A sad trend starting to appear its head.

[tldavis19]

We're "old skool" in Alabama. Daddies will take their son's to the woodshed for showing their ass. Every time I interact with a player it's yes sir or no sir. Gotta love the South.

I still use "sir" when I address the guys older than me in my association or have been at this longer. I get the "Sir is for my father" response a lot lol, but that's just how i was raised.

[johnnyg08]

Back in the day, the coaches generally policed their own team so we never had to deal with it.

 

Now, the coaches don't police, the umpires don't want to hurt anybody's feelings so they "warn" when they should be ejecting.  

 

That's what I see as the root of the problem.

[KyleUmp]

We, as umpires, are part of this problem. We don't eject nearly enough and often far too late for the ejection to have any preventative impact on a game. I found this especially true when I was umpiring youth/travel games. As young umpires in local rec leagues, we are taught that ejections are a last resort, try to keep everyone in the game, etc. That's all crap. The rules are very clear when it comes to what is allowed and not allowed in terms of arguing judgment calls, who is allowed to question an umpire, etc. We need to deal with situations as they come up and not allow them to snowball all game. I've never worked a game, at any level, where a coach or a player complaining about balls and strikes (for example) in the first inning or two got better as the game went along. It always gets worse until you do something about it, whether it be a warning, ejection, whatever. 

 

As a sidenote, we also have to mean it when we issue a warning. A warning is just that, a warning. You are warning that individual that if they are doing continues, even one time, they will be ejected. I think that umpires are too liberal with their warnings. If you warn someone and they continue to do what it is you warned them to stop and they are not ejected then what is your warning - or future warnings - really mean?

[johnnyg08]

We, as umpires, are part of this problem. We don't eject nearly enough and often far too late for the ejection to have any preventative impact on a game. I found this especially true when I was umpiring youth/travel games. As young umpires in local rec leagues, we are taught that ejections are a last resort, try to keep everyone in the game, etc. That's all crap. The rules are very clear when it comes to what is allowed and not allowed in terms of arguing judgment calls, who is allowed to question an umpire, etc. We need to deal with situations as they come up and not allow them to snowball all game. I've never worked a game, at any level, where a coach or a player complaining about balls and strikes (for example) in the first inning or two got better as the game went along. It always gets worse until you do something about it, whether it be a warning, ejection, whatever. 

 

As a sidenote, we also have to mean it when we issue a warning. A warning is just that, a warning. You are warning that individual that if they are doing continues, even one time, they will be ejected. I think that umpires are too liberal with their warnings. If you warn someone and they continue to do what it is you warned them to stop and they are not ejected then what is your warning - or future warnings - really mean?

 

Amen to that.  Well said.

[mstaylor]

One thing I was never accused of is waiting too long to eject, even in summer ball.