Coach asks question about zone after being warned

[zoops]

Had a little situation in a high school tournament that has kind of gnawed at me a bit.  HT played (mostly pitched) like garbage and fell behind 14-5 in the 5th inning.  Bottom 5 they mount a little rally and it ends with me punching a kid out on a 3-2 pitch on the outside corner, probably an inch off but hey this ain't the bigs.  Next inning another batter gets called out on a curveball that was definitely over the plate and the HC in the 3rd base box starts to chirp a bit, I think about how I need to have the same zone all game or something of the like.  My partner after the game said the coach was saying I was a "rally killer" but was turned away from me when saying it so I couldn't hear it.  He got a couple comments in and I looked down and said "alright Bob I hear you that'll be enough" and he stopped.  A batter or two later the VT goes for a mound visit and HC comes down to talk to his batter about 20 feet from home plate and as he is doing so he says "Is that catcher setting up inside?"  Now I'm a bit annoyed because I had heard him say (in a whiny tone) in the dugout after the inning-ending K that the catcher must have been set up inside because he reached an awful long way for the pitch.  I probably should have just answered the question but I said "Those pitches aren't outside Bob."  Then he goes on about how his batters told him those pitches were 6 inches outside.  I said "well they're not right."  He said a couple more things and I gave him the we're done line and he went back to his box and not much happened the rest of the way.  

I think I could have handled this better by just firmly answering the question, or would you just say we're not going to discuss it coach?  I think I should have just answered it and then if he belabored the point he would have had a short leash.  

[ElkOil]

Sounds like you handled it just fine.  Are you wondering if there could have been a better outcome?

[zoops]

I guess I think I put myself in a bad spot by not answering his question and getting defensive.  Now I've given him an open door to get offensive and he can hide behind "all I did was ask a question."  If I just answer him and he goes on the offensive now I can give him one last "no more" and then dump him if needed.  

[ElkOil]

I guess I think I put myself in a bad spot by not answering his question and getting defensive.  Now I've given him an open door to get offensive and he can hide behind "all I did was ask a question."  If I just answer him and he goes on the offensive now I can give him one last "no more" and then dump him if needed.  

​He can't hide behind anything you did or didn't do, and there's nothing you can do to open the door to his inappropriate behavior.  He wears big boy pants and knows better.  You also don't want to be doling out "no mores" any more than you have to.  Consider one his warning, then the next gripe means his trip to the parking lot.

That said, I think you're right that you don't want to get defensive, but it seems like in this case, he's making his own bed

[ricka56]

as he is doing so he says "Is that catcher setting up inside?"

​PU: What ??? sometimes in...sometimes out...sometimes up...sometimes down. I'm not sure what you're asking, but if you're trying to cleverly argue B/S, knock it off.

OC: Well, I was just asking, Is that catcher setting up inside?

PU: And I answered that question...sometimes.

[BillKen]

It isn't a sign of weakness for you to not get the last word because you have the final say!

[catsbackr]

If you've already warned him and he still wants to argue or question balls and strikes, dump him.

 

If you haven't warned him and you hear his conversation ostensibly with his batter directed at you, either ignore him or tell him to "knock it off" then warn him.  I'd probably just quietly tell him to knock it off.

Edited May 27, 2015 by catsbackr

[blue23ll]

Don't "hear" what is being said in the dugout, unless the noise is coming out of the dugout and directed at you. Yes, the coach asked his batter where the catcher was lining up, and he asked loud enough for you to hear. Ignore it. Don't have rabbit ears, that will do nothing but get you in trouble.  Players will tell the coach what they think he wants to hear, which most times is an exaggeration or outright untruth. 

[noumpere]

now I can give him one last "no more" and then dump him if needed.

​"One last" no more is one more no more than should be used.

[maven]

​"One last" no more is one more no more than should be used.

​I agree.

I get that some TD's encourage a "warn, then warn some more" culture, but the problem with that is that none of those ends up being a warning.

That culture trains coaches that they can ignore those "warnings," because all such "warnings" mean is that the umpire doesn't like what they're saying (which was kinda the point of saying it). There are no consequences for ignoring such a "warning." At least, there are none until there are, which comes to seem arbitrary on the umpire's part, because it's impossible to know from their content which "warning" is the last.

