Umpire Evaluations From Coaches

[dumbdumb]

14 hours ago, lawump said:

Fair enough.  Of course, I may just be biased against you because of the whole '86 thing...having grown up in Mass.

Oh my goodness. Another person not in the Terry Cooney fan club (wink, wink). Sorry you feel that way. Didn't know it went back as far as 86, and that call at home plate that went in your favor. And a former Marine, which are prominent in your home state. Jeesh.

However, checking some stats. That was a fine year for 4 new umpires hired, 2 in each league. 2 retired (injured out), one from each league, and 2 still active, one from each league.

[lawump]

20 minutes ago, dumbdumb said:

Oh my goodness. Another person not in the Terry Cooney fan club (wink, wink). Sorry you feel that way. Didn't know it went back as far as 86, and that call at home plate that went in your favor. And a former Marine, which are prominent in your home state. Jeesh.

However, checking some stats. That was a fine year for 4 new umpires hired, 2 in each league. 2 retired (injured out), one from each league, and 2 still active, one from each league.

Coney was '90.  '86 was Buckner.  Both were before I was a real (trained) umpire.  Looking back on it, as an umpire now, the '90 Red Sox...with the possible exception of Rich Gedman and Dwight Evans...were a massive collection of rats.  If you look at the video of Clemens' EJ on YouTube, a lot more Sox should have been EJ'd than just him.  Cooney was 100% correct to run him, and in typical Clemens fashion, he lied after the game about what he actually said and did.

[dumbdumb]

2 hours ago, lawump said:

Coney was '90.  '86 was Buckner.  Both were before I was a real (trained) umpire.  Looking back on it, as an umpire now, the '90 Red Sox...with the possible exception of Rich Gedman and Dwight Evans...were a massive collection of rats.  If you look at the video of Clemens' EJ on YouTube, a lot more Sox should have been EJ'd than just him.  Cooney was 100% correct to run him, and in typical Clemens fashion, he lied after the game about what he actually said and did.

Yep, everyone remembers the 90 deal with Clemens and Cooney. But, I wanted to backdate to the AL playoffs in 86 where you guys also had Cooney (HP) in a 3rd game that was lost against California. California hit a ball that hit the 1st base bag and the runner from second tried to score. Cooney called safe, but went for help on the play and the play was overturned to out, and Mauch was ejected. There was also a play in game 7 where Barnett got help. Gedman was hit but the BU said he swung at the pitch so he had to continue to bat. Also Cooney missed game 7 so only Rocky Roe was left down the right field line, and Bremigan had 3rd and also the left field line. Don't know why he missed 7th game but sure it has been mentioned somewhere.

And no, I am not trying to pick on Cooney.

But of course, you knew all that, and if you did not, your life has not been improved one iota by knowing this now.

Cheers

[lawump]

8 hours ago, dumbdumb said:

Yep, everyone remembers the 90 deal with Clemens and Cooney. But, I wanted to backdate to the AL playoffs in 86 where you guys also had Cooney (HP) in a 3rd game that was lost against California. California hit a ball that hit the 1st base bag and the runner from second tried to score. Cooney called safe, but went for help on the play and the play was overturned to out, and Mauch was ejected. There was also a play in game 7 where Barnett got help. Gedman was hit but the BU said he swung at the pitch so he had to continue to bat. Also Cooney missed game 7 so only Rocky Roe was left down the right field line, and Bremigan had 3rd and also the left field line. Don't know why he missed 7th game but sure it has been mentioned somewhere.

And no, I am not trying to pick on Cooney.

But of course, you knew all that, and if you did not, your life has not been improved one iota by knowing this now.

Cheers

Here is my best memory from the '86 playoffs:  Some umpire (I don't remember who) during the ALCS made a "controversial" (I use the term loosely) call against the Sox.  In front of everyone (about 20 family members were all watching the game together), my aunt yelled sarcastically, "great call, Al!"

Yup, she thought all the umpires had their first names on their hats!

[dumbdumb]

13 hours ago, lawump said:

Here is my best memory from the '86 playoffs:  Some umpire (I don't remember who) during the ALCS made a "controversial" (I use the term loosely) call against the Sox.  In front of everyone (about 20 family members were all watching the game together), my aunt yelled sarcastically, "great call, Al!"

