Coach insists I'm wrong on a rule

[RBIbaseball]

R1, no outs. 14U USSSA

 

I'm PU, my partner in B gets drilled by a hard line drive in the chest.

 

I call time instantly and am walking to my partner. The players continue to play it out and throw the runner out at first.

As I'm halfway and the play stops. I stop again and declare BR safe at first and put R1 on 2B. Coach is yelling that we still threw him out. I yell over to the coach that it's immediate dead ball, and BR essentially gets a single out of it, tough luck.

 

I finish it off with a, "hey partner, you know you're suppose to dodge OUT of the way of those, not into them, right" ... Luckily he was okay.

 

Anyway. Point to the story, and question.

 

Coach follows up with checking on the umpire as well, then tells me ina very respectful (but still trying to get the call changed) manner as we are both walking back towards his dugout:

"you know you got that wrong, right" .

Um, ya why's that coach.

"Ya, it's suppose to be a live ball"

No. I'm 100% sure it's a dead ball once it hits my partner off the bat"

Very confidently coach says again, "nope it's a live ball, we've had that play before"

I close it out by saying, "Coach, the calls the call, and I tell you what. I am very confident I'm right, but I understand you are too. So let's both look it up after the game and double check ourselves."

Coach seemed a little caught off guard by that proposal, but we move on.

 

Had the team later in the day and coach thanks me and admits he was wrong, "teaching" me the difference of whether the umpire is in front of or behind the infielders.

I told him I looked it up to just be sure. I said those other times it happened was at a younger age where the umpires were behind the infield, huh? He admits yes, and we all move on with our lives, better for it.

 

 

How do you guys like my , "we'll both go look it up de-escalation" . I kinda came up with it on the fly. Does it scream a lack of confidence and you recommend against it, or a humble approach that will prove to be useful going forward... ?

 

Did I just get lucky that it worked out so well this time ... What if there was a chance I could be wrong, would that change anything? Curious as to what you guys think. Should I remove this tactic from my toolbox?

 

Edit: for what it's worth my partner thought it was a live ball too and that I got it wrong 

[noumpere]

I used it, and in multiple sports.

 

The other option is to tell the coach he can protest (depending on the league / sport /etc.)

[Tborze]

I wouldn’t use it. Why not just explain the rule to him?  Sounds like he would have understood the difference and moved on without thinking you were wrong the rest of the game. 
Another point, as nounpere mentioned, protests. If I was unsure of a ruling, I wouldn’t wait till after the game to look it up. 
Also, your comment/explanation to the coach didn’t sound like you were 100% confident. 
It also doesn’t help when your partner can’t help you out!  

[beerguy55]

If protests are in place...AND the deadline hasn't been passed:

"Coach, are you protesting?"   

"Yes" or "No"

"Good, conversation's over".

 

If a protest can't be made, for whatever reason, the offer to show him the rule after the game can often work - it certainly did for me. 

[Thunderheads]

"Coach, I'm so confident I'm right, I'll give you my paycheck after the tournament if I'm wrong"  

If you de-escalated' something, then it worked.  Will your tactic work all the time? Probably not.

Something else:  "Coach, I don't care what's happened before on this play, it was called incorrectly if it was left a live ball"

Another tactic would be to come up big with your call, and be very demonstrative;  "TIME! TIME! - That's umpire interference. Direct R1 to second, and BR to first.  THEN check on your partner.

I say the above because your original post gives the impression that your call may have come across as 'casual'.

[The Man in Blue]

17 hours ago, RBIbaseball said:

I finish it off with a, "hey partner, you know you're suppose to dodge OUT of the way of those, not into them, right" ... Luckily he was okay.

 . . . 

Very confidently coach says again, "nope it's a live ball, we've had that play before"

 

I hate -- HATE -- that approach.  "The last guy got it wrong but I liked it, so you got it wrong because I don't like it."  (I know you add later that there was a distinction, but this is the coach's approach and I hate it.)