An actual warning is the last intervention prior to ejection (or restriction in FED). If I were working in an environment where coaches don't understand warnings (in the proper sense), I might use the expression, "Coach, that's enough (the warning): this is your one and only warning."

[ricka56]

Two warnings (if you must) can be manageable.

Warning # 1  KNOCK IT OFF !
Coach: Blah, blah, blah
Warning #2 If you continue to (state his ejection-able behavior), you will be ejected.

"TD, I warned him and then I warned him again, stating the consequences if he continued. He continued and I had to EJ him."

[bluejerred]

Awesome job!!  If you are going to get grief, get it for calling STRIKES!!  They whine because it's the only thing they can do.  

[zoops]

Don't "hear" what is being said in the dugout, unless the noise is coming out of the dugout and directed at you. Yes, the coach asked his batter where the catcher was lining up, and he asked loud enough for you to hear. Ignore it. Don't have rabbit ears, that will do nothing but get you in trouble.  Players will tell the coach what they think he wants to hear, which most times is an exaggeration or outright untruth. 

​I should have been a little more clear...the coach came down to talk to his batter and did so for a few seconds (I didn't hear anything about the zone there), but then directed the question to me ("hey blue..."), not his batter.  Thanks for all of the feedback.  

[Replacematt]

I guess I think I put myself in a bad spot by not answering his question and getting defensive.  Now I've given him an open door to get offensive and he can hide behind "all I did was ask a question."  If I just answer him and he goes on the offensive now I can give him one last "no more" and then dump him if needed.  

​Why would you answer one team's question about what the other team is doing? 

[zoops]

​Why would you answer one team's question about what the other team is doing? 

​I'm not sure.  Just seems like giving an answer would be fine, and then if he goes off on a tangent about the zone you can nail him.  

What would you recommend replying?  "Coach, I'm not answering that" ? Just looking for opinions on how to handle something like this, that's why I posted the situation.  

[RingEmUp]

"You mean to tell me you CAN'T tell where the catcher is set up from 100 feet away but you can see where the ball is?"

[maven]

"You mean to tell me you CAN'T tell where the catcher is set up from 100 feet away but you can see where the ball is?"

​He knew (or thought he knew) where F2 was. It was a leading question.

Homie don't play that.

 

[noumpere]

​I'm not sure.  Just seems like giving an answer would be fine, and then if he goes off on a tangent about the zone you can nail him.

What would you recommend replying?  "Coach, I'm not answering that" ? Just looking for opinions on how to handle something like this, that's why I posted the situation.

​If you hadn't already warned him, then a "we are NOT discussing balls and strikes" comment would work.

 

You had already told him "That's enough."  Only you can decide whether you meant it.

[ricka56]

So he's pissed that F2 is moving out to catch a strike, and he tries to trap you up by asking if F2 was set up inside. "Yes" seems like an answer that he can't go anywhere with.

[MPLSMatt]

So he's pissed that F2 is moving out to catch a strike, and he tries to trap you up by asking if F2 was set up inside. "Yes" seems like an answer that he can't go anywhere with.

​Agreed.  Seems like the warning or ej isn't necessarily needed for "is the catcher set up inside" but for the inevitable next comment  of "well then how's that a strike, then?" or "well he can't get both the insider and outside pitch" or whatever.  That's when you go with a "we aren't discussing balls and strikes, bill."  Obviously it's a leading question filled with innuendo but I think you'll look like a redass to get too worked up about this question.    Wait for him to actually discuss B & S to react.  If he hears what you have to say ("yep, he's inside") then just walks away, I don't see the problem.  

 

[Replacematt]

​Agreed.  Seems like the warning or ej isn't necessarily needed for "is the catcher set up inside" but for the inevitable next comment  of "well then how's that a strike, then?" or "well he can't get both the insider and outside pitch" or whatever.  That's when you go with a "we aren't discussing balls and strikes, bill."  Obviously it's a leading question filled with innuendo but I think you'll look like a redass to get too worked up about this question.    Wait for him to actually discuss B & S to react.  If he hears what you have to say ("yep, he's inside") then just walks away, I don't see the problem.  

 

​Don't take the bait. You know it's a leading question. Answering it in any substantive way is letting him control the conversation, and also unfair to the defense.