Coach casually asking me about partner's ruling

[maven]

27 minutes ago, wolfe_man said:

Seriously, why is this such a big deal?  It's eye-black.

In our state, we have seen (in various sports) "eye black" that:

• had white over-lettering that said "F*** [name of opponent]" and other inflammatory phrases
• extended all over the face, and looked something like KISS makeup

Some folks are fine with all that, kids are kids, yada yada. But I think it changes the tone of a game, especially where there's prior bad blood (and, alas, sometimes that phrase applies literally).

[ErichKeane]

16 minutes ago, maven said:

In our state, we have seen (in various sports) "eye black" that:

• had white over-lettering that said "F*** [name of opponent]" and other inflammatory phrases
• extended all over the face, and looked something like KISS makeup

Some folks are fine with all that, kids are kids, yada yada. But I think it changes the tone of a game, especially where there's prior bad blood (and, alas, sometimes that phrase applies literally).

I find myself OK with the latter (And think I saw it on TV at the LLWS a few years ago?), the former is completely unacceptable. Former sounds like an ejection where I'm from.

[Replacematt]

27 minutes ago, maven said:

In our state, we have seen (in various sports) "eye black" that:

• had white over-lettering that said "F*** [name of opponent]" and other inflammatory phrases
• extended all over the face, and looked something like KISS makeup

Some folks are fine with all that, kids are kids, yada yada. But I think it changes the tone of a game, especially where there's prior bad blood (and, alas, sometimes that phrase applies literally).

The first is a sportsmanship issue, not an eye-black issue. The second is nothing.

[wolfe_man]

First is obviously a problem, no swearing verbally is permitted, so none written can be tolerated either.   Agree with @Matt that this is a clear sportsmanship issue and the current rules cover it. 

Second one, I have no problem with at all.  Does it look goofy? Yes, but it's not an itch that I choose to scratch.  It's not demeaning to anyone, other than the wearer perhaps. 

Are we becoming the NFL (no fun league) now for baseball too?  I'm a traditionalist to some degree, but it should be fun or we're going to lose even more kids to other sports.  I'm fine with enforcing rules that affect safety and fairness, but some of these it feels like we're making an issue where there isn't one.

[BLWizzRanger]

2 minutes ago, wolfe_man said:

First is obviously a problem, no swearing verbally is permitted, so none written can be tolerated either.   This is clear sportsmanship issue and current rule covers it.

Second one, I have no problem with at all.  Does it look goofy? Yes, but it's not an itch that I am choose to scratch.  It's not demeaning to anyone, other than the wearer perhaps.

I mean, the kids are still in puberty.  Can you imagine what their acne will look like? 

[Replacematt]

53 minutes ago, BLWizzRanger said:

I mean, the kids are still in puberty.  Can you imagine what their acne will look like? 

I don't get icked out by much, but I've seen some really bad ones caused by camo paint on still-hormonal 18-23-year-olds.

[Vegas_Ump]

Basic answer to the OP:  "Coach, it's his call."  Then zip it.

If the coach asks the other ump to ask you for help, that's fair.  The partner is under no obligation to do so, but for many calls it's reasonable.

If your partner does come to you for help, answer truthfully.  You do not have an agenda to make him look good; you have the obligation to get it right.

Note that an inexperienced partner might have incorrectly applied a rule.  This is grounds for protest.  But you as a partner must stay out of the discussion unless the other ump asks.

Mike

Las Vegas

[Replacematt]

18 minutes ago, Vegas_Ump said:

Note that an inexperienced partner might have incorrectly applied a rule.  This is grounds for protest.  But you as a partner must stay out of the discussion unless the other ump asks.

Not on a rules issue. You need to get in there.

[MadMax]

7 hours ago, dumbdumb said:

because then i would like to know what you are going to do when his girlfriend gives him the black eye from a dispute and he has to pitch looking like spot the dog.