Yup, she thought all the umpires had their first names on their hats!

You better cut your Aunt (or is it pronounced Ant in SC) some slack and respect your elders young man.

I am sure, dollars to doughnuts, or should I say RC colas to moon pies, she thought it was Al Clark.

That's my story and I'm stickin to it.

 

********Sunday---added. Well I found out about Cooney missing game 7 of the ALCS back in 1986. Guess I hit the right keywords. You hit the right keywords and you can find out a lot of things. (But, without the right keywords, forget it---and I think???or seems?? that it is intentionally done with some documents that people really don't want you to see, and to make it as hard as possible to find if they are forced/or just nicely choose to put it out there). Apparently he blew out his calf in running to his position at 2nd base to start the game.

From the Orlando Sentinel

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/1986-10-16/sports/0260250059_1_wilfong-chilly-weather-rick-burleson

[Stk004]

2 minutes ago, dumbdumb said:

You better cut your Aunt (or is it pronounced Ant in SC) some slack and respect your elders young man.

I am sure, dollars to doughnuts, or should I say RC colas to moon pies, she thought it was Al Clark.

That's my story and I'm stickin to it.

1. I say ant

2. I like the reference, if that's what you were going for 

[BigUmpire]

Guys

As requested by the league the purpose of Coaches evals is to pick umpires for post season. The UIC will be valuating each umpire throughout the season as well.

This league has struggled when recommending umpires for post season and someone says "  NOT this guy- he has stunk all season" and the league officials say to the coaches" whey haven't you stated this all season?"

I agree most REC coaches dont know a good umpire from a blender BUT here is some criteria I have selected in this draft of the Electronic version we will have the coaches ill out on the league website when they report their scores.

As @greyhawk stated "Coaches evals are: "Not for determining if an umpire had a good or bad performance for that particular game, but rather to spot trends.  If several coaches give the same feedback about an umpire over the course of a season, then it's likely something that should be addressed as a learning opportunity."

BIG shoes to fill BUT @greyhawk MAY be our new Mike Taylor.

This is a draft of the statement/questions;

 

Coach

Thanks for spending your time with these young people!

 

 

 

We REALLY do value your opinion on how our umpires performed during your game.

 

 

 

Please rate the Plate Umpire 1-10 on a scale of 1-10

 1=He stinks/Kill the bum!  

10= This is the greatest umpire I have ever seen!

 

 

 

1.   Appearance/Comment_____/_________________________________________

 

 

 

2.   Strikezone/Comment______/_________________________________________

 

 

 

3.   Pre-game meeting/Comment_____/____________________________________

 

 

 

4.   Kept the game moving/comment_____/_________________________________

 

 

 

5.   Temperament/Comment_____/_______________________________________

 

 

 

6.   Attitude/Comment______/___________________________________________

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Specks]

23 hours ago, BigUmpire said:

Guys

As requested by the league the purpose of Coaches evals is to pick umpires for post season. The UIC will be valuating each umpire throughout the season as well.

This league has struggled when recommending umpires for post season and someone says "  NOT this guy- he has stunk all season" and the league officials say to the coaches" whey haven't you stated this all season?"

I agree most REC coaches dont know a good umpire from a blender BUT here is some criteria I have selected in this draft of the Electronic version we will have the coaches ill out on the league website when they report their scores.

As @greyhawk stated "Coaches evals are: "Not for determining if an umpire had a good or bad performance for that particular game, but rather to spot trends.  If several coaches give the same feedback about an umpire over the course of a season, then it's likely something that should be addressed as a learning opportunity."

BIG shoes to fill BUT @greyhawk MAY be our new Mike Taylor.

This is a draft of the statement/questions;

Coach Thanks for spending your time with these young people!

We REALLY do value your opinion on how our umpires performed during your game.

Please rate the Plate Umpire 1-10 on a scale of 1-10

 1=He stinks/Kill the bum!  

10= This is the greatest umpire I have ever seen!