 

48 minutes ago, Tborze said:

I wouldn’t use it. Why not just explain the rule to him?  Sounds like he would have understood the difference and moved on without thinking you were wrong the rest of the game. 

I am not saying don't explain it ... I am saying the guys that do get calls wrong have explanations also.  One of the most enjoyable games I ever had was with a first base coach that "liked the way I explained things" so he came out with different things every inning to pick my brain.  At the end of the game I issued him a challenge: "Now go look it up and see if I am right.  Just because it sounded good doesn't mean I am right."  He laughed and that gave me more credibility.

37 minutes ago, beerguy55 said:

If protests are in place...AND the deadline hasn't been passed:

"Coach, are you protesting?"   

"Yes" or "No"

"Good, conversation's over".

 

If a protest can't be made, for whatever reason, the offer to show him the rule after the game can often work - it certainly did for me. 

I am not an advocate of bringing up protests as a remedy, but I wish I had thought of that this past weekend on an IFF call.  I will add this to my toolbox despite my anti-protest stance!

 

32 minutes ago, Thunderheads said:

"Coach, I'm so confident I'm right, I'll give you my paycheck after the tournament if I'm wrong"  

Following the IFF situation last weekend, the UIC brought up protests.  I proposed to the UIC that the umpire should get to keep the protest fee if the umpire was correct.  It shouldn't just be a money maker for the tournament.  (He countered with the umpire paying the fee if they were wrong ... If I'm willing to bet my game check ... 😁)

[RBIbaseball]

44 minutes ago, Thunderheads said:

"Coach, I'm so confident I'm right, I'll give you my paycheck after the tournament if I'm wrong"  

If you de-escalated' something, then it worked.  Will your tactic work all the time? Probably not.

Something else:  "Coach, I don't care what's happened before on this play, it was called incorrectly if it was left a live ball"

Another tactic would be to come up big with your call, and be very demonstrative;  "TIME! TIME! - That's umpire interference. Direct R1 to second, and BR to first.  THEN check on your partner.

I say the above because your original post gives the impression that your call may have come across as 'casual'.

Ya for sure. In hind sight there was kinda 3 separate announcements I made (to the best of my memory)

 

1. I called time as soon as he got hit and started walking out.

2. When the players threw him out at first, that's when I stopped and said BR safe at first, R2 gets 2B and kept going to my partner (at this point 1B coach was already next to him checking on his well being)

3. The HC responded to my announcement of awards with "no we threw him out at first". I responded again with, Its an immediate dead ball on the umpire interference (I truly believe I did call it what it was, but it's very possible my brain in lieing to me), BR gets a single out of it coach, R1 to 2B. Then I made it to my partner shortly after that.

 

My partner got drilled directly in the chest, and he is an older gentleman... Most everyone's immediate reaction was to go straight to him, and I got caught up in that too. As far as him helping me out ... Even if he knew the rule, he was so disoriented from getting hit there is no way he could have helped. Took him a couple min to be ready to go.

 

I suppose I should have given the full rundown from behind the plate the first time to instill confidence in my call, then go out to check.

[Umpy]

44 minutes ago, Thunderheads said:

"Coach, I'm so confident I'm right, I'll give you my paycheck after the tournament if I'm wrong"  

I'm going to use this one at my Little League district tournament this weekend.

[RBIbaseball]

54 minutes ago, beerguy55 said:

If protests are in place...AND the deadline hasn't been passed:

"Coach, are you protesting?"   

"Yes" or "No"

"Good, conversation's over".

 

If a protest can't be made, for whatever reason, the offer to show him the rule after the game can often work - it certainly did for me. 

Tbh I have no idea what the protest policy is/was or whether there was one.

I'm not sure I like the idea of defaulting to "protest or not?" as an initial strategy to deescalate and move on.

