, and get out of Dodge (collecting your chcck)?

Sure do. These are not my players nor kids. That job is left to the coach. This has what to do with the discussion.

There was a recent post that basically said that someone was a good coach but didn't teach behavior - and argued with those of us (including other umpires) who said that his failure to teach behavior meant he wasn't a good coach.

Relevance?

I am constantly having RAT thrown in my face - just because I coach.

I have used that term about coaches I have dealt with or seen on the field in some capacity. I haven't seen you on the field so I don't know. The reason I have seen it thrown at you is b/c of some of the debating you have done with the rules similar to how a coach may try it on the field. Or, when you defend a coach after an umpire has posted something about him.

I am constantly reading that coaches don't know the rules (and a significant number don't) but many (not all - many) of you indicate a refusal to teach (many of you do, but too many refuse). Why? Maybe so you can make statements like "I know the rules better than all of them"? Does that make you feel good? Important?

I don't teach b/c I didn't sign up for that role. If I am asked about something, I will take the time to educate. But, I do not and will not spark the conversation. If a coach/player/parent doesn't want to take the time to actually learn, I am not wasting my time to attempt to force it upon them.

I have read posts (various boards) where a poster asked "why did the player - runner - coach - whomever do a particular thing" - which to me would be perfectly clear to someone who has been around the game for any length of time.

Not really. Sometimes, the occurrence was so foolish that no one "who has been around the game for any length of time" can figure out. Such as, a team is down by 5 runs in the last inning and the coach does a suicide squeeze play.

Coaches take umbrage with your decision, not you personally. They'll be upset with whoever made the call - not because it's you.

Of course, after a while the coaches know who the good umpires are. They also know who they cringe for. You can probably split it into "game management" and "game calling". If you get too bad in either one, being really good in the other won't save your reputation.

Coaches spend half the time on offense and half the time on defense. Their view of a play will vary depending on which side they're on at the moment. BUT after the game, they'll understand the perspectives. If they can't -they won't survive as a coach.

Not exactly true. Many want an umpire who calls questionable ones their way or they can work them due to their lack of knowledge. And, some coaches do take umbrage with the umpire b/c of something in the past. I have seen that done.

Something that really annoys me is discussions of rec games/leagues where everyone involved except the umpires are volunteers, and reading umpire complaints about game length - when they're not complaining about it not being real baseball to have time limits.

It isn't about the length of the game. It is about the pace of the game. I don't mind doing a 4 hour 16 inning ball game as long as the game is a good one. And, by good one, I just mean pitching, hitting, and defense are doing their part. When players take 3 minutes to get into position for the next inning, what am I supposed to do? Eject all of them. No. I have to stand there and wait on them to get on the field. Thus, slowing down the pace and dragging out the game and making it boring. If they wanted to agree to getting as many innings in as possible in a 2 hour limit, I have no problem. Let's do 8 innings if possible. If it is a high scoring game b/c everyone is doing their best, so be it. We'll only get 4 innings in and that is fine. At least, the pace was good. But, if that same 2 hour limit and we only get 4 innings in due to walking on and off the field, I cannot wait until the 2 hour mark hits so I can start a new game and see how that goes.

Many umpires feel this way. Your perspective of the complaint is not the same as mine when I say it. You see it as "I am complaining that I have to be out there for 2 hours". When it is, "I am complaining about having to wait on them just to get started with the next inning". If the pace is fine, you won't ever, never hear that complaint from me.

Want to start a game on the wrong note? Say "Not on my field". Want to say it the right way? Say "Not in games I'm calling".

Honestly, who cares if it is said either way. It means the same thing. It isn't going to happen in the game where this umpire is involved.

Most of all learn to "turn the page". When it's over, it's over. Move on.

