johnnyg08 Posted February 11 Report Posted February 11 If you know...are your NFHS varsity baseball game fees more, less, or the same as your NFHS varsity softball game fees? Feel free to expand on the rationale as well. Thanks!
The Man in Blue Posted February 11 Report Posted February 11 They are the same. Over the years, this has led to many umpires giving up baseball for shorter softball games on smaller fields. Softball typically also offers "+ innings" (JV, B-team, whatever) for +$$$ immediately after, as opposed to baseball that believes every level needs a 30+ full-game schedule, so they only play one game at a time. 1
Thatsnotyou Posted February 14 Report Posted February 14 The thing is, softball umpires shouldn’t make less, which is a line of thinking I’ve heard a bunch. Baseball umpires should make more. Not going to lie, at some point when I’m older the smaller field, but really, the shorter game time and awesome pace of play (in terrible April weather) will have me considering switching. We’re all kind of silly for working baseball. 1
johnnyg08 Posted February 14 Author Report Posted February 14 4 hours ago, Thatsnotyou said: The thing is, softball umpires shouldn’t make less What would be some reasons that they should be the same? There's very little, if anything that's the same about the two sports. Why isn't football the same as volleyball? lacrosse? soccer? I'm genuinely asking.
noumpere Posted February 14 Report Posted February 14 3 hours ago, johnnyg08 said: What would be some reasons that they should be the same? There's very little, if anything that's the same about the two sports. Why isn't football the same as volleyball? lacrosse? soccer? I'm genuinely asking. Read it again. ThatsNotYou dind't say they should be the same. But, the reason it IS the same has to do with misguided interpretations of "fairness" "equity" and Title IX. Boys LAX and Girls LAX are different enough that they should be paid differently, too. (And, Girl's flag football is paid differently than Boys football. VB and BK are close enough that they are correctly paid the same, at least around here.) 2
johnnyg08 Posted February 14 Author Report Posted February 14 2 hours ago, noumpere said: But, the reason it IS the same has to do with misguided interpretations of "fairness" "equity" and Title IX. Exactly this. I hear that garbage around here too...a classes example of Dunning-Kruger @Richvee This literally has nothing to do with T9. I went so far as to contact who at the time was one of the top T9 attorneys in the country to see an interpretation. His reply is as follows: This was back in 2021: Good Afternoon Mr. Green, I read your article Titled "Nine Ways Title IX Protects High School Students" which is where I found your email address. I have a question for you around Title IX & sports contest officials, and in this case "umpires" for softball & baseball. There are no provisions under Title IX regarding the idea that compensation for contest officials (umpires) be the same for baseball & softball correct? His reply: Title IX could be implicated in your softball-baseball officials scenario in two ways. The first would be if female officials were paid less than male officials even when officiating the same sport (a highly unlikely possibility). The second is if softball officials received compensation so much lower than baseball officials that the quality of officiating in softball was demonstrably inferior to that in baseball (a subjective determination to be sure, but one that could result in discrimination against the softball players). Good luck with the situation. Now, we all know the we will always be able to find an attorney to argue a position on anything for the right amount of money...it doesn't mean that they have a case. The situations he's describing above do not apply to our situation. Our difference is a nominal difference in compensation that simply accounts for the fact that a baseball game is longer and is a different game for many reasons, unlike NFHS girls & boys basketball. 10 hours ago, Thatsnotyou said: The thing is, softball umpires shouldn’t make less, which is a line of thinking I’ve heard a bunch. Baseball umpires should make more. @Thatsnotyou Reading this again after getting some sleep, it appears as though we agree. 1
SeeingEyeDog Posted February 14 Report Posted February 14 The disparities in pay between sports that bother me are things like... In my state, lacrosse and field hockey referees receive an additional subsidy to their fee which is dependent on how many counties they cross to and from a game. More counties involve more subsidy...as it should! (I will also acknowledge that lacrosse and field hockey require more overall physical fitness that other sports don't...) Life is frequently defined by what we (or one) can negotiate. The further one travels for work "should" equate to more compensation...regardless of what the base fee is to begin with. ~Dawg 1