1.   Appearance/Comment_____/_________________________________________

2.   Strikezone/Comment______/_________________________________________

3.   Pre-game meeting/Comment_____/____________________________________

4.   Kept the game moving/comment_____/_________________________________

5.   Temperament/Comment_____/_______________________________________

6.   Attitude/Comment______/___________________________________________

 

Let me tell you a story about my partner a couple of weeks ago. As we're walking to the field he's talking to everybody we meet, approaching people and shaking their hands. As we walk onto the field he approaches the coaches in the dugout and shakes hands there as well. In between innings he's in the dugouts chatting and joking. After the half inning he goes to the home and visitor books to verify the score (I guess he can't count to 3 even though he had and used an indicator on the field). All that being said I would guess that the coaches would evaluate him higher than me on 4 of those criteria. The reality is he's not a very good umpire. I'm friendly but not familiar. I try to be professional but I have a job to do and being a coaches buddy isn't on my list of things to do. I don't believe that coaches know what they should be looking for. Now, if you wanted to make it a yes/no question I think that would be better. Did Umpires show up on time, Were they dressed professionally, Did they hold a plate meeting etc. Then have a spot for overall comments.

I also have problems with this: 1=He stinks/Kill the bum!  

I think that helps perpetuate the attitude problems that we sometimes experience with coaches. That could let someone think that phrase is acceptable. Those words should NEVER be used.

[scrounge]

2 minutes ago, Specks said:

Let me tell you a story about my partner a couple of weeks ago. As we're walking to the field he's talking to everybody we meet, approaching people and shaking their hands. As we walk onto the field he approaches the coaches in the dugout and shakes hands there as well. In between innings he's in the dugouts chatting and joking. After the half inning he goes to the home and visitor books to verify the score (I guess he can't count to 3 even though he had and used an indicator on the field). All that being said I would guess that the coaches would evaluate him higher than me on 4 of those criteria. The reality is he's not a very good umpire. I'm friendly but not familiar. I try to be professional but I have a job to do and being a coaches buddy isn't on my list of things to do. I don't believe that coaches know what they should be looking for. Now, if you wanted to make it a yes/no question I think that would be better. Did Umpires show up on time, Were they dressed professionally, Did they hold a plate meeting etc. Then have a spot for overall comments.

I also have problems with this: 1=He stinks/Kill the bum!  

I think that helps perpetuate the attitude problems that we sometimes experience with coaches. That could let someone think that phrase is acceptable. Those words should NEVER be used.

Spot on on all points. Seriously, saying Kill the bum? Really?

I'd also make it mandatory that any ratings of 1-3 must be accompanied by specific, detailed comments. Every company I've worked for wouldn't allow a "not meeting expectations" rating without comments, even if only for documentation/legal reasons. But the stated reason is still very valid - it provides the necessary context. If someone gets a 1 but the coach can't articulate a reason why? Useless rating.

[MadMax]

I'll reinforce that I think the point scale and range should be much much briefer. 0-3 or 4. 5 the absolute maximum considered.  This will help in your data gleaning immeasurably because it prevents grey in the data. You'll find your grey in the comments, which is to be expected and what you'll be subjectively reviewing anyway.

Let me present:

Harry Hustle calls Game A between Coach Red and Coach Green. Red's team loses. Some calls may or may not have gone against Red during the game; Green had nary a problem or issue. If you use a scale of 0-10, the trouble is, you're introducing subjective bias before even asking a single question. Green might be the kind of guy who never gives out 10's, or he, because his team won, may over-inflate his value and give generous 10's across the board; conversely, Red might be the type to be so steamed he gives nothing but Zeroes, or, he may be objectively reasonable, and issue 1's, 2's or 3's. Again, you want your subjectivity to be in feedback and comments, while objectivity should be in the data points and act as flags. 

Game A, 0-10 Scale, Red gives 0's because he's pissed, Green gives 7's because nobody's perfect. Median = 3-4.

Game A, 0-10 Scale, Red gives 3's because he can be "objective about this" (but he's still not happy about losing), Green gives 9's because he's happy as a lark. Median = 6.

Game A, 0-4 Scale, Red gives 0's, Green gives 3's because nobody's perfect. Median = round up to 2.

Game A, 0-4 scale, Red subjectively sees that his gripes are recognized in comments, but he understands the objectivity in a brief number scale, and gives 1's, 2's and 3's, while Green gives 3's but mostly 4's. Median = 2-3.

Are you seeing a much starker picture of how that game went, at a glance, with a narrower scale range? Yes.