Many umpires do this. Generally, it is coaches/players/parents who can't. There are umpires who can't also. But, usually, it is a coach who brings up the past and gets tossed or reprimanded for doing so. At least, it is that way for me. And, if this wasn't true of coaches/players/parents, how does the umpire have a reputation and they "cringe" when the umpire comes on the field? This is a 50/50 shared problem sometimes. And, sometimes it isn't, even for the umpire who won't forget. Edited December 8, 2010 by Mr Umpire

[mstaylor]

I disagreed with your premise that lead to post 26. You and I have about the same time in LL and simply disagree that you should allow a LL coach to bring a book out. I will willingly allow him to protest and if I think I need to look it up to kill the protest then I will. If I am confident I won't, I will always talk to my partner to make sure we are on the same page.

I also disagreed with Hokie's answer to a point. I rarely am part of a league anymore, I am a freelance umpire, whether I am paid or not. I don't care if the coach likes me or not, but in a rules question situation I am probably going to know more than he does. There are a few umpires around that can match me rulewise but I can't think of a single coach. Is it possible for me to enforce a rule wrong and be corrected by a coach, sure, none of us are perfect. I will treat him respectfully until he steps over the line, see post above for the line.

Hokie is probably right, he just didn't word it that great.

As to post 96 he simply characterized the flavour of your post to be fairly us/them type post. I didn't take it that he was calling you a rat, just the position that you are taking is rat like. I personally think you are completely wrong in your stance. This may be the difference between you being primarily a coach that umpires and me being an umpire that has coached.

[Rich Ives]

I really hate the "them vs. us" attitude from both coaches and umpires. I find that it's usually spawned from ignorance, grouchiness, or bad Mexican food. All unfortunate.

For every umpire that walks on the field assuming the guy in the dugout is an idiot, there's a coach thinking the same about you. If that's how you roll, I feel bad for you. Life's too short.

Kyle, I don't know how many years you have in with your league. I have 37 with mine. I know you have a youth umpire corps and keep the coaches in line too.

If the umpires are volunteers and part of the league family we don't have these problems very often.

Our UIC and I do the teaching. It includes how to behave. We've been known to not renew relationships and have been known to terminate folks even in season - including coaches.

But the VAST majority of folks are wonderful with the program, teach well, and behave properly. And those of you who sheparded you kids through a sport know it - but seem to sometimes forget it.

Yet on the boards I constantly get confronted with posts calling coaches rats, pointing out their lack of rules knowledge to the point of mocking them, and in general impugning their integrity. I see volunteer workers belittled and directors derided. And I get trashed for defending them.

Sorry folks - I'm going to keep doing it.

BTW - Don't forget that for every HS game there are multiple non-school games. The only reason you have games to "work" is because a gazillion parents and/or other volunteers are out there organizing it all - whether it be baseball, basketball, soccer, hockey, or whatever.

[jjb]

I’ve found that Coaches generally come in three categories:

The first category makes up about 75% of the Organization. These people are either well-informed about rules, or willing to ask questions politely and respectfully. They run their teams with an even disposition, no matter what the score. They are an absolute joy to work with, and the reason we keep coming back. We rarely post about these people, because there’s nothing to talk about.

The second category makes up about 20% of the group. They are usually well-grounded in rules knowledge, except for the more obscure ones. When we explain the obscure ones, they’ll generally back off. They are usually well behaved, except when the game is close, or on the line. Then, they have a tendency to blame the umpire for the call, rather than shake it off as part of baseball. Usually, with these people, a short “calibration” in the form of a warning will keep them in check.

The third category makes up about 5% of the group. These are the rats we talk about, and, IMHO, have no business in Youth Sports. Their rules knowledge begins with the phrase “everybody knows that…”, and nobody can tell them different. If the game goes his way, it’s due to his Superior Coaching Ability. If it doesn’t, it’s because the Umpire’s an idiot, and it’s the coaches responsibility to tell him so. These are the coaches we end up tossing, and these are the ones we’re usually talking about here.

If you try and lump them into one category, whether it be “Rat” or “non-Rat”, you run the risk of somebody calling you on it. I think that's what we're seeing here....

