Post game

[Jdc03270]

Not much on this subject that I could find so thought I would ask.

I want to focus more on this and was wondering what other people do post game.

So...

What do you cover in your post game talk with your partner? Do you have a list? What do you do????

Thanks!!!!

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[maineump]

I like to cover the game in general. It generally depends on your partner and if the person junior or senior to you. Are you the teacher or the student at the post game? It doesn't matter how long you have been doing this, you can always learn something new and get better. Be open to suggestions and give suggestions in a positive way, things will go much better.

[scrounge]

I dunno, nothing hard and fast. As @maineump said, it depends. If it's someone senior and I respect or has been approachable, I'll usually initiate by asking for feedback. Heck, will often do so with a peer or even a junior person who knows his stuff. If something happened unusual, we'll probably discuss that. But if it's just some buster or someone who gives off a vibe of not caring or not interested in feedback, nothing but pleasantries and a quick change and departure.

[conbo61]

I will ask anyone that I work with what they saw that I can improve on.  Even the newbies can shed some light on things that I can do better that maybe a more experienced partner would take for granted.  Things like communication, rotations, etc.

I like to review specific calls, how we covered certain plays, any rules situations we encountered.  If I am on the plate I ask if my zone was appropriate and consistent.

Sometimes the biggest trick is just trying to get a post-game.  Many partners are just looking to jump in the car and leave.  I had that happen with two of our newer members a few years ago, and perhaps this is most telling, they did not return the next season.

Biggest thing is be professionally candid.  Be honest and own the mistakes, file them away and try not to make the same one again.  Be professional with your critiques.  Odds are you committed the same shortcomings you identify in your partner.  The goal of a post game is for everyone to improve and not go home discouraged.

[lawump]

Let's be honest, post-games are really about evaluating each other.  As such:

First, remember the three Golden Rules about post-game conferences:

(1) Don't ask unless you really want to know.  [Don't ask your partner(s) "how'd I do," or "did you see anything," with the expectation that you are going to have heaps of praise thrown at you.  You may, but you may not.  If your ego can't take negativity, don't ask.]

(2) If asked, tell the truth.  [Don't blow smoke up the other guy's a$$.  Tell him the truth.  If (s)he doesn't hear the truth, (s)he will never get better.  If I don't know the person who is asking very well, I might reply with, "do you really want to know?  Because we have an unwritten rule in our association that if you are ask, we are going to tell you the absolute truth."  This let's them know that you're not about to sugar-coat anything.  I've had some guys say, "yes, please!  I need to get better."  I've had other guys say, "nah, I was just making small talk."  (Of course, if my feedback is going to be all praise...then I don't need to give them this "warning".)

(3) Do not volunteer to give an evaluation.  Wait to be asked.  If they want your feedback, they'll ask.  (The exception is if you're an assigned crew chief.  Then it becomes your job to do a post-game crew evaluation.  When I have been a crew chief at an American Legion regional, I have conducted informal crew reviews at the end of each day.  (Usually in a restaurant over beer.))

Second, as for me personally and by way of example, if I'm working a college game with two power-5 conference umpires...I'm going to ask them.  Period.  It shows two things: first, that I respect them and their opinion and second that I care about learning and improving.  Now, if the role is reversed and I get asked by someone (say one of my high school umpires) I tell them honestly what I saw and what they can work on.

Third, if the person asking is a "newbie" who has a lot to learn/work on, try not to overload them.  Just try to give them 2-3 things that they can really work on.  If you overload them, they will forget everything you have said which results in the post-game evaluation becoming worthless.

 

[maven]

What lawump said, especially:

1. Lead with a positive: even poor umpires do SOMETHING right. Noticing the positive makes an evaluator seem more objective and more interested in helping the other improve, rather than merely bashing, putting them down, or making himself seem better by comparison.

2. Two or three suggestions MAX. People usually don't have attention or interest in more. And try to use 'we' more than 'you'.

[ElkOil]

If I'm working with a senior partner, I'll ask right away what he thought and if he has any suggestions. That lets him know I'm interested and open-minded. I've received some incredibly valuable feedback that has helped my game tremendously.

If I'm the senior guy, instead of telling my partner what to do, I'll use my own experiences as examples and also relate what I still want to work on. I want to come across as someone who still wants to learn, regardless of who my partner is.