Example Question, Scale 0-10, "Did Harry conduct the game in a timely manner with appropriate pace?" Red: "Harry sucks. There's no way I'm giving him a passing grade, even if the game started on time and was done in 1:30. I'll give him a 3." Green: "Yes, but this is amateur baseball, and nobody's perfect or MLB quality, so I'll give Harry a 7." Median = 5.

Same Example Question, Scale 0-4. Red: "I've got my issues with Harry, but the game was over before the sun set, so on this, he gets a 3." Green: "Yes, but this is amateur baseball after all. 3." Median = 3.

So with the narrower scale range, it looks like Harry Hustle actually conducted the pace of the game rather timely. No cause for scrutiny or concern.

I understand we don't want to be blatantly binary (Yes/No) in these survey and review questions, but we don't want the coaches to impress subjective feedback into these data-point responses either – that's what the comments are for.

[RichMSN]

I worked an adult league once where I found out the teams were allowed to choose the playoff umpires. The assigner was all about keeping his job amd keeping the league happy.

My last game in the league was a few years ago. I worked the section championship and watched some really awful and really green umpires work the championships while I stayed home.

Since then I'm simply not available for them.

[JSam21]

On ‎9‎/‎15‎/‎2016 at 1:38 PM, BigUmpire said:

Local Rec group I consult for is asking how to get the coaches to submit evaluations on the umpires after the game.

There are paper forms BUT it does NOT seem practical to meet a coach after a game and ask him to spend his time to fill out even a simple form especially if he loses.

Just getting them back to the UIC in a big spread out park would take lots of organization and manpower.

I also don’t believe umpire evaluations, paper or electronic should be public. A person transporting the completed eval could lose, alter or never get it back to the UIC.

One sharp IT type of umpire suggested that when the coaches log into the league website to record the game score they have to fill out umpire evals on the game FIRST.

 

Any suggestions?

For high school baseball here in Missouri... If you don't submit your evals you are not allowed to play in the state play offs... They are done electronically. It goes on a 1 to 5 scale... 1s being the best... If you give a 1 or a 5 the coach must write a paragraph about why he gave that rating.

[lawump]

3 hours ago, JSam21 said:

If you give a 1 or a 5 the coach must write a paragraph about why he gave that rating.

I'm going to go out on a limb and say there are a lot of 2's and 4's. 

[Specks]

Why do people think coaches think know enough to evaluate umpires? They know what they like, they don't understand what makes an umpire good or bad! This is like asking me to evaluate chef's on an escargot dish vs a hamburger, I don't like escargot so I won't rate it as well. Even though it may be a far better prepared item. And before you ask if I'm qualified to rate food... I am a chubby guy so ...yes I am!

[MadMax]

19 hours ago, Specks said:

Why do people think coaches think know enough to evaluate umpires? They know what they like, they don't understand what makes an umpire good or bad! This is like asking me to evaluate chef's on an escargot dish vs a hamburger, I don't like escargot so I won't rate it as well. Even though it may be a far better prepared item. And before you ask if I'm qualified to rate food... I am a chubby guy so ...yes I am!

Tournament and League Directors, especially those that may be challenged in getting their slates filled by teams (and the coaches who coach them), think that they have to find that x-factor, that variable, preventing teams from forming a waiting list to play – and pay to be – in their league or tournaments. Say nothing about fields and facilities, entrance fees, forfeitures, heavy-handed local rules, or that one of the organizers is a reputed gambler, none of that matters save "How are the umpires?"

A coach (having paid the league or tournament fee) can voice a concern about a facility or a local rule and get an acknowledged, actionable response. Umpires, though, to them are a complete mystery, because most TDs and LDs don't truly know what constitutes a "good" umpire ("Well, he doesn't show up with a hangover, and he said he knows our (local) rules."). This is why many Leagues and Tournaments will foster a relationship with a UIC or Umpire association they know and entrust to vet, coordinate and/or train umpires. Notice that the league in the OP brought on @BigUmpire as a consult. They are searching for answers, or at least a machine of structure so as to address concerns and generate answers.

BigUmpire should think it over thoroughly – 7 and a half innings instead of 7 and a half million years – and answer "Forty Two".

Specks, I like your culinary parallel.