[otownmike]

Probably the worst thing in this example is we are talking about ejecting a coach in a 9U game? That said, I usually will take a little behind the plate about select pitches. Certainly not going to take a constant questioning of my strike zone, nor allow the rule book or change places actions to happen without severe warning or ejection. The key is to establish control right away as I don't think many coaches in this type of division are interested in getting ejected. I have also found the occassional between inning private sidebar with the team manager (who may not be the coach in question) gets their attention about how the rest of the game is going to go and whether or not they want to be a part of it.

[mstaylor]

Welcome otownmike. You make a good point.

The 5% that jjb referenced are the idiots that want to argue every rule myth known to man. It is rampant at the younger levels because many of the coaches are new to coaching and have no sense of decorum. Also, many of the umpires are equally inexperienced. The teaching that Rich references happens here quite often. You have to explain many more rulings than at higher levels, this is to be expected. The problem is the parents are more excitable, as are the coaches, and sometimes the only way to teach limits is to excuse a coach. Do I toss many coaches in 12 and under, rarely, but I certainly will explain that the possibility is there.

[Mr Umpire]

Kyle, I don't know how many years you have in with your league. I have 37 with mine. I know you have a youth umpire corps and keep the coaches in line too.

If the umpires are volunteers and part of the league family we don't have these problems very often.

Our UIC and I do the teaching. It includes how to behave. We've been known to not renew relationships and have been known to terminate folks even in season - including coaches.

But the VAST majority of folks are wonderful with the program, teach well, and behave properly. And those of you who sheparded you kids through a sport know it - but seem to sometimes forget it.

Yet on the boards I constantly get confronted with posts calling coaches rats, pointing out their lack of rules knowledge to the point of mocking them, and in general impugning their integrity. I see volunteer workers belittled and directors derided. And I get trashed for defending them.

Sorry folks - I'm going to keep doing it.

BTW - Don't forget that for every HS game there are multiple non-school games. The only reason you have games to "work" is because a gazillion parents and/or other volunteers are out there organizing it all - whether it be baseball, basketball, soccer, hockey, or whatever.

No argument about much of this post. And, by doing your part of questioning things like this, it keeps us on our toes. And, keeps us honest or at least attempts to. And, you know I have no problems with "know-it-alls" being questioned as I have dealt with before. Especially when I first started posting on other sites.

[spiritump]

Who should teach them?

You get paid? Fine. You consider it WORK as in a job? I suggest you're there for the wrong reason.

But if you're at a rec league no one else does and they put in as much time and effort as you.

I do it because I love the game--I get paid because I have a skill that I work hard at to be good at my job-- and for that I get a good pay for my games--as for the rec coaches as I stated before --they are there for their kids!!! As to learn the rules--that is there responsibility to learn them--but most think they know it all already--just ask them.

[HokieUmp]

How many of you just show up, do a pre-game., do the game, and get out of Dodge (collecting your chcck)?

Me. That is what I'm paid to do, and that's my 'job' for that league - to officiate. Not coach, nor groudskeep, nor work the concession stand, nor be 'team mom.'

And yes, I take a check. I know that makes me 'dirty' in your mind, and others, but it is, as they say, what it is. When/if youth coaches buy gear, get trained in both the game and how to coach, I would expect their leagues to pay them as well, frankly.

On the other hand, I get abused, in varying degrees, by coaches, players, and parents, and am taught not to respond. And I'm also taught not to question a coaches decision, nor mock a bad/stupid play. So yeah, I'm taking an effing check.

There was a recent post that basically said that someone was a good coach but didn't teach behavior - and argued with those of us (including other umpires) who said that his failure to teach behavior meant he wasn't a good coach.

I don't think that was me, but I'd say if he wasn't teaching beyond the sports part, that doesn't make him a bad coach. It could be argued he's not doing his role model duties, if one wants to go that route, but it doesn't make him a bad coach.

I am constantly reading that coaches don't know the rules (and a significant number don't) but many (not all - many) of you indicate a refusal to teach (many of you do, but too many refuse). Why? Maybe so you can make statements like "I know the rules better than all of them"? Does that make you feel good? Important?

