Why do I suck?!?

[JaxRolo]

Seems like I'm a horrible Internet Umpire. When I give an answer to a situation a lot of you guys disagree. But on the field I do a lot of high level type games where I have seen umpires kicked out because they are not very good. Yet I get invited back for these tournaments. I rarely have problems on the field. Evaluators and assignors often talk to me and tell me I've done a great job. So why can't I give a correct answer online?

[Texas Manny]

I know I've made some mistakes Jax, but when I do give the correct answer, which isn't mine, but by the professional interpretations manuals, folks still argue. So I'm at a loss too. The reason I went with the manual responses was to support my response with facts, but even those are refuted.

 

What's even more frustrating is I just get I'm wrong and then a personal attack or snide remark, not by one but many. I have no problem with folks disagreeing, but I don't go personal and always show respect. That courtesy is not always given back.

 

I do admit I've lashed out a few times, but only in response, never in opening aggression. So I don't have an answer for you.

[ricka56]

Maybe you're just masterful at convincing know-nothings that your incorrect interp is correct.

 

That was a tongue-in-cheek comment, but actually, I know umpires like that.

 

Better to be a good on-field umpire than a good internet umpire...I hope I am too.

[th3]

racism

[Kevin_K]

The problem with only the written word is that there is no opportunity to have a realistic conversation. Tone, emphasis, and nuance all are lacking in this format. To add to that, the reading comprehension of your audience impacts their understanding of your ideas. You should also consider that some people have to be right and need to let everyone know how smart they are - even when they are a total jack wagon.

 

It is the most difficult communication medium to master, yet it can be the most effective when done well.

 

Hopefully, I will one day be able to communicate as effectively as many of the members here seem to umpire.

 

- Kevin 

[Mike Prince]

You also don't see the play, you hear someone's (not always first hand) explanation of it and when you give input that is not agreed with, best case the OP gives a better explanation or they add details that they previously omitted. The worst case is a personal attack to prove just how right they (or another poster) are.  Either way they prove you wrong - and this ranges from courteous disagreement to far less appealing feedback.

 

Don't worry, I worse than suck at internet umpiring, and it really doesn't bother me anymore.  While I have learned a ton on this site since I joined in 2009, it is a different place 4+ years later.

[Jocko]

In my opinion, when on the field we have to trust our training, instincts, and judgement. Fly by the seat of our pants, so to speak. Online we have time to (over) think about it. And like Maverick said in Top Gun, "You don't have time to think. If you think, you're dead."

I try very hard to grasp every nuance of the craft. If I miss my point on here, "That's Nothing!!!"

If I miss it on the field, that's EVERYTHING.

[MRG9999]

Jax - It is hard to be an internet umpire.  Like Mike Prince and Manny say, you are only going by what the poster wants you to know.  On the field, it is a whole different scenerio where everything is in front of you to process and make your call.  Don't worry about the "internet umpiring".  People tend to twist things around to make responder look like an A$$. 

[Dannytheman]

I love ya man.....    But you can not have my Budweiser. 

[ricka56]

What's even more frustrating is I just get I'm wrong and then a personal attack or snide remark, not by one but many. .

 

I do admit I've lashed out a few times, but only in response, never in opening aggression.

That's complete BS and devoid of any sense of reality.  

 

... always show respect. That courtesy is not always given back.

ya mean like this...    you bring it on yourself, bruda, with posts like that. You should consider quit acting the persecuted.            

[Scratch Franzeo]

Practical Application of Rules > Theoretic Referencing of a Manual

[Platejob29]

Maybe you're just masterful at convincing know-nothings that your incorrect interp is correct.

 

That was a tongue-in-cheek comment, but actually, I know umpires like that.

 

Better to be a good on-field umpire than a good internet umpire...I hope I am too.

Well Rick I've got some bad news for you... haha just kidding. I agree it's better to be good on the field than on the internet. It's just like we talk about in the chapter how just because you can quote the rulebook and the mechanics book doesn't mean you know how to umpire.

[Jocko]

@ricka56 - assholish instigating. KNOCK IT OFF

[mstaylor]

It is hard to show nuances and jokes don't always translate well. I also agree it is better to be an umpire that can handle the game and level they are working. However, it is also good to discuss situations, rules and mechanics, to make us better when we do get to the field. What has never made sense is attacking an umpire personally when discussing these topics. I don't think a single one of us would ever opening attack a partner on the field, why is it different here. If a personal comment is needed, do it on PM, keep it between members. I have deleted more content this year than ever before, and that includes the other boards I mod. Warren started a very good thing here and there is some very good umpires here, including the posters in this thread. Fun jousting is encouraged, personal attacks are not. 

I enjoy the manual postings by Manny, Rich and others. It supports the knowledge that I think I have, or changes misconceptions I have. I teach umpires locally so having written back-up lends credibility when I teach.