Jump to content
Umpire-Empire locks topics which have not been active in the last year. The thread you are viewing hasn't been active in 2718 days so you will not be able to post. We do recommend you starting a new topic to find out what's new in the world of umpiring.

Recommended Posts

Posted
On 4/24/2019 at 2:49 PM, Vumpire said:

Also, I don't care for the formula: "if you continue to do X, I will do Y, or I will have no choice but to do Y," a wise man told me never to use this in adversarial proceedings: with kids, wives, neighbors. It accomplishes nothing. He knows you can eject him. Reminding him of it is a power trip. Why not use a technique, "Coach, in my judgment they're not out of the box, they're not gaining an advantage from it, but I will keep an eye on it." I.e. be reasonable and make the issue go away by acknowledging the concern.

The "formula" as you call it (most of us refer to is as "the script") is there because we are told to use it. NCAA requires it for all but automatic reasons for ejections. And a good many HS and State Associations are now doing the same.

It was put in because to many coaches were complaining that they were getting ejected "without a warning" for "minor stuff." They neglected to add that this ejection for a minor infraction was in addition to them bitching and generally carrying on for the whole game.

The coaches and ADs are what makes up the majority of the Rules Committees in both NCAA and NFHS. So it gets passed down to us.

Dont use it... that's fine. But understand that of the Powers That Be want you to use it, and you refuse. Well... that's your career funeral. Isnt it.

×
×
  • Create New...