Eject or Not Eject?

[maven]

No. Are you seriously going to toss a coach who says, "I think you missed that one. Your positioning was horrible?"

Exactly. Folks need to figure out what's personal: stop thinking about the pronoun, and start thinking about the point of the remark.

 

Coach is entitled to his opinion. Repeat until you understand that. He thinks you're wrong — your call is wrong — and you can't run him for that. It's impossible to express that thought without the pronoun. That can't be what "personal" amounts to.

 

So approach the issue another way: your call is "rules + judgment." coach is allowed to ask you to justify your ruling with a rule. He is not allowed to challenge your judgment, but he is entitled to think your judgment is wrong.

 

So, he can say, "you're wrong about the rules," and we can talk about that briefly. He can say, "your judgment is wrong," and we will leave that alone. This is all legal, though of course if he's running around making an azz of himself and screaming at the top of his lungs then it won't matter that the content of what he says is permissible. But if you know what coach is allowed to say, that might help you recognize the personal comments he's not allowed to say.

 

At our clinics I try to help umpires see the difference between these legitimate expressions of dissent and a personal comment, one that is directed at me, personally. I try to help them move away from the obsession with the pronoun 'you,' which is neither necessary nor sufficient for a personal comment. (A coach who screams "Cheater!" at me from the dugout has not used the word 'you'...) And of course, I always start with: "Coach is entitled to his opinion." Some guys can't seem to agree to disagree (which should be easier for us, since our judgment is the only one that counts).

 

I called a technical foul on a coach in basketball last season when he slipped up. He disagreed with a call of mine and said, "You're terrible...I mean... that's a terrible call!" He knew immediately that he had crossed the line, and he tried to jump quickly back behind it. Too late!

[Cav]

 

No. Are you seriously going to toss a coach who says, "I think you missed that one. Your positioning was horrible?"

 

 

I need to take care of business.  And, let's be clear on exactly what business needs to be taken care of.  Having another opinion on a call is common.  Were it not, no official would be needed to sort out disagreements between the opponents. 

 

Skipper:  I think you missed that one (no problem up to this point.)

Me:  (While swallowing all the sarcasm boiling up within concerning his oxymoron, "I think..." there is no need to comment.  But if I did it would be simply)  I hear you, Skip.

 

But, when he make a disparaging comment to a game official, then his motivation is beyond expressing an opinion and it enters into verbal bullying, either trying to frighten the official into making future calls biased in his team's favor (getting into the umpire's head) or, at the very least, either using the umpire as an excuse to justify his team's performance outcome or to raise the level of respect his players, assistants and fans may have of his coaching prowess.  All this at the cost of the demeanor and bearing of the umpire and, may I add, the game.     

 

If I let it go, he will likely continue on about this call or later repeat himself on other calls, in this game and/or other games, that I work or with other crews.  His objective, be it known to him or not, is to win by using a strategy of biasing the independence of the crew into owing his team a favorable call.  The tactic he has chosen is to disparage (bully) me in order to figure out my "trigger" while "teasing the snake" in front of his players, assistants and fans.  His convoluted logic leads him to believe his "performance" will somehow earn their respect of his coaching prowess and help his team win.     

 

If I try to take care of business in a PC sort of way, then I have not solved the issue that likely will occur again. 

 

Skipper:  I think you missed that one.  Your positioning was horrible.

Me:  If I heard you correctly, Skip, you were not so much questioning the application of a rule but rather you related to me your need to comment on that call in order to earn the empathy and respect of your players, assistant and fans.  Is that correct?

Skipper:  What? 

Me:  De Baker, Thompson and Uche have written extensively on redirecting hostile energy by influencing your terms of thought from your reptilian brain to thinking with your pre-frontal cortex. 

Skipper:  What?

Me:  Let's play ball (leaving him standing in foul territory and trotting out to my next spot.)

Skipper:  What?

 

By making the correct decision that his comment, "Your positioning was horrible"  was personal, there may be extenuating circumstances that influence precisely how business will be taken care of.  I may have indeed been out of position due to any number of reasons (field conditions, inherent shortcomings of a one- or two-man system, trying to cover a "snowball" fight, et. al.)  But, I do not accept personal comments about any laziness or lack of knowledge on where to be on my part.       

[Cav]

At our clinics I try to help umpires see the difference between these legitimate expressions of dissent and a personal comment, one that is directed at me, personally. I try to help them move away from the obsession with the pronoun 'you,' which is neither necessary nor sufficient for a personal comment. (A coach who screams "Cheater!" at me from the dugout has not used the word 'you'...) And of course, I always start with: "Coach is entitled to his opinion." Some guys can't seem to agree to disagree (which should be easier for us, since our judgment is the only one that counts).

 

I called a technical foul on a coach in basketball last season when he slipped up. He disagreed with a call of mine and said, "You're terrible...I mean... that's a terrible call!" He knew immediately that he had crossed the line, and he tried to jump quickly back behind it. Too late!

 

 

A personal comment can indeed be expressed at you, but more importantly the personal comment itself is about you. 

 

A coach who screams the exclamatory sentence, "Cheater!" at me will be understood to have exclaimed, "You are a cheater!"  I'm not all that much into English grammar, and perhaps someone smarter than me will explain it better. 