But what gets covered depends on where you and your partner are in development. As @maven said, even poor umpires do something right. Conversely, even great umpires do something wrong. Or strange. Or confusing. These are opportunities to ask about why a situation was handled a certain way without accusing your partner of wrongdoing. 

Most everyone I've ever worked with is at least pretty good at umpiring, so post-games are usually productive. Some are terrible and don't care to improve, so no post-game conversation can help. 

[KenBAZ]

Wow guys, some great posts on this string. I hope the OP is taking it all in. Thanks, I really appreciate hearing from you all on this subject.

Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk

[BT_Blue]

On Fri Jan 13 2017 at 8:23 PM, KenBAZ said:

Wow guys, some great posts on this string. I hope the OP is taking it all in. Thanks, I really appreciate hearing from you all on this subject.

Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk

Going with discussions I have had with him though pm on here. I would think does.

[Hawkman]

It's different with every guy. For several years I worked about 85% of my games with the same guy which was great for the most part. We were friends, our communication was flawless since we worked together so often, and we could be brutally honest with each other without worrying about someone getting pissed off or hurt about it. We WANTED feedback from each other. The downside to the same partner every night is you miss out on picking up things from the new perspective a different partner might provide.Well I took a year off  and then came back for the 2015 season. My old partner had picked up a new guy to work with so he and I don't do nearly as many games together now so I work with a lot of different partners. All that said, I prefer a regular partner because I think things go more smoothly that way. It's rare I get a bad partner for a varsity contest, but it's a crapshoot with JV games. I've worked with some truly awful umpires at the lower levels and most of them don't realize how bad they are.

You never know how a stranger is going to respond to feedback so I never give any unless asked. If the guy I'm working with is someone I've worked with before and know to be a competent and experienced umpire I'll ask for honest feedback. There have been a few occasions when I feel I've been struggling with a certain part of the zone behind the dish (pitches at the knees, top of the zone, breaking balls) I'll ask my partner to take note of those pitches during the game and give me some postgame feedback. If a guy seems open to it I'll bring up some odd plays we may have had or situations where maybe our rotation was poor. If the guy seems like he doesn't care or thinks he knows it all already I just say see ya later and go my separate way. I've found that often the guys that need the most help and constructive criticism are the one who are the least willing to ask for or accept it. Good umpires like getting feedback on how to improve because they want to get better.

Bottom line if they don't ask for it I don't give it. If they do ask I'll be honest with them. We can all improve. 

 

[ElkOil]

1 hour ago, Hawkman said:

Bottom line if they don't ask for it I don't give it. If they do ask I'll be honest with them. We can all improve. 

 

By not offering unsolicited feedback, you're depriving your fellow umpire the value of your knowledge and experience. Unless your organization has a solid mentor and evaluation program, chances are partner-to-partner input is the biggest way to improve. Unless you're an active part of your partners' growth and evolution, improvement will suffer. I encourage you to embrace the role of a seasoned umpire from whom others can learn. It's the whole reason for post-games.

[JSam21]

Wish I had more guys that were willing to hang around for a bit after the game to do this. Most of the guys I've worked with show up too late to do a good pre-game and get out of dodge asap to do a post game.

[conbo61]

12 hours ago, ElkOil said:

By not offering unsolicited feedback, you're depriving your fellow umpire the value of your knowledge and experience. Unless your organization has a solid mentor and evaluation program, chances are partner-to-partner input is the biggest way to improve. Unless you're an active part of your partners' growth and evolution, improvement will suffer. I encourage you to embrace the role of a seasoned umpire from whom others can learn. It's the whole reason for post-games.

I have found those that don't ask, typically (NOT always) don't care.

Just to echo one point made by @lawump, we have a similar "rule", if you aren't ready to hear criticism, don't ask.

[dumbdumb]

On 1/13/2017 at 2:02 PM, lawump said:

Let's be honest, post-games are really about evaluating each other.  As such:

First, remember the three Golden Rules about post-game conferences:

(1) Don't ask unless you really want to know.  [Don't ask your partner(s) "how'd I do," or "did you see anything," with the expectation that you are going to have heaps of praise thrown at you.  You may, but you may not.  If your ego can't take negativity, don't ask.]

