Ya know what burns my arse?

[BLWizzRanger]

A flame about that high. (Holding my hand out about arse high).

 

All joking aside, I was assigned a game and it was revoked in a matter of minutes. Mind you, it is a State Championship caliper game, later in the season, and there are better umpires in my board.

 

But, come on....

 

Just taking the burn to get better.

 

Sent from my SM-F721U1 using Tapatalk

 

 

[The Man in Blue]

You either have a similar name or are listed right next to the guy they really wanted.  😋

[MadMax]

On 3/15/2024 at 12:22 PM, BLWizzRanger said:

it is a State Championship caliper game, later in the season, and there are better umpires in my board.

Pandora didn't have just one box... she had several, of various sizes, shapes, and... content. 

This whole topic of one (umpire) being "better than" another (umpire) is one of those boxes. 📦

"Better... how? What measures or qualifies that??" 

[The Man in Blue]

Trust me @MadMax, I know which umpires are better than me because they let me know.  😛

[BLWizzRanger]

Pandora didn't have just one box... she had several, of various sizes, shapes, and... content. 
This whole topic of one (umpire) being "better than" another (umpire) is one of those boxes. 
"Better... how? What measures or qualifies that??" 

Good question but hard to answer with a definitive answer, right? Trying to be more self reflective and not lie to myself below.

While there isnt one metric alone that stands out, its all of the usual combination of factors. In no particular order...

They have current college experience. I have minimal experience (summer leagues and fallball scrimmages) with the college game.

They have many more years of experience. Two to three to ten times years of experience.

They have good reputations with coaches and other umps. I do too but I dont know all of the ones they do with their experience (And they ref multiple sports thereby more expirence, presence, and familiarity).

They get their calls correct. Yes, I do too and I get good compliments by the ones I am comparing myself with. However, I am not perfect as seen on my posts here. But I do strive to be perfect.

They have a good zone. Mine has turned the corner and I am much more consistent.

I am a good teammate. I have always supported my team and have never left them out to hang.

They have good game management. I think I do too, but I do get tested somewhat as my reputation is still being built as being good and competent. I have had the ones I am comparing myself with, telling some coaches to back off on arguing rules because I know what I am talking about. (Not bragging because I learn something on this board every day and am far from knowing it all. Its about testing myself and making sure I recheck the rules book to make sure I know the rules.)

My availability is less than theirs. Different jobs, different lives... it is what it is.

So yeah, across the board I have to get better.

I heard a multi-conference college and American Legion assigner speak and his words were that he uses the same umpires over and over because they do all of the right things and get along in the locker room. He isnt actively looking to replace his group but he knows what is out there and can replace when needed.

I sort of think I am in this outside group with my assigner. I hate to call this the good old boys network but if you are going to use them until they need replaced, that is what it is.





Sent from my SM-F721U1 using Tapatalk

[blue23ll]

It's early still, just roll with it!! Don't let any single game derail you. Think of the season in it's totality.

If you want better games, tell your assignor. Ask to work with the 'big dogs' in your association.

[MadMax]

3 hours ago, BLWizzRanger said:

So yeah, across the board I have to get better.

See, if you’re conducting self-evaluation, and you’ve deduced it down to, in simple terms, “get better”, then sure… it’s your world. I just bristle at an “evaluator” telling you that. 
Why? 
Because every “evaluator’s” value-scale is different. Every. Single. One. 

I am a supervisor. I supervise the machinations and performance of my/our crews. I am a developer. I develop and advance the skills of umpires in a variety of leagues and levels, not just the League I work for. Professional baseball (Big M-) has supervisors and instructors. Sure, they’ll conduct evaluations, but when they do – here is the crucial difference – it’s to a set, standardized value-scale. What’s on that scale is the League’s business. 

Furthermore, what that value-scale determines, or how it is applied, is the League’s business. It’s worth pointing out, though, that each Umpire knows what that value-scale is, and if there is a deficiency, there are resources and steps to take to correct it or bring it up to acceptable standard. 