Two questions emerge… leap… from this: 

1. When is a high school boy going to be slated to pitch after suffering an assault & battery from a juvenile “domestic dispute”??? That’s what you’re postulating, are you not? Come on! At least propose something remotely feasible… like a car accident, or any of a list of boneheaded things kids do. 
2. Why would or should I – as an umpire for a baseball game – do anything at all regarding that? So what? So he’s got a black eye or he’s got eye black on… how does that affect the proceedings of the game? (Read: it doesn’t.)

Really, this forced and highly variable interpretation of sportsmanship or intimidation or what constitutes competition is maddening. 

[Kevin_K]

16 hours ago, Richvee said:

They need to get over it. Are the same guys still telling kids to take the sunglasses off their caps?  

They're the same guys who only have blue(ish) shirts and heather purple pants and expect PU to cover 3B on a clean triple with no one on.

[Richvee]

8 hours ago, Kevin_K said:

They're the same guys who only have blue(ish) shirts and heather purple pants and expect PU to cover 3B on a clean triple with no one on.

I thought so… 

[MadMax]

13 hours ago, Vegas_Ump said:

Basic answer to the OP:  "Coach, it's his call."  Then zip it.

[snip]

If your partner does come to you for help, answer truthfully.  You do not have an agenda to make him look good; you have the obligation to get it right.

But, Vegas, it’s not “his call” – at least, it shouldn’t be. This forced, faux sanctimonious “policing” has gotta end. The PU essentially made something up and stalled the game by several minutes, and likely increased animosity simply to feel justified and self-righteous. He thinks he’s “doing good” by curtailing something as petty as eye black, but he’s got extremely shaky rules justification for it. So if it turns out that the HC does want to make a rules inquiry, what then?  

[Recontra]

“Hey, Mike, he’s got sunglasses on, he can’t have those! . . . . . . . can he?”

”Hey, Mike, he’s got eye make-up on, he can’t have that . . . . . . .  can he?”

Me. Glare. “Play!”

[Vegas_Ump]

14 hours ago, MadMax said:

But, Vegas, it’s not “his call” – at least, it shouldn’t be. This forced, faux sanctimonious “policing” has gotta end. The PU essentially made something up and stalled the game by several minutes, and likely increased animosity simply to feel justified and self-righteous. He thinks he’s “doing good” by curtailing something as petty as eye black, but he’s got extremely shaky rules justification for it. So if it turns out that the HC does want to make a rules inquiry, what then?  

Max:  I got your point.  But why didn't the coach take it to the umpire who made the "call" in the first place?  He IS entitled to understand the rule under which this guy acted--for better or worse.  But coming to the other ump is "fishing for a call"--I hate that!

It sounds to me like the PU may have made something up as you suggested.  OK, then why shouldn't the coach take his issue to him and ask for the rule.  And he better be prepared to handle the inevitable protest if indeed the PU executed a PIROOMA.  

The PU may have gone looking for trouble--not a good thing.  But whining to the other ump is NOT the way to solve the problem.

Mike

Las Vegas

[LRZ]

"PIROOMA"

Say what?

[Velho]

to borrow the phrase itself, I think Mike is referring to this https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=PROOMA

[BigBlue4u]

Good job not throwing partner under the bus.  One way you can answer is to say, as you did, "Maybe he thought it was distracting." That doesn't answer his question, but he might buy that response. If he pushes you on that reply, tell him, "Well, why don't you go in and ask him."  I wouldn't be saying "No comment."  All that does is throw up a big red flag.

[udbrky]

In Indiana, our commissioner wants us to keep everyone at a single line, because of the potential for unsportsmanlike things being added. TBH, it's not something I really catch and I've never seen it be an issue.

 

Regarding throwing your partner under the bus.

 

 

"I didn't see what happened Bob, I was watching my area."

"what'd you have on that pickoff/steal?"

"I was watching the pitcher to make sure he didn't balk/I was watching for batter interference"

Both should be true. Plus, why are you watching your partner's call?

[LMSANS]

On 4/22/2022 at 3:50 PM, Kevin_K said:

They're the same guys who only have blue(ish) shirts and heather purple pants and expect PU to cover 3B on a clean triple with no one on.

Fortunately, the state changed the shirt and pants so that got rid of most of these.🙄