The Man in Blue Posted February 14 Report Posted February 14 13 hours ago, johnnyg08 said: What would be some reasons that they should be the same? There's very little, if anything that's the same about the two sports. Why isn't football the same as volleyball? lacrosse? soccer? I'm genuinely asking. I highly disagree with that bolder part. The sports are much more alike than different; the cultures can be very different. A long time ago I made the observation that if you tell two quality softball teams they have a 75-minute time limit, they will get 6 innings in, if not all 7. If you tell two quality baseball games they have 120-minute time limit, they will make sure to take every second of that and then complain they only played 4 innings and you should stay longer. 1
johnnyg08 Posted February 14 Author Report Posted February 14 13 minutes ago, The Man in Blue said: I highly disagree with that bolder part. The sports are much more alike than different; the cultures can be very different. A long time ago I made the observation that if you tell two quality softball teams they have a 75-minute time limit, they will get 6 innings in, if not all 7. If you tell two quality baseball games they have 120-minute time limit, they will make sure to take every second of that and then complain they only played 4 innings and you should stay longer. I appreciate the opportunity to discuss. I guess I don't really see many similarities. What are some that you can think of that would justify the same game fee?
The Man in Blue Posted February 15 Report Posted February 15 I didn't say they could justify the same fee. 😁 I said it is the same game. The same skills are needed to officiate, the same knowledge is needed, the same critical thinking is needed . . . you can pluck umpires from one and drop them in the other. There are nuances they won't know, but they won't flounder to get through a game by any stretch of the imagination. Different pitching mechanics, but a strike is still a strike, a ball is still a ball, a walk is still a walk, etc. The field is smaller, but I will attest that you move more and more often in softball than baseball. Working outside instead of in is part of that. You still have three basic base positions, but you are going farther to get to them in softball. The faster pace also has you moving more frequently. An out is still an out, safe is still safe . . . There is no leading off and they can't leave the base until the ball leaves the pitcher's hand, but that and the pitching mechanics really are about it for BIG differences. As I said, there are some nuances, terminology, and penalties that are different, but the game is the same. What do you see that is so different? 1 1
johnnyg08 Posted February 15 Author Report Posted February 15 13 hours ago, The Man in Blue said: There are nuances they won't know, but they won't flounder to get through a game by any stretch of the imagination. Different pitching mechanics, but a strike is still a strike, a ball is still a ball, a walk is still a walk, etc. An out is still an out, safe is still safe . . . You've pointed out some things that I hadn't considered. ^^^ A #1 pitcher can pitch every game. Under that premise alone, it's going to be a better & faster game...esp if they're striking out 15 a game...because of that, you have minimal pitching changes, which keeps the game moving. Softball has a 15 & a 10 run rule (get the disaster games over) No leading off means no throw overs or attempts to hold a runner. (faster game) As you can probably tell, my main argument for a higher baseball fee is the overall time on the field. Time is money. If the two (bb & sb) teams are playing simultaneously. 99.9% of the time, which field is done first...and often by quite a bit of time? 2
MadMax Posted February 15 Report Posted February 15 The time-based sports are (relatively) easy to determine a pay scale – you connect it to time. Within a sport, between the two genders, the officials’ pay should have no difference. Football will always be the outlier, because football: A) requires the most amount of officials (to effectively officiate), and B) girls don’t have their own sanctioned football, so the comparisons always get a-skewed. If a woman is officiating, she should (and ultimately does) get paid the same as any other official on that crew. Any other time-based sport, between the two genders, the officials should be paid the same – varsity girls soccer pays the same as varsity boys soccer. I’d argue that within a (timed) sport – regardless of level – the pay should be the same. That’s my opinion. There’s other factors that go into it – a JV or Freshman or even Middle-school game shouldn’t require more than 2 officials. Hell, I’ve done plenty of them solo, with no complications. There should be a requirement that a varsity game cannot be played without at least 