(2) If asked, tell the truth.  [Don't blow smoke up the other guy's a$$.  Tell him the truth.  If (s)he doesn't hear the truth, (s)he will never get better.  If I don't know the person who is asking very well, I might reply with, "do you really want to know?  Because we have an unwritten rule in our association that if you are ask, we are going to tell you the absolute truth."  This let's them know that you're not about to sugar-coat anything.  I've had some guys say, "yes, please!  I need to get better."  I've had other guys say, "nah, I was just making small talk."  (Of course, if my feedback is going to be all praise...then I don't need to give them this "warning".)

(3) Do not volunteer to give an evaluation.  Wait to be asked.  If they want your feedback, they'll ask.  (The exception is if you're an assigned crew chief.  Then it becomes your job to do a post-game crew evaluation.  When I have been a crew chief at an American Legion regional, I have conducted informal crew reviews at the end of each day.  (Usually in a restaurant over beer.))

Second, as for me personally and by way of example, if I'm working a college game with two power-5 conference umpires...I'm going to ask them.  Period.  It shows two things: first, that I respect them and their opinion and second that I care about learning and improving.  Now, if the role is reversed and I get asked by someone (say one of my high school umpires) I tell them honestly what I saw and what they can work on.

Third, if the person asking is a "newbie" who has a lot to learn/work on, try not to overload them.  Just try to give them 2-3 things that they can really work on.  If you overload them, they will forget everything you have said which results in the post-game evaluation becoming worthless.

 

"Second, as for me personally and by way of example, if I'm working a college game with two power-5 conference umpires".

(SEC,ACC,BIG12,PAC12,BIG10)? or in Baseball are you substituting Big West or C-USA for BIG10? in iterative strength ratings?

I guess if I was working Coastal Carolina, that would be like working Z-ball????????? Pick on lawump week, along with Blue Monday. Get your Elvis albums out.

Thanks for your guidance on this post.

You young whipper snapper guys getting started or new to the craft, take this to the bank and Mavens comment below lawump. They are handing out valuable info and so are other veterans.

[lawump]

13 minutes ago, dumbdumb said:

"Second, as for me personally and by way of example, if I'm working a college game with two power-5 conference umpires".

(SEC,ACC,BIG12,PAC12,BIG10)? or in Baseball are you substituting Big West or C-USA for BIG10? in iterative strength ratings?

I guess if I was working Coastal Carolina, that would be like working Z-ball????????? Pick on lawump week, along with Blue Monday. Get your Elvis albums out.

Thanks for your guidance on this post.

You young whipper snapper guys getting started or new to the craft, take this to the bank and Mavens comment below lawump. They are handing out valuable info and so are other veterans.

LOL.  I've worked Coastal Carolina.  They've definitely come a long way as a program (that may be an understatement).  Coastal Carolina vs. UNC-Wilmington is a pretty intense non-conference rivalry.  Those schools are close to one another, appear to have a similar culture (state schools near the beach) and they definitely don't like each other.

[Hawkman]

19 hours ago, ElkOil said:

By not offering unsolicited feedback, you're depriving your fellow umpire the value of your knowledge and experience. Unless your organization has a solid mentor and evaluation program, chances are partner-to-partner input is the biggest way to improve. Unless you're an active part of your partners' growth and evolution, improvement will suffer. I encourage you to embrace the role of a seasoned umpire from whom others can learn. It's the whole reason for post-games.

I understand where you're coming from but respectfully disagree. You can't force someone to want to improve, thus unsolicited and usually unappreciated advice is wasted on them. I've had plenty of guys who have asked me for feedback in both baseball and basketball and I try to give it to them in a constructive manner. I find it seems more natural to exchange information in basketball; most guys will do that at halftime and after the game. Baseball umpires don't seem as open to it for some reason in my experience. 

[ElkOil]

1 hour ago, Hawkman said:

I understand where you're coming from but respectfully disagree. You can't force someone to want to improve, thus unsolicited and usually unappreciated advice is wasted on them. I've had plenty of guys who have asked me for feedback in both baseball and basketball and I try to give it to them in a constructive manner. I find it seems more natural to exchange information in basketball; most guys will do that at halftime and after the game. Baseball umpires don't seem as open to it for some reason in my experience. 

