People can suck at their job. There are good doctors and bad doctors. Same goes for umps, presidents, cops, CEOs, teachers and attorneys.
That ump totally overstepped. Even with that "rule" (which is suspect, 1A).
Umps should not go looking for trouble, listening to private conversations, and pushing boundaries.
My guess would be to agree with you. This feels more like a "private" conversation between player and parent (discussed loud enough for all to hear), and not an actual private discussion that the ump happened to hear.Why do you assume that was the case? How do you know the language was not inappropriate, the comment was not directed at the umpire, or that the girl was not overly loud or aggressive with it? I would say if the umpire heard it during a rain delay, one of those things is true.
On another forum a newer umpire posted a thread about a kid who was very specific and aggressive with his language after a call, but was not facing the umpire or being loud about it. The umpire noticed it the first time and let it go. The second time the kid did it, he was even louder and more aggressive, causing his own removal from the game. The kid contended he did nothing wrong because "he was talking to himself."
We do understand that competition can get heated. We do understand that a player sometimes needs some space to vent. That does not excuse the language or the aggression. Those are not tolerable.
All you know is a couple lines posted through a social platform that came to you third- or forth- hand ... and of course, the umpire "overstepped" by enforcing the rules. And you think umpires have an "I can do no wrong" attitude ...
In my opinion it does not matter how bad the ump is. They have been hired to do a job. As long as they are doing the job to the best of their ability they deserve respect.
Would it matter if the ump told a player they sucked after striking out, even if the player was bad?
I do not know about the ump ejecting or just warning. Most likely it was said loud and clear since no one disputes what was said.You seem to have missed the part where she wasn't talking to the umpires.
Now, we don't know if this was an umpire with rabbit ears, just a guy looking for trouble, or if she was a little too loud or maybe doing one of those "Hey, I wasn't even talking to you!" passive-aggressive comments where she was technically talking to someone else, but saying it loudly enough so he could hear it. Or maybe it was a total fluke where she was just talking to someone and he happened to be walking by at that exact moment.
What bugs me is TMIB's post. Just posting the rules implies that because, technically, he's allowed to eject her (I don't think anybody questioned that) so that means he was right to do so. It's possible he was, but in most of the scenarios I can think of here, I think he deserves a diaper and a bottle for his response.
At the college level and above, I don't even think umpires should have the authority to eject except in the most extreme circumstances (a coach running on the field with a bat, threatening violence; a bench-clearing brawl, etc.). I think this is especially true at the MLB level, where I believe all ejections should be subject to a review by an independent panel and if the ejection isn't unanimously upheld the umpire is fined/suspended/barred from working playoff games. It's unnecessary and it just plays to the fragile egos of the thin-skinned umps. There are other ways to penalize certain behaviors within the context of the game.
At the youth level? Eh, eject us idiot coaches if we act up. We need to set a good example for the kids and a lot less should be allowed.
You seem to have missed the part where she wasn't talking to the umpires.
What bugs me is TMIB's post. Just posting the rules implies that because, technically, he's allowed to eject her (I don't think anybody questioned that) so that means he was right to do so. It's possible he was, but in most of the scenarios I can think of here, I think he deserves a diaper and a bottle for his response.