How do you handle an umpire who disregards certain rules?

[radness]

From the perspective of being a catcher~
Cannot count how many times somebody like a coach or a parent would ask
When the umpire called a pitch a ball...
Those would ask
'was that a strike Turbo'?
... Well I could give my interpretation on if I think it was a strike or not.
(Of which might be good for the pitcher to recognize it was a good pitch location.)

But the reality is the Umpire called it a ball.
That's what we should be understanding in the moment.
The Umpires interpretation of what they believe the area of the strike zone is.

it is recognizing how that individual umpire is going to interpret the rulebook for that game.

* That is what matters!
* because you don't have the same umpire every game. Have different umpires with different interpretations.

For the games when you do have the same umpire hopefully they will be consistent but there's also the chance they won't.

 

[PDM]

This this this ...
the rule book explains what the rules are.

It is up to the umpire to interpret what they see on the field.

(Are you asking/telling the umpire to interpret everything the same way you are?!
That would be arrogance. W

1. Bringing out a rule book to an umpire who is already an official. Is possibly suggesting they don't know the rules.
2. Yes they are going to do 'the best they can' according to the rules
'that include interpretation'.
3. Correct thats THEIR job.

Yeah, it is suggesting that they might not know a specific rule. Are you telling me that every umpire has a perfect knowledge of the rules? If so, give me a minute to laugh. I have known and worked with hundreds of officials in various sports over the last 40 years. None were/are perfect. There is nothing wrong with bringing something to the attention of the umpire if the coach feels that a call is being made incorrectly. In my state, we have a rules interpreter who tells us how to interpret the rules. We don't all make up our own interpretation. The goal is to all be on the same page and for each official to call each situation the same way. The coach and umpire may not see the situation the same way, but if they do, then they should both come to the same conclusion. The umpire observes the situation and makes the call for that situation based on the interpretation of the rule that he/she has been given. The coach might not have access to the interpretation because hehe does not tend official' meetings, and that's why the coach has every right to bring the book to the umpire and ask if the call was made correctly accord to the rule. The umpire can say, "Yes, that is the rule. Here is what I saw (with a brief description). The interpretation we were given for that rule in that situation is this (brief description). Does that match the call I made?" If that answer is yes, then all is well. If the coach says "But I saw this (brief description)." then the umpire can just say that he/she didn't see it that way and the discussion is over. At least the coach knows that the umpire made the right call based on the rule and what he/she saw. On the other hand, if the umpire sees that he/she had the rule wrong, then he/she can change the call, if possible. No reason to be God here. We all just want to get the calls right.

 

[PDM]

What if it's not an interpretation, and the umpire is just plain making stuff up??? Can the rule book come out then, or are we worried about hurting the umps feelings?

Best example I have is a few years ago we have a runner on second. Batter hits a deep fly ball that bounces over the fence for ground rule double. Ump says runner at second only goes to 3rd because "they weren't running hard to third when ball went over fence". I have no worries about "showing up" that umpire with a rule book.

As an umpire, I would have no problem with that. I want to get the call right. And any umpire who takes offense to being shown in a respectful manner that he/she got a rule wrong is a bad umpire. Umpires are there to get the calls right, not to be the God of the field.

 

[radness]

Yeah, it is suggesting that they might not know a specific rule. Are you telling me that every umpire has a perfect knowledge of the rules? If so, give me a minute to laugh. I have known and worked with hundreds of officials in various sports over the last 40 years. None were/are perfect. There is nothing wrong with bringing something to the attention of the umpire if the coach feels that a call is being made incorrectly. In my state, we have a rules interpreter who tells us how to interpret the rules. We don't all make up our own interpretation. The goal is to all be on the same page and for each official to call each situation the same way. The coach and umpire may not see the situation the same way, but if they do, then they should both come to the same conclusion. The umpire observes the situation and makes the call for that situation based on the interpretation of the rule that he/she has been given. The coach might not have access to the interpretation because hehe does not tend official' meetings, and that's why the coach has every right to bring the book to the umpire and ask if the call was made correctly accord to the rule. The umpire can say, "Yes, that is the rule. Here is what I saw (with a brief description). The interpretation we were given for that rule in that situation is this (brief description). Does that match the call I made?" If that answer is yes, then all is well. If the coach says "But I saw this (brief description)." then the umpire can just say that he/she didn't see it that way and the discussion is over. At least the coach knows that the umpire made the right call based on the rule and what he/she saw. On the other hand, if the umpire sees that he/she had the rule wrong, then he/she can change the call, if possible. No reason to be God here. We all just want to get the calls right.

