Why do Umpires Eject? - A clinic topic.

[ump570]

When coaches or players attempt to create a mob mentality in the dugout and take out a team's misfortune on you. Somebody's gotta go to be an example to the rest. 

[BRUMP]

because we have a bad attitude and we had a bad day at work/school and we have nothing better to do than ruin Americas pastime

[James Walker]

To uphold the integrity of the game.

[JaxRolo]

because we have a bad attitude and we had a bad day at work/school and we have nothing better to do than ruin Americas pastime

You may be joking but it's true at times. All weekday games are normally after 5pm. You just don't know what kind of day a person has had. This includes coaches. A person may have got fired, divorced, in a fight, you just never know. These things may affect all of us on the field.

[catsbackr]

The three P's --- prolonged, profane, or personal.

This is all you need to keep in mind. Think about it, every ejection you have will fall into one of these three categories.

The rest, what you're looking for I think, comes with experience but, with the exception of MC, will fall into these three categories.

Nicely done JHS, perfect answer!

[bluejerred]

Many others have given great answers. Here's mine.

 

• "You"/ Personal statements -- I have zero tolerance
• Being accused of cheating -- Zero tolerance if I feel they are being serious, very little tolerance otherwise
• Counting - Very low tolerance; they'll get a warning and be on an extremely short leash
• Demonstrating - Low tolerance; may get a warning depending on how animated they get
• Inciting others (players or spectators) - No tolerance
• Ignoring a prior warning - No tolerance; if I was nice enough to give a warning earlier don't shove it up my a$$.
• Physical contact/spit/spittle- Zero tolerance
• Prolonged arguments - Even if the player/coach is staying within the reasonable realm, we need to get back to playing ASAP. So say what you have to say once you run out of new material get back to the bench (and too many umpires keep giving them new material) once you start repeating yourself my tolerance level drops quickly. 
• Trying to be smart/cute in arguing a judgement call - you may get more slack in being direct in arguing a judgement call. Don't try to play games or be a smarty pants in skirting around it. My tolerance goes quickly with this too.

 

These are somewhat situational. I may give the coach of the 12 y/o team who thinks he's the next Lou Piniella a little more line and try to educate him on the path of destruction he is on, but when I feel the coach should know better then you've gotta go.

 

If I were running such a clinic I'd cover how to address an umpire and have a productive conversation for coaches and a how to manage managers for the umps.

As a new umpire, this is the advice that I am looking for.  I have never ejected anyone before so I have always was conflicted on what my "threshold" should be.  One thing that I have learned by reading all of your experiences is that it's not about what your threshold is; instead it should be what should actually be allowed during the course of a game.  However, experience no doubt will still be a factor and I'm sure I'll have more confidence in my decisions as I call more games and deal with more situations.  All that being said, if you were umpiring a "friendly" scrimmage and you were faced with issues from either one or both benches, would you still eject or would you just return the money and walk away?

[UmpJM]

I hate to introduce "unpleasantness" into this discussion, but I have come to believe that a significant percentage of ejections are the result of an umpire kicking a call and failing to effectively manage the ensuing "discussion" because he lacks the impartiality to admit to himself that he kicked it and/or reacts in an antagonistic manner rather than defusing the situation.

 

JM

[BigUmp56]

I hate to introduce "unpleasantness" into this discussion, but I have come to believe that a significant percentage of ejections are the result of an umpire kicking a call and failing to effectively manage the ensuing "discussion" because he lacks the impartiality to admit to himself that he kicked it and/or reacts in an antagonistic manner rather than defusing the situation.

JM

YES YES YES! I believe that the only thing to do when you kick a call is to own up to it. A manager may not like hearing you say that you kicked it, but he can respect it..........usually.

Tim.

[BigUmpire]

I hate to introduce "unpleasantness" into this discussion, but I have come to believe that a significant percentage of ejections are the result of an umpire kicking a call and failing to effectively manage the ensuing "discussion" because he lacks the impartiality to admit to himself that he kicked it and/or reacts in an antagonistic manner rather than defusing the situation.

 

JM

"significant percentage" ?

[UmpJM]

Big,

 

So, you're not going to let me get away with that, huh? Good call. 

 

How about, more than 25% and less than 50%. My opinion is that it's less than half, but more than just one every now and then.

 

JM

[BigUmpire]

Big,

 

So, you're not going to let me get away with that, huh? Good call. 

 

How about, more than 25% and less than 50%. My opinion is that it's less than half, but more than just one every now and then.

 

JM

"more than 25%" ?

[BigUmpire]

Clearly UmpJM is correct.

 

I MAY not agree with his estimate BUT if you have "stepped in it", as we all have, you sometimes "resort" to this to get the game back on track. 

 

Not good BUT how many times have we let a RAT stay whan he should have been run over by a truck in the parking lot!

[Celerion]

I think there are a number of situations which warrant an ejection.

1: You (directed at an umpire), some sort of clear profanity, followed by a derogatory term. I think this is fairly universal, but I don't want to speak for others.

2: Any malicious contact with the umpires. I would agree that even at any level, this should most likely should be followed by an ejection. A quick assessment between it being accidental vs malicious should be easy to make and would be up to the umpire involved.

3: I like the acronym IAWE (ignore, address, warn, eject) that was used in a previous topic. I think that it is a good model IMO and might share it with the umpires who worked for me this past season although ejections are rare for or league.

4: Excessive arguing about a play. I think that this is up for interpretation as to when it reaches that point. I agree with what people said about Harry Weindlestidt's (sorry about the mis-spelled last name, but tried to get close) handling of the situation. He would let coaches express their opinion [as long as it was expressed the "right way"] but would tell them when it was "time to go".

I personally think it is good to be willing to work with the coaches when possible while still remembering that as the umpire there is a job to be done and it is the umpires job to umpire, and the coaches job to coach.

Any other situations that should warrant ejections?

[JaxRolo]

2: Any malicious contact with the umpires.

 

[BRUMP]

2: Any malicious contact with the umpires.

 

I hope u mean MC with players...any malicious contact w me and that guys goin to the slammer