MTR wrote:Skarp wrote:When you enforce a rule (any rule), and a coach or player questions you about it, do you explain the rule and its application (at least cursorily) or do you say "I've made my call, discussion over"? With every good ump I've seen, it's the former.
Depends on the situation. If it is about the judgment side of the call, no discussion necessary. If a rule issue, I will tell the coach why I made the ruling in question, but I'm not going to stand in the middle of the field an give a mini-clinic. If the coach wants to question my interpretation, I do not hesitate to invite the coach to play the game under protest.So while you might not expressly earn your paycheck for teaching the rules of the game, in practical fact that is part of the value you provide for the money that you earn. That's the point I'm making.
The field is not the place for teaching. As is the responsibility of an umpire to learn the rules, so is it the responsibility of the coach. I know you have seen me post this before, but I open up my state clinics to anyone. When I address youth or adult league meetings, I invite them to the rules clinic and will even open our state mechanics school (for the volunteer umpires). There is no charge for the clinic and a nominal charge for the school to defray cost of equipment and insurance. In more than seven years, I have had one, ONE youth volunteer attend the school and none attend a clinic. The youth organization paid for five to attend, but the four others thought it was more important to rake and weed the field that day. The only requests of these folks is that they understand the events they are attending are meant for umpires with some sort of experience and the manner in which scenarios are addressed. I ask them to record any questions they have and someone from the staff will address them privately. That avoids any fear of looking poorly in front of umpires with which they will have to interact down the road.
Many of the youth organizations would love a clinic, but they want a private clinic. With all due respect to those who volunteer their time to these organizations, it is too much to ask of the state umpire staff to give numerous private clinics. These folks are as much a volunteer to the game as the parents of the players are to their daughters. They do not receive compensation for their time or efforts to the clinics or schools. That means members of the staff literally incur a cost to help educate others. They do it for the love of the game and don't stop just because their daughter has moved on to the next level which, unfortunately, happens too often to youth organizations.
I think we're talking past one another a bit here. I'm not saying the field is a place for formal teaching (of the rules, the game, or whatever). But the field is where most learning by coaches and players actually takes place...much of it by having their boneheaded/rookie misconceptions corrected by umpires. And if you think that you aren't being paid for that aspect of your job, try refusing to explain any of your rulings for a couple of months...see how often you get called back to ump games employing that philosophy.
It's a pretty common phenomenon for experts (in any subject) to have difficulty understanding why everyone else doesn't "get" it. Example: If you play poker much, you'll see so-called pros talking to neurosurgeons like they are complete idiots because they don't understand poker very well...a comical irony, to be sure.
On here, ssarge exemplifies the opposite...the expert consistently willing to "dumb it down" for the benefit of the layperson. You can judge for yourself which is the superior model.
comment) is whether umps are capable of handling that knowledge disparity with class, or instead have to act like condescending jackasses about it.