LOL in a silly way it doesn't matter if they know the rules exactly or not.

Lol because they use interpretation to make a call.

Lol with all the different umpires means you will encounter the 'interpretation debate' over and over and over and over and over................

This is called sensible feedback to help sort through the conundrum of the issue of application of rules.

 

[PDM]

This this this ...
the rule book explains what the rules are.

It is up to the umpire to interpret what they see on the field.

(Are you asking/telling the umpire to interpret everything the same way you are?!
That would be arrogance.)

No, I am asking the umpire to be open to the possibility that they don't have a perfect knowledge of the rule book and we willing to be proven wrong. Of course it is up to the umpire to see the situation and make the call according to the rule and at the accepted interpretation of that rule. But to do that, the umpire has to first get the rule right. When the umpire and the coach see a situation differently, the umpire wins that argument. When the umpire gets the rule wrong while making the call for that situation, and the coach shows the umpire the rule in the book, the umpire should accept that he/she is wrong and make any necessary change to the call. Why is that so hard to understand?

 

[radness]

No, I am asking the umpire to be open to the possibility that they don't have a perfect knowledge of the rule book and we willing to be proven wrong.

That first sentence is a doosie!!!

Of course it is up to the umpire to see the situation and make the call according to the rule and at the accepted interpretation of that rule. But to do that, the umpire has to first get the rule right. When the umpire and the coach see a situation differently, the umpire wins that argument. When the umpire gets the rule wrong while making the call for that situation, and the coach shows the umpire the rule in the book, the umpire should accept that he/she is wrong and make any necessary change to the call. Why is that so hard to understand?

Oh I do understand how you're trying to organize proving that you could be right.

Regardless the umpire has authority over the game.

Hope you can understand how thankful I am to have not incorporated challenging somebody else's authority over and over. Who uses interpretation to do their job.

 

[PDM]

LOL in a silly way it doesn't matter if they know the rules exactly or not.

Lol because they use interpretation to make a call.

Lol with all the different umpires means you will encounter the 'interpretation debate' over and over and over and over and over................

This is called sensible feedback to help sort through the conundrum of the issue of application of rules.

No, they should observe the situation, interpret what they see, and then make the call according to the rule that applies. And it does matter very much whether they know the rules. That is the starting point for being a good umpire. It's ridiculous to suggest that it doesn't matter whether the umpire knows the rules. I hope you aren't an umpire if that's what you think, because you can't be any good at it.

 

[radness]

No, they should observe the situation, interpret what they see, and then make the call according to the rule that applies. And it does matter very much whether they know the rules. That is the starting point for being a good umpire. It's ridiculous to suggest that it doesn't matter whether the umpire knows the rules. I hope you aren't an umpire if that's what you think, because you can't be any good at it.

Then let them do there job!

Do you think every umpire is going to see everything the same?
(Cuz that does not happen)
Or do you think every umpire should see it your way?
(Thats not happening either)

LOL that's hilarious that you can't accept that I do not need to argue/question the umpire. That I recognize umpires have different interpretations.
I don't let it bother me at all. Keep playing the game to win. By paying attention to what type of umpire we have helps me do that!

At the very least I could say that I've never aggravated an Umpire to where their emotions slanted the game against myself or my team.

 

[PDM]

That first sentence is a doosie!!!


Oh I do understand how you're trying to organize proving that you could be right.

Regardless the umpire has authority over the game.

Hope you can understand how thankful I am to have not incorporated challenging somebody else's authority over and over. Who uses interpretation to do their job.

I am explaining the process. If you can't understand or accept that, I don't really care. I didn't say anything about challenging an umpire's authority. I am talking about an umpire being open to correcting a call when a rule was misapplied.

 

[PDM]

Then let them do there job!

Do you think every umpire is going to see everything the same? Or do you think every umpire should see it your way?

And still you can't understand what I have written. It isn't about what the umpire sees, it's about making the correct call (applying the rule correctly) based on what he sees. If you can't understand that, then just say so and move on.