[jjb]

OK, for the moment, stop thinking as an Umpire just working games at a League, and start thinking as an Umpire Director working a Rec League Organization. Your job is to (1) train and supervise your Umpires (how many they may be), (2) keep the Umpires you have from leaving to other places and (3) keep the coaches from taking their teams to other leagues because the Umpires suck..

OK, how do you do it? As a trainer, you and I know that, no matter how much you train, there will be Umpires who suck at this. They don't know, they don't care, doesn't matter. The issue is that, besides being Umpire Director, we're also working our own games and can't get to every game to make sure the PU is taking the runner to 3rd. There's nobody to watch them.

Several years ago, we used Coaches Notes on the website in TX when I was there (I've moved), and I really liked the results.

I agree, most coaches haven't a clue how to Umpire. I'm with you, I get it. We ignore most of those. But some understand when the Umpire is dogging it and doesn't care, or hasn't the ability to figure out a Ball Out of Play ruling, all the coach can do is mutter to himself, and go elsewhere with his kids next season. It eventually hurts your League. No teams= no games= no Umpires, get it?

So you've got to figure a way to evaluate the Umpires on the field. If you've got the staff, and the time, having an Umpire sit behind the fence watching the game is helpful; but do you have the money to pay him? He ain't giving away a game fee to do that, is he?

All you've got is coaches. To be sure, you'll get your share of "the Umpire cost us the game" nonsense, but, in the end you'll get a couple advantages. You'll get an idea of what the coaches think of the Umpires. We did it for several years, and I gotta tell you, most of the comments about the Umpires were positive. We got a ton of "the Umpire was great; he made a ruling and explained it to me so that I could understand it" comments (that got passed on to the Rookie Umpire as positive reinforcement). And on the other hand, we got a lot of "the Umpire had a zone that was inconsistent" from 3-4 coaches, from an Umpire. We were able to use those evaluations to send out an experienced Umpire to look at him. We figured out it was a simple adjustment to his stance and lock-in, and he was great from then on.

Most of all, you and I know that Umpiring is Kabuki Theatre; Perception is Reality and what is looks like is most of what it really is. (think Selling the Call). If we (as a League Official) can, at least, give the coaches the impression that they have a place to go when they have an Umpire Issue, they're going to be happier, even if the answer is what they wanted to her. IMHO.

[jjb]

OK, for the moment, stop thinking as an Umpire just working games at a League, and start thinking as an Umpire Director working a Rec League Organization. Your job is to (1) train and supervise your Umpires (how many they may be), (2) keep the Umpires you have from leaving to other places and (3) keep the coaches from taking their teams to other leagues because the Umpires suck..

OK, how do you do it? As a trainer, you and I know that, no matter how much you train, there will be Umpires who suck at this. They don't know, they don't care, doesn't matter. The issue is that, besides being Umpire Director, we're also working our own games and can't get to every game to make sure the PU is taking the runner to 3rd. There's nobody to watch them.

Several years ago, we used Coaches Notes on the website in TX when I was there (I've moved), and I really liked the results.

I agree, most coaches haven't a clue how to Umpire. I'm with you, I get it. We ignore most of those. But some understand when the Umpire is dogging it and doesn't care, or hasn't the ability to figure out a Ball Out of Play ruling, all the coach can do is mutter to himself, and go elsewhere with his kids next season. It eventually hurts your League. No teams= no games= no Umpires, get it?

So you've got to figure a way to evaluate the Umpires on the field. If you've got the staff, and the time, having an Umpire sit behind the fence watching the game is helpful; but do you have the money to pay him? He ain't giving away a game fee to do that, is he?

All you've got is coaches. To be sure, you'll get your share of "the Umpire cost us the game" nonsense, but, in the end you'll get a couple advantages. You'll get an idea of what the coaches think of the Umpires. We did it for several years, and I gotta tell you, most of the comments about the Umpires were positive. We got a ton of "the Umpire was great; he made a ruling and explained it to me so that I could understand it" comments (that got passed on to the Rookie Umpire as positive reinforcement). And on the other hand, we got a lot of "the Umpire had a zone that was inconsistent" from 3-4 coaches, from an Umpire. We were able to use those evaluations to send out an experienced Umpire to look at him. We figured out it was a simple adjustment to his stance and lock-in, and he was great from then on.