[Replacematt]

By making the correct decision that his comment, "Your positioning was horrible"  was personal, there may be extenuating circumstances that influence precisely how business will be taken care of.  I may have indeed been out of position due to any number of reasons (field conditions, inherent shortcomings of a one- or two-man system, trying to cover a "snowball" fight, et. al.)  But, I do not accept personal comments about any laziness or lack of knowledge on where to be on my part.

 

So, he makes a true statement that is relevant to the issue at hand, and you'll toss him. According to you, he can't air a legitimate grievance and explain to you why it is legitimate without it being personal.

[Cav]

 

 

So, he makes a true statement that is relevant to the issue at hand, and you'll toss him. According to you, he can't air a legitimate grievance and explain to you why it is legitimate without it being personal.

 

 

Is his declaration true?  If so, see my comments above.  If not, he now has made a personal comment about me, not an opinion, and that's that. 

[Replacematt]

So, he makes a true statement that is relevant to the issue at hand, and you'll toss him. According to you, he can't air a legitimate grievance and explain to you why it is legitimate without it being personal.

 

Is his declaration true?  If so, see my comments above.  If not, he now has made a personal comment about me, not an opinion, and that's that.

No, he hasn't. He's simply incorrect. Stop looking to get offended and umpire.

[Platejob29]

 

 

So, he makes a true statement that is relevant to the issue at hand, and you'll toss him. According to you, he can't air a legitimate grievance and explain to you why it is legitimate without it being personal.

 

Is his declaration true?  If so, see my comments above.  If not, he now has made a personal comment about me, not an opinion, and that's that.

 

No, he hasn't. He's simply incorrect. Stop looking to get offended and umpire.

 

Matt I think now I see where we differ on the subject. I don't eject someone because they offend me and to me ejections shouldn't be because someone feels offended. As Thunderheads said above I appreciate the discussion we've been able to have on the topic and the examples you gave to explain your position. I also have to say that we are going to have to agree to disagree. I wish more threads on this website would have discussions like this rather than just an argument back and forth were neither party ever gives relavent examples to explain their position.

[Thunderheads]

I must concur w/ @Platejob29 .....

 

I think this has been handled very nicely by all sides without getting nasty (and I'm not just saying that as a moderator)

 

I also wanted to interject that all of this is very dependent on HOW THE COACH is saying these things we're discussing.  Calmly and not acting like an idiot, ... it can probably be discussed, .... yelling like a fool for all to hear will NOT end well!

[Majordave]

I agree. I've been a casual observer. Kudos to the participants. Well stated opinions.

Most EJs are a HTBT situation in my opinion. Context of words, body langusge, non-verbal cues are key if not overt and blatant.

[PonyUmpire]

The word "you" doesn't necessarily make a remark personal.  "You missed that call" is not personal.  It's a value judgement on the call, not on me.  "Your zone sucks" isn't personal either (although I might still eject for it).  A statement is personal if it's an assault on me or my character, regardless of whether or not it contains the word "you".  If a coach turns to me on his way back to the dugout and says "a**hole", he has just made a personal comment.   

[Cav]

(I can't believe, of all people, I am about to teach grammar.)

 

"You" is a personal pronoun that refers to a particular person (singular) or group of people (plural).  If somebody talking to me says, "You missed that call" then he is making a statement that reflects on my character, conduct and/or motives in an offensive manner. 

 

"Your" is an adjective that is literally defined as belonging or related to you.  If someone talking to me says, "Your zone sucks" then he is making a statement that again reflects on my charter, conduct and/or motives in an offensive manner. 

 

When someone looks at me and says, "[A]**hole" then the subject and verb are understood.

 

All statements warrant a response, be it a warning, restriction (NFHS) or an EJ. 
 

[maven]

(I can't believe, of all people, I am about to teach grammar.)

 

 

You should have stopped with this statement. As far as I can tell, it's the only correct one in the entire post.

[conbo61]

Holy crap, some people need to get out on a field and just umpire. This winter is making folks crazy.

[bluejerred]

If he asks for time to specifically tell me my zone sucks. He just ejected himself

 

I've seen coaches request time in the middle of an at-bat to come to the plate umpire and ask them where the pitch was.  What would be the correct action taken here in everyone's opinion?

[conbo61]

I would give a one word answer "high", " outside ", etc. and then have a between inning discussion to not do that again.

[aiber]

I would not say anything, turn around and put the ball back in play.

[johnnyg08]

I've seen coaches request time in the middle of an at-bat to come to the plate umpire and ask them where the pitch was.  What would be the correct action taken here in everyone's opinion?

Really? Do not grant time for this purpose. As soon as you find out that it is a balls and strikes conversation order him back to the dugout immediately along with a "you can't come out here to talk balls and strikes, I need you to go back to the dugout now. This is your warning."

[aiber]

I've seen coaches request time in the middle of an at-bat to come to the plate umpire and ask them where the pitch was.  What would be the correct action taken here in everyone's opinion?

Really? Do not grant time for this purpose. As soon as you find out that it is a balls and strikes conversation order him back to the dugout immediately along with a "you can't come out here to talk balls and strikes, I need you to go back to the dugout now. This is your warning."

Keep in mind that most times the umpire does not know the reason for the request.

[johnnyg08]

Agree. So I will restate a portion of my earlier post.


As soon as you find out that it is a balls and strikes conversation order him back to the dugout immediately along with a "you can't come out here to talk balls and strikes, I need you to go back to the dugout now. This is your warning.