Any organization's culture is slow to change, but it's never going to unless the change happens from within, by individual members who are unconcerned by the status quo. You don't have to rock the boat by offering up unsolicited advice, but you can ask about something that happened and discuss it. For example, I was working with a guy much more senior than me once, and he blew a call pretty badly. We didn't discuss it during the game, but afterwards, I said, "Feel free to come to me on a call like that. I'm happy to give you what I saw."

"Did you have something different?"

"Yeah, he missed the tag."

My partner shrugged it off since there was nothing to be done and since the game was lopsided, nobody really cared, anyway. But the tone was set and the seed planted. The next time we worked together, he had no issue getting together. I don't know if our previous experience actually changed anything, but the next time around was different and  better. 

Incremental improvements are small victories.

[Jimurray]

1 hour ago, ElkOil said:

Any organization's culture is slow to change, but it's never going to unless the change happens from within, by individual members who are unconcerned by the status quo. You don't have to rock the boat by offering up unsolicited advice, but you can ask about something that happened and discuss it. For example, I was working with a guy much more senior than me once, and he blew a call pretty badly. We didn't discuss it during the game, but afterwards, I said, "Feel free to come to me on a call like that. I'm happy to give you what I saw."

"Did you have something different?"

"Yeah, he missed the tag."

My partner shrugged it off since there was nothing to be done and since the game was lopsided, nobody really cared, anyway. But the tone was set and the seed planted. The next time we worked together, he had no issue getting together. I don't know if our previous experience actually changed anything, but the next time around was different and  better. 

Incremental improvements are small victories.

I think the thread is a about post game. I would question why from one game to the other an umpire would need to go to his partner, and whether the impetus was a coach or his uncertainty about what he saw. What improvement are you talking about?

[ElkOil]

1 hour ago, Jimurray said:

I think the thread is a about post game. I would question why from one game to the other an umpire would need to go to his partner, and whether the impetus was a coach or his uncertainty about what he saw. What improvement are you talking about?

Perhaps my post wasn't communicated properly somehow. I've stayed on he topic of post-game by using a example of what occurred during a post-game and how it improved communication between those same two umpires in a subsequent game. It was done as unsolicited feedback and resulted in a very real improvement.

It directly answers the question in the OP and furthers the discussion with @Hawkman, which is also on-topic.

[Specks]

15 hours ago, ElkOil said:

"Did you have something different?"

"Yeah, he missed the tag."

My partner shrugged it off

Elk, I must be missing something, are you saying he should have came to you on a judgement call?

[Mudisfun]

I think what @ElkOil is saying is that by his interaction with his partner after the prior game he sowed the seeds that he was approachable and willing not only to learn but could also be relied on to provide competent observational feedback.

At a later time that same umpire came to him when in the prior game he did not. Was this the result of his interaction? Who can say but by being open during the prior post game he may have opened the door for the more experienced partner to trust his judgement a little more than before.

 

 

[KenBAZ]

Hawkman:

Isn't that almost the definition of a good umpire, someone that wants to get better? No one gets to be a good umpire by accident.

[Jdc03270]

Wow. Great discussions! keep it rolling everyone!!

[ElkOil]

6 hours ago, Specks said:

Elk, I must be missing something, are you saying he should have came to you on a judgement call?

Two things. One, the topic is about post-game conversation, not about partners getting together on judgement calls. Two, if a coach argues a judgement call because he has information one umpire didn't have, then yes. Partner up. Don't get together simply because a coach didn't agree with a banger. But I don't want to get off-topic on this thread.

[Specks]

Elk, I get what the thread's about, it's in the title. I was having trouble following you logic jump.

On ‎1‎/‎16‎/‎2017 at 9:26 PM, ElkOil said:

he blew a call pretty badly. We didn't discuss it during the game, but afterwards, I said, "Feel free to come to me on a call like that. I'm happy to give you what I saw."

"Did you have something different?"

"Yeah, he missed the tag."

My partner shrugged it off

That sounds like judgement and NO reason for him to come to you.

 

On ‎1‎/‎16‎/‎2017 at 9:26 PM, ElkOil said:

The next time we worked together, he had no issue getting together

Maybe there was a legitimate reason to get together this time.

Not trying to be a reda$$ (it usually occurs naturally) with you I just didn't see a direct connection between the 2 encounters that could be traced to the post game. But I wasn't there and you were so I'll take your word for it.