Most of all, you and I know that Umpiring is Kabuki Theatre; Perception is Reality and what is looks like is most of what it really is. (think Selling the Call). If we (as a League Official) can, at least, give the coaches the impression that they have a place to go when they have an Umpire Issue, they're going to be happier, even if the answer is what they wanted to her. IMHO.

[jjb]

OK, for the moment, stop thinking as an Umpire just working games at a League, and start thinking as an Umpire Director working a Rec League Organization. Your job is to (1) train and supervise your Umpires (how many they may be), (2) keep the Umpires you have from leaving to other places and (3) keep the coaches from taking their teams to other leagues because the Umpires suck..

OK, how do you do it? As a trainer, you and I know that, no matter how much you train, there will be Umpires who suck at this. They don't know, they don't care, doesn't matter. The issue is that, besides being Umpire Director, we're also working our own games and can't get to every game to make sure the PU is taking the runner to 3rd. There's nobody to watch them.

Several years ago, we used Coaches Notes on the website in TX when I was there (I've moved), and I really liked the results.

I agree, most coaches haven't a clue how to Umpire. I'm with you, I get it. We ignore most of those. But some understand when the Umpire is dogging it and doesn't care, or hasn't the ability to figure out a Ball Out of Play ruling, all the coach can do is mutter to himself, and go elsewhere with his kids next season. It eventually hurts your League. No teams= no games= no Umpires, get it?

So you've got to figure a way to evaluate the Umpires on the field. If you've got the staff, and the time, having an Umpire sit behind the fence watching the game is helpful; but do you have the money to pay him? He ain't giving away a game fee to do that, is he?

All you've got is coaches. To be sure, you'll get your share of "the Umpire cost us the game" nonsense, but, in the end you'll get a couple advantages. You'll get an idea of what the coaches think of the Umpires. We did it for several years, and I gotta tell you, most of the comments about the Umpires were positive. We got a ton of "the Umpire was great; he made a ruling and explained it to me so that I could understand it" comments (that got passed on to the Rookie Umpire as positive reinforcement). And on the other hand, we got a lot of "the Umpire had a zone that was inconsistent" from 3-4 coaches, from an Umpire. We were able to use those evaluations to send out an experienced Umpire to look at him. We figured out it was a simple adjustment to his stance and lock-in, and he was great from then on.

Most of all, you and I know that Umpiring is Kabuki Theatre; Perception is Reality and what is looks like is most of what it really is. (think Selling the Call). If we (as a League Official) can, at least, give the coaches the impression that they have a place to go when they have an Umpire Issue, they're going to be happier, even if the answer is what they wanted to her. IMHO.

[GPblue]

On 9/20/2016 at 6:00 PM, Specks said:

Why do people think coaches think know enough to evaluate umpires? They know what they like, they don't understand what makes an umpire good or bad! This is like asking me to evaluate chef's on an escargot dish vs a hamburger, I don't like escargot so I won't rate it as well. Even though it may be a far better prepared item. And before you ask if I'm qualified to rate food... I am a chubby guy so ...yes I am!

Here's the problem with this......what does a coach like?  He likes to win.  Is he going to put the blame on his team when this doesn't happen?  Maybe.  But if there is ANY sort of situation that goes into question....who's under the bus.  I think everyone hopes umpire evaluations don't become like Yelp where everyone thinks they are the next Gordon Ramsey and opens a can of worms to thinking coaches evaluations are gospel.

[dumbdumb]

On 9/30/2016 at 3:27 PM, GPblue said:

Here's the problem with this......what does a coach like?  He likes to win.  Is he going to put the blame on his team when this doesn't happen?  Maybe.  But if there is ANY sort of situation that goes into question....who's under the bus.  I think everyone hopes umpire evaluations don't become like Yelp where everyone thinks they are the next Gordon Ramsey and opens a can of worms to thinking coaches evaluations are gospel.

Yes, but they sure do like to quote those Manager/players evaluation poles in print media done by SI over the years with the MLBU don't they.

[GPblue]

23 hours ago, dumbdumb said:

Yes, but they sure do like to quote those Manager/players evaluation poles in print media done by SI over the years with the MLBU don't they.

that one is a case of, if they have no other information, what else can they use as a reporter.