Yes. Yes, it does.

I don't work for those leagues. I work for an association of officials. When exactly am I going to teach? In the middle of a game, when emotions are running high? Really? Or after that same game? I've already had two encounters here in Virginia where coaches/parents have approached me and/or my partner after a game in our "locker room." It didn't go that well, and they weren't there to learn rules; they were there to tell me what a useless sonofabitch I was. (Paraphrasing, of course.) Not exactly one of your "teachable moments."

If my association wanted us to go teach a league's coaches, would I go? I probably would. Since I've not heard reports of pigs flying at 35,000 feet, I'm pretty sure it won't happen.

I have read posts (various boards) where a poster asked "why did the player - runner - coach - whomever do a particular thing" - which to me would be perfectly clear to someone who has been around the game for any length of time.

Runners that put their heads down and just run on an infield pop-up? That's clear to you? When you see multiple runners on the same base, that too?

There is self-policing that you have to allow up to a point. Read the WHOLE last sentence again, especially the underscored part.

And that's what started this whole long-a$$ thread: even though the rulebook says judgement calls are not to be argued, the practice is that they are. To a point. But one of those "argument no-nos" is NO RULEBOOK ON THE FIELD.

And yet you won't accept that.

I have coaches argue. They question me on judgement, and I allow it. If they get personal or cross a line, they are warned/ejected as warranted. And you know what I mean about questiong judgement: "He never tagged my runner." "Yes, he did, Skip." That's not disputing a rule interpretation; that's arguing a judgement call. And - to a point - we allow it. Even I - who you think is Arrogance Personified - allows it.

Coaches spend half the time on offense and half the time on defense. Their view of a play will vary depending on which side they're on at the moment. BUT after the game, they'll understand the perspectives. If they can't -they won't survive as a coach.

And yet they do.

Something that really annoys me is discussions of rec games/leagues where everyone involved except the umpires are volunteers, and reading umpire complaints about game length - when they're not complaining about it not being real baseball to have time limits.

That's already been addressed elsewhere, but if the game is moving, I don't really care. Two hours is two hours. But if it's badly played, and the players are moving like pond water getting on/off the field, it's a miserable experience. I'm all for time limits - I've had games this year that might still be playing if the league hadn't set time and/or run limits.

Want to start a game on the wrong note? Say "Not on my field". Want to say it the right way? Say "Not in games I'm calling".

Relevance?

But, since it's been brought up: does it matter which way it's said? According to my rulebook, once we start the plate meeting, it IS my field, to include directing groundstaff (i.e., a dad). So, for what it's worth, they're interchangable.

On the other hand, I can't think of a time where I've said that to start a game. Why would I? Exchange cards, do groundrules, discuss issues required by the rulebook we're under (stuff like sportsmanship, etc), and close with "good luck and be safe." Done and done.

I mean, when would that come up? I can only think I would respond in that manner if a coach were to come out with an attitude, either about a previous umpire or a game I've done for him earlier. So, yeah, he might get a bit of a face-full in return.

And as for post #26.... I'm going to be pedantic. If you go back and look at my quote, I did equivocate about knowing more than ALL of the youth coaches. It was along the lines of, in not actually directly quoted as, "I know I know more than most, if not all." That does give me a little wiggle room, in case there's a coach out there that actually opens the rule book he gets from the league at the beginning of the year. (Sorry, Mike, but I'll have to disagree with you; I think I worded it just fine, even if the tone was sharpish.) Given that it came up about 75 posts later, that must still concern you. But I guess that's the coach side of you speaking.

Put it this way, I'll quote Lois Griffin in the episode where she learns some form of martial arts: If there's a youth coach among the lot that we officiate for around here that wants to take me on in a rules test, "Spin the wheel, Raggedy Man!" If I get beat, I get beat. But I'm pretty comfortable with how many I'd beat.