2 officials, and should have 3. Then, there’s set, or interval-based games, such as tennis and volleyball. Volleyball, in particular, presents a conundrum that does relate to the two batsports – that of a shortened, legal match win via sweep. Varsity volleyball is best-of-5… if a varsity match is a 3-0 sweep, shouldn’t the pay be same as a JV match that ended 2-1? By that weird rationale? Keep this in mind for later… So that brings us to the two batsports, and the crux of the entire argument. To what do we connect the pay for officials? Can’t do it to time, because neither game is timed. Do you connect it to (required) innings, on a per-inning basis? Further complicating this determination is the perceived relationship between gender and umpire quality. And, there’s a perceived relationship between umpire quality and game length. While I do not subscribe to the notion of gender outright determining umpire quality, I do understand what it’s based on – experience. Ever hear the phrase, “Have some feel for the game!”, or “You don’t know the game!”? Even if you get a perfect Rulebook test score, and can recite chapter & verse of every rule – and from the “secretive” manual! – the game participants can figure out real quick that you yourself never actually played the game. And, thanks to Little League pushing girls out of baseball (and indeed, Little League Softball fighting for exclusivity as an entity), scores of girls & women were deprived of the experience of playing baseball, to the extent that it translates to officiating, if one chooses. Experience definitely factors in to the two batsports. My opinion is that baseball should be 3-man – whenever possible – and thus warrant a higher officiating fee. We can absolutely correlate more umpires = a “better” -called game. And, it’s also going to increase & improve the all-too-needed experience of the umpires, plural. It’s this experience that results in “better”, more efficient game management, which leads to “quicker” games. So, unlike just about every other sport, the two batsports put more value on the officials’ experience rather than “time spent on field in that (particular) game.” Administrators, coaches and participants have disclosed that they’d “pay anything” to have “better” umpires. What makes better umpires? Not necessarily higher pay, itself. More experience makes better umpires. 2
Thatsnotyou Posted February 16 Report Posted February 16 “Neither game is timed”. In the regular season, this could be fixed (and go off of expected game time, not start time). There just isn’t a good reason to be doing an April game that goes 9 innings or drags and goes 2:30. If I was a new-ish umpire, I don’t know how many times I could do this realistic scenario and return for more: Come into work early to leave early. Get to the school a half hour early, just to watch the visiting bus show up 5 minutes before game time. Watch said visiting team take their time getting to the dugout, warm up, and insist on a full infield. Start the game 20 minutes late. Said game goes 2:20. 20-30 minute drive home. What I thought/planned/expected to be roughly two hours starting at say 4:30, became 2:20 at 4:50. 7:10 vs 6:30 out time. 40 minutes, or 33% more, for absolutely zero benefit. And those 40 minutes, especially you are returning home to any sort of responsibilities (log back on for work, S/O, kids, chores, make dinner etc.), are quite important. 2
johnnyg08 Posted February 16 Author Report Posted February 16 5 minutes ago, Thatsnotyou said: “Neither game is timed”. In the regular season, this could be fixed (and go off of expected game time, not start time). There just isn’t a good reason to be doing an April game that goes 9 innings or drags and goes 2:30. If I was a new-ish umpire, I don’t know how many times I could do this realistic scenario and return for more: Come into work early to leave early. Get to the school a half hour early, just to watch the visiting bus show up 5 minutes before game time. Watch said visiting team take their time getting to the dugout, warm up, and insist on a full infield. Start the game 20 minutes late. Said game goes 2:20. 20-30 minute drive home. What I thought/planned/expected to be roughly two hours starting at say 4:30, became 2:20 at 4:50. 7:10 vs 6:30 out time. 40 minutes, or 33% more, for absolutely zero benefit. And those 40 minutes, especially you are returning home to any sort of responsibilities (log back on for work, S/O, kids, chores, make dinner etc.), are quite important. Spot on. This happens somewhat frequently in my area.
johnnyg08 Posted February 16 Author Report Posted February 16 Or have a rain storm the size of a 5 state region over your area, make us leave early from work, pay $500 for a bus, tell us to head that way only to stand there and watch the water puddle on the untarped home plate and mound. Then try to tell us that's only worth 1/2 a game fee.