 

Obviously if he responded to my "calls the call, we'll both look it up after" with anything like "no, this is costing my team, we need to get it right" ... Now maybe the next step is a protest talk or contacting a UIC to rectify or something

 

But in this case, I read the coach fairly well and my tactic worked. I guess it's a case by case. I can't use this every time. It's situation and person dependent perhaps 

[BigBlue4u]

21 hours ago, RBIbaseball said:

Very confidently coach says again, "nope it's a live ball, we've had that play before"

I've said it before, be very careful of unverifiable information.

[beerguy55]

3 hours ago, RBIbaseball said:

Tbh I have no idea what the protest policy is/was or whether there was one.

I'm not sure I like the idea of defaulting to "protest or not?" as an initial strategy to deescalate and move on.

I've stated this before, and I stand by it.

There is a difference between a disagreement in judgment and a disagreement in the rules.

As far as a disagreement in the rule, it's pretty clear cut.

Short of taking out the rule book right there on the field, which is not permitted in most amateur settings, as far as I know (If the league/tourney allows it, then do it, within reason), protest is how it is resolved, and there's no reason to argue further.

Offer the five minute conversation before or after the "protest" comment, whatever floats your boat, but there's no reason for the conversation to last more than 20 seconds. 

"You wanna talk for five minutes after the game and I'll show you the rule?"

"No, I want this solved now"

"You protesting?"

If you know you're right, you know you're right.  That won't change if you talk to your partner.  And if both you and your partner are in agreement, that won't change the mind of the coach who "knows" he's right.   Any further conversation is pointless...shut it down by giving him the avenue your league/tourney rules have provided.  That's why it's there.

And if he doesn't want to do that...he's free to look up the rules in the rule book he should have in his bag...and then either acknowledge his error later in the game, or complain to your assignor.

OBR does have this instruction:

Do not allow criticism to keep you from studying out bad situations. Carry your rule book. It is better to consult the rules and hold up the game ten minutes to decide a knotty problem than to inadvertently misapply these rules.

I think that's even more important since OBR specifically forbids protests...7.04.   MLB they can call New York.  At lower levels, I wonder how many keep that instruction in mind.

 

[Umpy]

The Little League Rules Instruction Manual actually specifically calls out keeping your rulebook with you to prevent protests. Direct quote from the final page, and similar language to your OBR instruction:

"IMPORTANT

Carry your rulebook.  It is better to consult the Rules and hold up the game long enough to decide a knotty problem than to have a game protested and possibly replayed."

[The Man in Blue]

1 hour ago, beerguy55 said:

If you know you're right, you know you're right.  That won't change if you talk to your partner.  And if both you and your partner are in agreement, that won't change the mind of the coach who "knows" he's right.   Any further conversation is pointless...

Absolutely that^.  

The coach doesn't give two squirts if you got it right or wrong.  The coach only wants it to go his way whether that is right or wrong.

[RBIbaseball]

4 hours ago, beerguy55 said:

I've stated this before, and I stand by it.

There is a difference between a disagreement in judgment and a disagreement in the rules.

As far as a disagreement in the rule, it's pretty clear cut.

Short of taking out the rule book right there on the field, which is not permitted in most amateur settings, as far as I know (If the league/tourney allows it, then do it, within reason), protest is how it is resolved, and there's no reason to argue further.

Offer the five minute conversation before or after the "protest" comment, whatever floats your boat, but there's no reason for the conversation to last more than 20 seconds. 

"You wanna talk for five minutes after the game and I'll show you the rule?"

"No, I want this solved now"

"You protesting?"

If you know you're right, you know you're right.  That won't change if you talk to your partner.  And if both you and your partner are in agreement, that won't change the mind of the coach who "knows" he's right.   Any further conversation is pointless...shut it down by giving him the avenue your league/tourney rules have provided.  That's why it's there.

And if he doesn't want to do that...he's free to look up the rules in the rule book he should have in his bag...and then either acknowledge his error later in the game, or complain to your assignor.

OBR does have this instruction:

Do not allow criticism to keep you from studying out bad situations. Carry your rule book. It is better to consult the rules and hold up the game ten minutes to decide a knotty problem than to inadvertently misapply these rules.