[kylejt]

Everybody comes to the parks for different reasons. Mine is no better than anyone else's. The quicker I figured that out, but better off I was. And it's just a game, so I don't get that wound up about it. I do find it funny, and partly sad, that some folks do. Oh well. Me, I get fired up about things that are a hair more important.

[otownmike]

Welcome otownmike. You make a good point.

The 5% that jjb referenced are the idiots that want to argue every rule myth known to man. It is rampant at the younger levels because many of the coaches are new to coaching and have no sense of decorum. Also, many of the umpires are equally inexperienced. The teaching that Rich references happens here quite often. You have to explain many more rulings than at higher levels, this is to be expected. The problem is the parents are more excitable, as are the coaches, and sometimes the only way to teach limits is to excuse a coach. Do I toss many coaches in 12 and under, rarely, but I certainly will explain that the possibility is there.

Hey Michael....I saw your site as a regular poster from Ask the Ump.....good topic here. I have done a lot of Orlando area travel ball mostly now in the 14-18 range but have done my share of 10-12 under. don't disagree that you have to be ready to toss any of them if they cross the line and while it may be a little jagged individually we all know it when it happens. Definitely agree it is a lose-lose if you let them go to the rulebook. I love what you said how "it won't end well for them if they do it." Missed calls are part of baseball at all levels, all we can do is read up on them constantly and attend mechanics and other clinics to be as sharp as we can be. Thanks for the post opp.

[midmoump]

IMO (which lately on this board is less point of view and more point of attack), it is not my place as an umpire to teach the players nor the coaches concerning rules, decorum, or civility. There is a place for a player or coach who chooses to be ignorant, or uncouth, or disrespectful. That place is the parking lot. If the hook teaches him something, great. If a warning teaches, that's fine too. But frankly I don't care if the player or coach learns or not.

My role as umpire includes making the calls, enforcing the rules, maintaining order and fair play, and managing the progress of the game. Players play, coaches coach, umpires umpire. To paraphrase, "I ain't here to be no nanny in no kindergarten!"

My point here is, somewhere in this favored land there may exist an idyllic league where coaches, parents, and even umpires cooperate to further the best interests of the children and teach the great game of baseball. Unfortunately many, including myself, umpire in a more difficult environment where teaching by the umpire is neither sought nor welcomed.

While my view may seem myopic to some, isn't a contrary view demeaning to the parents, the players, and the coaches? I mean, the parents have raised their children to be respectful, right? The coaches have educated themselves on the rules and are experienced in the game, right? The players want to compete fairly, right?

That is why a coach with a rulebook in hand gets heard and is not immediately and automatically tossed "on my field." If there is a legitimate reason for the rulebook to be out, great. If not, he can read it to himself in the parking lot. Whether he learns something from the experience is not my concern. Otherwise I will spend most of the game "teaching." For instance:

"Hey kid, don't walk in front of the umpire and catcher, it's disrespectful."

"Hey skip, let me explain Rule 6.08©, just in case you don't understand your options here."

"Hey parent, be more positive."

No, IMO, it is simply not my place as an umpire to teach.

[midmoump]

Players play, coaches coach, umpires umpire.

[mstaylor]

This has been a long, contentious thread. I have had many discussions with managers over the years. Everybody here knows my addage of playing 80% of the game with 20% of the rules. This leads to coaches that have played for years with no clue about most of the book. This means when something odd happens they come out for an explanation, that's us teaching, no matter the level. If they come out screaming, they go away. If they come out upset they are given a chance to settle down and get an explanation, if they don't they are given the option of returning to the dugout or getting an early night. If they bring a rulebook out I will stop them as they exit the dugout if I can. If I can't then it's the parking lot. I just can't see an instance where it would be reasonable to bring a rulebook out. All of these situations are teaching moments for us. They may not see it but we are either teaching a rule interpretation or teaching what is acceptable on a ball field.

I have very very few ejections at any level, whether it is a 9/10 game or an semi-pro game. If a batter draws a line on you, auto ejection. This can be a teaching moment or a verification of something he already knew.