The Man in Blue Posted February 16 Report Posted February 16 On 2/15/2025 at 10:34 AM, johnnyg08 said: You've pointed out some things that I hadn't considered. ^^^ A #1 pitcher can pitch every game. Under that premise alone, it's going to be a better & faster game...esp if they're striking out 15 a game...because of that, you have minimal pitching changes, which keeps the game moving. Softball has a 15 & a 10 run rule (get the disaster games over) No leading off means no throw overs or attempts to hold a runner. (faster game) As you can probably tell, my main argument for a higher baseball fee is the overall time on the field. Time is money. If the two (bb & sb) teams are playing simultaneously. 99.9% of the time, which field is done first...and often by quite a bit of time? I guess I am not sure what you are driving at, so I'll try not to go too far down a rabbit hole. Are we only talking time? If that is case, I can't argue with that. I will say, as I referenced in my previous post, the longer game time of baseball is more a product of the culture of the game than the mechanics. I am not saying mechanics don't play some role in the game times though. I've had fast baseball teams and slow softball teams . . . it is more the culture of how they have been taught to play and what their coach AND THE UMPIRES allow. A #1 pitcher can pitch every game . . . This is debatable, but is true on the surface. There was a time when baseball teams only ran a few pitchers (a few starters, a middle reliever, and a closer). The culture of baseball has changed to where our expectations of a pitcher are only a few innings or even just a few batters. Most (youth) baseball orgs now run some form of pitch limit. There is significant debate in softball about how healthy it is to ride a pitcher into the ground, but there are no rules against it. Run rules . . . Run rules will vary by state adoption, some have the same mercy rules as softball. IHSA uses the same 10-5/15-4 for softball and baseball. No leading off . . . Does prevent dragging things out by the pitcher. Still plenty of back-pick attempts and more stolen base attempts. Theoretically, I agree with you that baseball should pay higher. However that is based on an expectation of game time, not an actual measurement. I would say that foundation of higher pay should be based more in the demand created by the disparate game times. If we are having a hard time getting baseball umpires because they are jumping ship to softball, you have to change that incentive. However, tie it to time and you will have umpires racking up the billing hours while they enjoy their Sunday picnic between innings. Don't believe me? Ask the guys who work alone for $10 more. Personally, I'm more offended that the jamoke wearing cargo pants makes the same game fee in his first 3 weeks that seasoned, veteran umpires make. 1
johnnyg08 Posted February 16 Author Report Posted February 16 3 minutes ago, The Man in Blue said: I guess I am not sure what you are driving at, so I'll try not to go too far down a rabbit hole. Are we only talking time? If that is case, I can't argue with that. I will say, as I referenced in my previous post, the longer game time of baseball is more a product of the culture of the game than the mechanics. I am not saying mechanics don't play some role in the game times though. I've had fast baseball teams and slow softball teams . . . it is more the culture of how they have been taught to play and what their coach AND THE UMPIRES allow. A #1 pitcher can pitch every game . . . This is debatable, but is true on the surface. There was a time when baseball teams only ran a few pitchers (a few starters, a middle reliever, and a closer). The culture of baseball has changed to where our expectations of a pitcher are only a few innings or even just a few batters. Most (youth) baseball orgs now run some form of pitch limit. There is significant debate in softball about how healthy it is to ride a pitcher into the ground, but there are no rules against it. Run rules . . . Run rules will vary by state adoption, some have the same mercy rules as softball. IHSA uses the same 10-5/15-4 for softball and baseball. No leading off . . . Does prevent dragging things out by the pitcher. Still plenty of back-pick attempts and more stolen base attempts. Theoretically, I agree with you that baseball should pay higher. However that is based on an expectation of game time, not an actual measurement. I would say that foundation of higher pay should be based more in the demand created by the disparate game times. If we are having a hard time getting baseball umpires because they are jumping ship to softball, you have to change that incentive. However, tie it to time and you will have umpires racking up the billing hours while they enjoy their Sunday picnic between innings. Don't believe me? Ask the guys who work alone for $10 more. It's for sure about time. Which games end sooner...almost all of the time...and it's not by 5-10 minutes? 1
The Man in Blue Posted February 16 Report Posted February 16 @MadMax, I would apply all the same things about a 3-man crew to softball. NFHS and various states are working on girls' football (flag). I know my school had a meeting last year to see if girls were interested. My guess is the game fees will be the same (but fewer officials used).