I think that's even more important since OBR specifically forbids protests...7.04.   MLB they can call New York.  At lower levels, I wonder how many keep that instruction in mind.

 

But I took that 20 sec , while we are walking, and he accepted it and moved on... If he hadn't accepted it, then ya sure rule book or protest time I guess 

Is it not worth a 20 sec investment for a decent chance to avoid it , over just defaulting to "are you protesting or not coach" ?

[The Man in Blue]

3 hours ago, RBIbaseball said:

But I took that 20 sec , while we are walking, and he accepted it and moved on... If he hadn't accepted it, then ya sure rule book or protest time I guess 

Is it not worth a 20 sec investment for a decent chance to avoid it , over just defaulting to "are you protesting or not coach" ?

 

I think this wholly depends on the coach's demeaner.  If the coach really wants a right answer, invest the time.  If the coach thinks it is Burger King (just wants it his way), don't bother.

I will spend all the time I can with a coach who wants to learn and get a right answer.  I will spend as little time as possible with Coach Veruca Salt.

[beerguy55]

11 hours ago, RBIbaseball said:

But I took that 20 sec , while we are walking, and he accepted it and moved on... If he hadn't accepted it, then ya sure rule book or protest time I guess 

Is it not worth a 20 sec investment for a decent chance to avoid it , over just defaulting to "are you protesting or not coach" ?

That was my point all along...Yes, you always need to read the room to make a judgment call to what you think will work best, but in the end I don't care what order you do what in or how you spend that 20 seconds;  20 seconds is all it should take.  There's no reason for a rule dispute to go 1, 2, 5 minutes like many of them do.   The only time it should take five minutes is if your league/association/tourney allows you to reference the rule book to resolve/verify in real time.

Otherwise "Coach, we're not arguing this.  I've explained the ruling, I know the rule...if you want to take five minutes after the game I'm happy to show you."  "But but but"  "Are you protesting?"

 

[RBIbaseball]

@The Man in Blue @beerguy55

Thanks for the insight. I've never actually dealt with a coach who was legitimately protesting a rules application. Good to be mentally prepared going forward with how I would handle that.

[johnnyg08]

Nah, they typically don't care and they won't look it up either. I'm not doing their legwork for them, especially when I know I'm 100% correct. 

 

[noumpere]

18 minutes ago, johnnyg08 said:

Nah, they typically don't care and they won't look it up either. I'm not doing their legwork for them, especially when I know I'm 100% correct. 

 

Except when what you 100% know is 100% incorrect (not "you" - johnny, but the generic smitty umpire who would have the same responses to the coach as we see in this thread )

[BigBlue4u]

On 6/27/2023 at 4:17 PM, RBIbaseball said:

How do you guys like my , "we'll both go look it up de-escalation" . I kinda came up with it on the fly. Does it scream a lack of confidence and you recommend against it, or a humble approach that will prove to be useful going forward... ?

I don't like it and I recommend against it.  By saying you'll both look it up, it would likely make the coach assume you are not sure of the rule yourself.  When a coach takes that route, my standard response is, "Coach, if you think I am wrong, play the game under protest.  Otherwise, we're playing ball.  What do you want to do?" However. I will say this, if it works for you, stay with it.
 

[The Man in Blue]

I disagree that “let’s both look it up” shows a lack of confidence.  I think it shows that you are not being a stand-offish know-it-all and are challenging the coach to do the same.  It is a two-way street.

I see showing your ability and willingness to read the book as a strength, not a weakness.  

[johnnyg08]

On 6/29/2023 at 3:22 PM, noumpere said:

Except when what you 100% know is 100% incorrect (not "you" - johnny, but the generic smitty umpire who would have the same responses to the coach as we see in this thread )

Yeah. That happens too. That's for sure. 

[mrumpiresir]

If the coach is being cordial, I have no problem showing him the rule.  It builds rapport. 

I ran into a coach at a Legion All Star game a few days after I made an incorrect in his game.  I apologized and told him I was wrong.  He was cool.