I have been on many BODs of youth leagues, but right now I help run a semi-pro league. This means I have spent time fixing fields, scheduling rainouts and games called for weather, scheduling umpires and many other things that have nothing to do with my job on the field. When I umpire, that is my job that night. I don't fix fields, I don't work in the concession stand or anything else.

I really don't see the need to get upset with each other over this. Disagreeing is fine but the sniping is unnecessary. Whether you are a LL volunteer or working AL or NCAA, when you umpire you are there to administrate that game, your BOD responsibilities are turned off for that game.

[yawetag]

My point here is, somewhere in this favored land there may exist an idyllic league where coaches, parents, and even umpires cooperate to further the best interests of the children and teach the great game of baseball.

These are the leagues where the umpire wears his hat backwards and his shin guards outside his pants.

[Umpire in Chief]

This has been a long thread and probably should be coming to an end.

My thoughts after trying to digest so many different things in this thresd...

1. Everybody had their own tollerance level if you're a umpire, player or coach of what will be acceptable.

2. Some umpires are still working on finding their "comfort level" when it comes to making/not making ejections, game management skills, people management, and just as coaches and players do some odd-ball plays that have me thinking WTF? umpires are in a period of awkwardness as they learn where their line is and will make some errors. It's just part of the learning curve. We as senior or more experienced umpires should offer advice to these guys at the appropriate place and time. Not leting them loose credibility on the field and not leting them hang themselves either.

3. I think a number of people have gone a bit far with blanket, one-size-fits-all statements. These are okay for discussion purposes but like virtually everything in life, the situation and circumstances will dictate. Will I always EJ someone for (pick your ejectionable offense) probably not, the majority of the time yes. A lot is going to depend on the situation, the tact of the people involved and who knows what else.

4. Guys, remember any group will have their good and their bad this includes umpires and coaches. As for umpires there are everything from guys who are giving their best effort with little to no education & training, to the I don't give a crap, to the "works in progress", to the guys who treat every game like the most important one. We all have to deal with that and it can be frustrating. Same goes for coaches. The act of being a coach does not alone make one a RAT, and there are some very "excitible" coaches I respect a lot because they know their craft including maybe not necessiarily the rules all the time, but how to air their issues in a professional way. And there are other coaches with all levels of play and success who are just arrogant SOBs and hold umpires in complete content. That's life. Deal with it in the specific context your in and then move on.

5.We as umpires are a special group, generally speaking we take our craft very seriously and therefore can get fired up when we or our advocation come under fire. And this is a good thing. Nobody else is out there looking out for us, so we need to be sure to have our brother's backs. But there is a point of diminishing returns. Sometimes we just need to suck it up and then keep moving. I say umpires are special because next year will be when I have been an umpire lomnger than a soccer referee, I know it's apples to oranges but, I never had a detailed post game after a soccer game with my partners discussing my strengths and weaknesses (and I had some great partners) sought out advice as to how to improve. It just didn't happen. We showed up 1/2 an hour before the game warmed up together, BS'ed did the game and got out. I Never remember meeting more than a handful of referees with a passion for what they do, where umpires generally seem to have a passion for what they do.

6. Coaching as an umpire - As umpires we are constantly walking that line. And for each person that line is going to be in a different place, and once again the situation is going to come into play. How many times, regardless of level of play, has a discussion of rules or situations with coaches maybe crossed the line into coaching? Generally I'd say I don't coach as an umpire, but thinking back on some of the conversations I've had maybe I've gone a little further into the coaching side than I should or was necessary. It happens and a good coach with appropriate tact, personality and the right questions will get more than some of his counterparts, it's human nature. Now am I going to actively go out there and coach during a game, no and as umpires we shouldn't. But a legitimate question asked appropriately is more likely to get a solid answer and even an explanation which might boarder or cross the coaching line. Am I a softy for this? No, but I will let some coaches stretch my coaching/umpiring line.

Lets have a merry Christmas and not let this get us so bent out of shape.