With that being said, outside of certain collegiate conferences / associations, these value-scales used in amateur baseball are largely arbitrary and ambiguous. Rules knowledge? That’s measurable. We got tests for that. But when you’ve got an “evaluator” telling an umpire he “should” Eject a player – like something @834k3r witnessed – then that crosses into that open-to-interpretation, arbitrary realm where there isn’t one set, standardized method. Whether that particular umpire did or did not Eject, what measureable bearing does it have on his capability or proficiency as an umpire?? It doesn’t. 

 

[BigBlue4u]

16 hours ago, MadMax said:

Whether that particular umpire did or did not Eject, what measurable bearing does it have on his capability or proficiency as an umpire?? It doesn’t. 

I disagree.  Game management is a very important, yet often overlooked, part of umpiring.  Example:

If an umpire called a batter out on a called third strike and the batter took two steps toward his dugout and threw his bat against the backstop, I can't imagine an umpire NOT ejecting the batter.  If you were being observed and that happened, and you did not eject the batter, that would have a direct and very measurable bearing on your capability or proficiency as an umpire.

[The Man in Blue]

23 hours ago, BLWizzRanger said:

Good question but hard to answer with a definitive answer, right? Trying to be more self reflective and not lie to myself below.

While there isnt one metric alone that stands out, its all of the usual combination of factors. In no particular order...

They have current college experience. I have minimal experience (summer leagues and fallball scrimmages) with the college game.

They have many more years of experience. Two to three to ten times years of experience.

They have good reputations with coaches and other umps. I do too but I dont know all of the ones they do with their experience (And they ref multiple sports thereby more expirence, presence, and familiarity).

They get their calls correct. Yes, I do too and I get good compliments by the ones I am comparing myself with. However, I am not perfect as seen on my posts here. But I do strive to be perfect.

They have a good zone. Mine has turned the corner and I am much more consistent.

I am a good teammate. I have always supported my team and have never left them out to hang.

They have good game management. I think I do too, but I do get tested somewhat as my reputation is still being built as being good and competent. I have had the ones I am comparing myself with, telling some coaches to back off on arguing rules because I know what I am talking about. (Not bragging because I learn something on this board every day and am far from knowing it all. Its about testing myself and making sure I recheck the rules book to make sure I know the rules.)

My availability is less than theirs. Different jobs, different lives... it is what it is.

So yeah, across the board I have to get better.

I heard a multi-conference college and American Legion assigner speak and his words were that he uses the same umpires over and over because they do all of the right things and get along in the locker room. He isnt actively looking to replace his group but he knows what is out there and can replace when needed.

I sort of think I am in this outside group with my assigner. I hate to call this the good old boys network but if you are going to use them until they need replaced, that is what it is.





Sent from my SM-F721U1 using Tapatalk
 

I would suggest you should either remove or, at minimum, reframe the way you are looking at some of these standards.

They have current college experience. I have minimal experience (summer leagues and fallball scrimmages) with the college game.

This is only viable if the experience is due to measured assigning standards.  Around my parts, "college experience" largely comes down to not having a regular job.  Availability is the biggest measure for how a person gets college experience.  I am not self-fellating or trying to crap on anybody, but I work HS games with several guys who work college, and I will tell you they are not better umpires than me.  They don't have day jobs (retired, work overnights, college students, just don't work a regular job, etc.), so they can work those games.

They have many more years of experience. Two to three to ten times years of experience.

Again, a potential measure, but not a great one.  I have worked with many guys with less years than I have and they will be better umpires than I am and in far less time.  Years only measure how old you are and how many years you sent your check in.  When I started, we were not in a shortage of officials, and nobody would hire me because it was my first year.  They told me this.  I worked three games (I think).  The next year, I had a (2) next to my name and nobody turned me down.  What did I gain in those three games?

They have good reputations with coaches and other umps. I do too but I dont know all of the ones they do with their experience (And they ref multiple sports thereby more expirence, presence, and familiarity).