MadMax Posted February 16 Report Posted February 16 6 hours ago, Thatsnotyou said: Come into work early to leave early. Get to the school a half hour early, just to watch the visiting bus show up 5 minutes before game time. Watch said visiting team take their time getting to the dugout, warm up, and insist on a full infield. Start the game 20 minutes late. Said game goes 2:20. 20-30 minute drive home. What I thought/planned/expected to be roughly two hours starting at say 4:30, became 2:20 at 4:50. 7:10 vs 6:30 out time. 40 minutes, or 33% more, for absolutely zero benefit. How’s this any different for any other high school sport? Football, soccer, lacrosse… Ah yes, lights! Lights change everything, and allow those varsity contests to go on at a much more advantageous time! So many high schools are installing turf fields so as to ease logistics and maintenance. However, I’ll trade a turf baseball field for a set of lights any & every day of the week! I’m more than agreeable to doing a JV game (time limited to 2 hours(?)) followed by a Varsity game. Happy as a frog 🐸 in a bucket of crickets! 🦗 But the one thing that allows that to happen? Lights. 3
The Man in Blue Posted February 17 Report Posted February 17 I've maintained for years that we would have more HS umpires if games didn't start at 4:30. 3
johnnyg08 Posted February 17 Author Report Posted February 17 1 minute ago, The Man in Blue said: I've maintained for years that we would have more HS umpires if games didn't start at 4:30. Yep. And around here, the schools operate off of a two day week as well and we wonder why we're short? 4:30 game times and we play everything on the same two days of the week. 1
Kevin_K Posted February 17 Report Posted February 17 On 2/15/2025 at 12:08 PM, MadMax said: Football will always be the outlier, because football: A) requires the most amount of officials (to effectively officiate), and B) girls don’t have their own sanctioned football, so the comparisons always get a-skewed. Hate ( not really) to break it to you @MadMax but it's on its way
The Man in Blue Posted February 17 Report Posted February 17 @johnnyg08 . . . why only two days a week? The only day they won't play around here is Sunday. They try to avoid Fridays, but that lasts about as long as the first round of cancellations. The ironic part of 4:30 start times is that one reason to do it was to allow that JV game or innings to be played afterwards and not need more officials on more days. Then they just scrapped that back-end . . . and stuck with 4:30. Heck, even a 30 minute push to 5:00 would open the pool up. 2
The Man in Blue Posted February 17 Report Posted February 17 3 hours ago, Kevin_K said: Hate ( not really) to break it to you @MadMax but it's on its way IMO, this one will be the real test. Will they have to pay flag football referees the same as they pay football referees (because that is the pay scale they are accustomed to and won't have interest in it otherwise), or will the sports be different enough to justify a lower pay? I can guarantee they won't have the revenue from the gates, so that will be one reason to try. I also don't see them needing the same number of referees, but I could be wrong. I know very little about the inner-workings of football referees.
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now