Boring Ejection

[Jocko]

wow..would you cheat to help a team win if the assigner asked you to..and promised you some great plum games in return? so you coud go on a better vacation?

nice try

[mstaylor]

Did he give you any idea why he was to be tossed. Even if you don't have to list a rule you have to explain the ejection. I just can't see tossing anybody just because the assigner said toss him. I can see him say he has been a problem, don't take anything off of him. To tell you to dump him with no reason is unheard of.

[Jocko]

To all those who are so pissed at me and galloping around on your high horses, there IS a backstory. I cannot discuss details. Sufficed to say, I was not happy about it. I don't enjoy ejecting, I don't want to have a quick trigger rep. Stop being so self righteous and sanctimonious. None of us are qualified to cast the 1st stone.

[RichMSN]

To all those who are so pissed at me and galloping around on your high horses, there IS a backstory. I cannot discuss details. Sufficed to say, I was not happy about it. I don't enjoy ejecting, I don't want to have a quick trigger rep. Stop being so self righteous and sanctimonious. None of us are qualified to cast the 1st stone.

There may be a backstory, but I can guarantee you that I would never eject a coach for something that didn't happen on the field and during the time the game was played. If you expect us to respond in a certain way, then you need to provide more details. Otherwise, you may not like what you get as a response.

[scrounge]

To all those who are so pissed at me and galloping around on your high horses, there IS a backstory. I cannot discuss details. Sufficed to say, I was not happy about it. I don't enjoy ejecting, I don't want to have a quick trigger rep. Stop being so self righteous and sanctimonious. None of us are qualified to cast the 1st stone.

IF there is sufficient backstory, then the UIC and/or commissioner should have the cajones to just outright suspend the coach. Own it, don't do it in a backdoor way with a totally unjustified plate meeting ambush. It's not self righteous or sanctimonious to respond to the situation you presented. Your UIC wanted to suspend him or send a message and you were the willing hatchet man. That's not an ejection, that's a suspension disguised as one. And you were wrong to participate.

[Jocko]

To all those who are so pissed at me and galloping around on your high horses, there IS a backstory. I cannot discuss details. Sufficed to say, I was not happy about it. I don't enjoy ejecting, I don't want to have a quick trigger rep. Stop being so self righteous and sanctimonious. None of us are qualified to cast the 1st stone.

There may be a backstory, but I can guarantee you that I would never eject a coach for something that didn't happen on the field and during the time the game was played. If you expect us to respond in a certain way, then you need to provide more details. Otherwise, you may not like what you get as a response.

take this in the spirit it's intended..... Your opinion and $1.00 will buy a beer. Why would I feel the need to justify ANYTHING I do on or off the diamond to ANYONE? You do what you do and it works for you. Cool. Easy to judge others, but if you were under the same scrutiny you're imposing upon me, I bet you'd try to wiggle out of it. All 'm saying is I really don't give a rat's a$$ what YOU, or anyone else for that matter, may or may not do in your hypothetical scenarios. Capiche?

[Jocko]

F*** it. I'm out.

[mstaylor]

It is not possible to give the back story, unfortunately. I still don't like the idea but it was beyond Trout's control.

[scrounge]

It is not possible to give the back story, unfortunately. I still don't like the idea but it was beyond Trout's control.

I'm sure there is, but then let's just call it what it is, a suspension based on prior conduct. It's not just semantics, it makes a difference.

[JaxRolo]

I think pretty much at some point has wrongly ejected someone. You may not be aware of it. We seem to judge by a few words that are written on here when we really don't have the all the details. Sometimes a writer/poster may not communicate well what the actual situation might have been.

I posted another thread about a couple of ejections I had. If someone else had posted the same thing I probably would have been all over that person.

Things happen. Sometimes out of our control and sometimes due to other circumstances.

I don't think I would have ejected like Trout did but maybe the backstory would have changed my mind.

Let's not chastice someone for being honest on here looking for feedback. Express your opinion and leave it at that!

[RichMSN]

It is not possible to give the back story, unfortunately. I still don't like the idea but it was beyond Trout's control.

Really? He could've said, "I'm not doing your dirty work" and not worked the game.

[mstaylor]

Very true Rich, probably been my reaction but it was bigger than Trout. He has chosen to step out of the discussion because he can't reasonably defend himself without disclosing the story, which he can't do.

[UmpireSam]

At Disney we never eject players or Coaches.

At the pre game meeting we get the Head and base coaches names

If there is a problem with a player we call time in the same tone as our ball call.

Then we walk over to that player's Coach and say "Coach________ player number xx is disqualified."

You have to remove him from the game.

If the Coach refuses, you ask which one of the base coaches is now the Head Coach because Coach_____ is disqualified.

"New head coach, You have to remove the former Head Coach from the game".

They get the hint.

[RichMSN]

At Disney we never eject players or Coaches.

At the pre game meeting we get the Head and base coaches names

If there is a problem with a player we call time in the same tone as our ball call.

Then we walk over to that player's Coach and say "Coach________ player number xx is disqualified."

You have to remove him from the game.

If the Coach refuses, you ask which one of the base coaches is now the Head Coach because Coach_____ is disqualified.

"New head coach, You have to remove the former Head Coach from the game".

They get the hint.

In other words you play a little game to avoid calling an ejection an ejection.

Puh-leese.

[kristoffae]

At Disney we never eject players or Coaches.

At the pre game meeting we get the Head and base coaches names

If there is a problem with a player we call time in the same tone as our ball call.

Then we walk over to that player's Coach and say "Coach________ player number xx is disqualified."

You have to remove him from the game.

If the Coach refuses, you ask which one of the base coaches is now the Head Coach because Coach_____ is disqualified.

"New head coach, You have to remove the former Head Coach from the game".

They get the hint.

I work multiple Baseball events at Disney WWOS each year. I have seen my fair share of coaches and players ejected. Hell, I saw an umpire toss a disabled one legged coach. I never heard of the above policy when working at WWOS.

[Dragon29]

Your opinion and $1.00 will buy a beer.

OK - I don't want to chastise Trout for an EJ I don't totally understand, but . . . I can certainly flame the Hell out if him for drinking cheap-ass beer!!!

[HokieUmp]

I think pretty much at some point has wrongly ejected someone. You may not be aware of it. We seem to judge by a few words that are written on here when we really don't have the all the details. Sometimes a writer/poster may not communicate well what the actual situation might have been.

...

Let's not chastice someone for being honest on here looking for feedback. Express your opinion and leave it at that!

Rolo, I appreciate your effort in being a peacemaker here, I really do. It's a nice thing to do. But there are a couple points needed to be made here.

1. It was wrong. Unless some of the details left out were what the coach may have said at the plate meeting, he was not EJed for his actions ON THAT DAY/GAME. That's just flat out wrong. And if you're going to call coaches 'rats', as Trout does, then they at least have to have made a play for the cheese. (To be fair, I refer to them as rats, too, but I'm not going to cheat them like they try to do to me.)

2. The original post he made didn't read to me like looking for feedback. It looked more like bragging, and then turned into a complete and utter defense of the position. Doing what one's told is fine - to a point - but most of that string was "I don't care, I'd do it again!"

3. When the feedback was given, it was, let's say, ill-received. We give newbies hell for asking questions and then ignoring the feedback/advice, so it should be no different here. (Trout's only been registered a few months, but he's posted more than I have in 4+ years, so it's dealer's choice on newbie vs. non-newbie. Edited to say: newbie v. non-newbie in the online realm. Don't need to get into resume' wars.)