I may be misreading this one, but being friends with the coaches does not make them better umpires.  I know the fact that I don't "buddy-buddy" up to coaches and learn the kids' names of ADs has held me back.  But I firmly believe it does make me the better umpire.  I want my reputation ON THE FIELD to speak for me.  Shmoozing and kissing babies was part of my J-O-B job, I didn't want to do it on the field.  (Also, back to availability up top.)  Yes, being seen is a big part of it and it sucks if it isn't happening for the right reasons.

I sort of think I am in this outside group with my assigner. I hate to call this the good old boys network but if you are going to use them until they need replaced, that is what it is.

This, sadly is true.  I have quit chasing trying to move up because of this.  I went to a few college clinics and the assignor would say, "I'm looking for new blood."  I occasionally met coaches (in various other capacities) and was told, "We keep telling the assignor to quit sending the same old guys every time."  I have been at organizational conferences where they say, "We want to get new officials into the post season instead of just having the same people every year."  And you know what NONE of those people who say those things ever did?  Yeah.  It IS the good old boy network and I have accepted that.

 

Personal rant: Around here, it is getting worse as a couple of the GOBN assignors are scooping up all the schools.  Very few assign themselves any more.  These GOBN assignors don't train, don't provide feedback, and don't come see you.  They are too busy umpiring.  The only reasons they are assigning is to cherry-pick the games for them and their buddies, and "power."  Then they complain about "how hard assigning is."  

Personal rant #2: Just to show my bias in this . . . I am dealing with the THIRD phone call I received asking "Where are you, you were assigned to our game?"  Of course, those calls come from the schools, not the assignors who didn't bother to notify me they had assigned me.  But it is MY name that gets drug through the mud. 

One of those was for a volleyball game WHEN I DIDN'T EVEN CARRY A VOLLEYBALL LICENSE this year.  The assignor was notified well in advance, and I even said I would work it if he couldn't find anybody.  He said, "No, no license, can't use you."  Then didn't bother to fix it.  He is a repeat multi-sport state official, officer in the local association, clinician, has his fingers in another org, and is always at the center of several no-shows (either assigning or himself) every year.

[The Man in Blue]

2 hours ago, BigBlue4u said:

I disagree.  Game management is a very important, yet often overlooked, part of umpiring.  Example:

If an umpire called a batter out on a called third strike and the batter took two steps toward his dugout and threw his bat against the backstop, I can't imagine an umpire NOT ejecting the batter.  If you were being observed and that happened, and you did not eject the batter, that would have a direct and very measurable bearing on your capability or proficiency as an umpire.

 

I don't think the argument is that game management isn't important.  I think the argument is that the umpire in questions seems to have managed the game just fine with his methods (there were no further issues), but the the assignor wanted HIS standards applied.  (OR the assignor just wanted to be able to create his own "value" in the situation.) 

[BLWizzRanger]

54 minutes ago, The Man in Blue said:

This is only viable if the experience is due to measured assigning standards.  Around my parts, "college experience" largely comes down to not having a regular job.  Availability is the biggest measure for how a person gets college experience.  I am not self-fellating or trying to crap on anybody, but I work HS games with several guys who work college, and I will tell you they are not better umpires than me.  They don't have day jobs (retired, work overnights, college students, just don't work a regular job, etc.), so they can work those games.

 

Well, its like I said, its a combination of everything and not just one thing.  Its the same here with their availability.  If someone is available to work that college mid-week game, starting at noon with minimal complaints, they become part of the OBN.  Its just how it works. Like you, I can hold my own with most of them.  But the tangible here is gaining experience in a higher leveraged game and the assignor believes that someone working College would be better suited to working the State Championship caliber game. Or so it seems.

 

1 hour ago, The Man in Blue said:

They have good reputations with coaches and other umps. I do too but I dont know all of the ones they do with their experience (And they ref multiple sports thereby more expirence, presence, and familiarity).

I may be misreading this one, but being friends with the coaches does not make them better umpires.  I know the fact that I don't "buddy-buddy" up to coaches and learn the kids' names of ADs has held me back.  But I firmly believe it does make me the better umpire.  I want my reputation ON THE FIELD to speak for me.  Shmoozing and kissing babies was part of my J-O-B job, I didn't want to do it on the field.  (Also, back to availability up top.)  Yes, being seen is a big part of it and it sucks if it isn't happening for the right reasons.

 

You are.

 

As Jules said to Marcellus, [paraphrasing]

"You sending the Wolf?"

"Crap Buddy, Thats all you had to say!"

They aren't buddy buddy but they respect them because they get the job done. I haven't seen anything but professionalism between the coaches and my partners. Just friendly banter at the plate meetings is all that I see.

[BigBlue4u]

19 hours ago, The Man in Blue said:

I don't think the argument is that game management isn't important.  I think the argument is that the umpire in questions seems to have managed the game just fine with his methods (there were no further issues), but the the assignor wanted HIS standards applied.  (OR the assignor just wanted to be able to create his own "value" in the situation.)

The Man in Blue.  Very good. That makes sense and I agree with what you say. It reminds me of a story a few years ago.  I was asked by the assigner to observe a high school umpire working a one-man game.  One team had buckets outside the dugouts for the coaches to sit on.  The umpire walked everywhere he went, allowed more than five warmup pitches between innings, rarely left the home plate circle on batted balls, etc. etc. etc.  When I reported back to the assigner he said, "I hear what you are saying but, you know what, my phone never rings.  Nobody ever calls me to complain about him."  Go figure!

 

[MadMax]

22 hours ago, BigBlue4u said:

If you were being observed and that happened, and you did not eject the batter, that would have a direct and very measurable bearing on your capability or proficiency as an umpire.

I realize I’m slicing semantics and dicing details, but I chose my terms carefully, and details matter. 

Whether or not an ejection is enacted when the circumstances and actions likely warrant it does have a direct bearing (or effect) upon your perceived capability as an umpire. Yes, on this, you are correct. However, it begs the question – “Who is doing the observing?” The “who” is important, because whomever it is, they are employing subjective bias. 

By contrast, when you use the term “measurable”, that relates to an objective point. We also use the term “metric(s)”. Games worked at X level, TrackMan score, NFHS test results… those are all metrics… measurables. We crave measurables. We work in a stats-heavy industry, everything is broken down, reformulated, and scrutinized in numbers and figures, and then compared and projected. We just can’t do that with umpiring. There’s much too much subjectivity (and too many variables)  inherit in our line of work. 

Certainly, there is no shortage of people who try and translate subjective “impression” into objective results. We typically call them grades. 

Ejections are a terrible, almost meaningless metric, insofar that their quantity is no indication as to if they were warranted (“good” ejection vs. a “bad” ejection), nor does it convey any of the events leading up to them, nor if the umpire with the “notches in his belt” followed the “proper” steps and protocols. 

1 hour ago, BigBlue4u said:

I was asked by the assigner to observe a high school umpire working a one-man game.

What was the purpose of your observing (and subsequently evaluating) him? 
It was a one-man game, which creates an entirely different context. It begs the question, why didn’t you work with him? I’m not upset with you, BB4U, but more… irritated with the assigner. In that one-man game, that umpire likely took the path of least resistance and friction. Was there a sign posted “no buckets outside dugout”? If not (and that’s what it sounds like), did the buckets themselves cause any problems during the game? And if he’s walking everywhere, I can sympathize… solo games are long, and there’s a lot to manage. You have to maintain focus over the entirety of the game. What purpose is served from running/hustling everywhere, all the time, in a game like that one? I have found that, given my size (6’2” 215), that if I discern and choose when to run and when to walk purposefully, the participants (players, coaches) have a more appropriately responsive attitude. 

The essence of my point is not that you, BB4U, are wrong or incorrect… simply to point out that a lot of this is contextual and subjective. 

[The Man in Blue]

4 hours ago, MadMax said:

What was the purpose of your observing (and subsequently evaluating) him? 
It was a one-man game, which creates an entirely different context. It begs the question, why didn’t you work with him? I’m not upset with you, BB4U, but more… irritated with the assigner. In that one-man game, that umpire likely took the path of least resistance and friction.

 

In lieu of me blowing a gasket, I will just say . . .