PDA

View Full Version : Is umpiring the worst it has ever been?



MikeThierry
05-31-2012, 02:26 PM
I have seen so many bad things with umps this year in which I have to ask that question. Take a look at this article. If this is true, this is an absolute abuse of power by the umps.

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/mlb-big-league-stew/yanks-catcher-russell-martin-lodges-unusual-complaint-umpire-144549402.html

RANDY IN INDY
05-31-2012, 02:29 PM
Craziest thing I ever heard.

MikeThierry
05-31-2012, 02:39 PM
Craziest thing I ever heard.

I was shocked when I read this story. Diaz should be suspended in my opinion over this if it's true.

RANDY IN INDY
05-31-2012, 02:41 PM
He should definitely be reprimanded. Umpires need to have control in the game but they don't have to be a horse's @$$.

westofyou
05-31-2012, 02:54 PM
No way

The umpires are better trained than ever, and despite the recent stuff way less combative

There is no comparison to the past

bucksfan2
05-31-2012, 02:57 PM
He should definitely be reprimanded. Umpires need to have control in the game but they don't have to be a horse's @$$.

Is this anything out of the ordinary? I have watched enough baseball games to realize that some umps hand the catcher the new baseball and others throw it back to the pitcher himself. If Diaz always throws the ball pack himself then this is much ado about nothing. If he doesn't always throw the ball back to the pitcher than Diaz is being petty, but I don't really see how this changes the game one way or another.

GoReds
05-31-2012, 02:58 PM
No way

The umpires are better trained than ever, and despite the recent stuff way less combative

There is no comparison to the past

That's not to say there still isn't room for vast improvement.

MikeThierry
05-31-2012, 03:10 PM
Is this anything out of the ordinary? I have watched enough baseball games to realize that some umps hand the catcher the new baseball and others throw it back to the pitcher himself. If Diaz always throws the ball pack himself then this is much ado about nothing. If he doesn't always throw the ball back to the pitcher than Diaz is being petty, but I don't really see how this changes the game one way or another.

As Martin pointed out, it's a way to keep his arm loose so it's easier for him to throw out potential runners on base. It might be a minor thing, technically speaking, but it's a perfect example of the power trip these umps have formed over the years.

RANDY IN INDY
05-31-2012, 03:18 PM
Is this anything out of the ordinary? I have watched enough baseball games to realize that some umps hand the catcher the new baseball and others throw it back to the pitcher himself. If Diaz always throws the ball pack himself then this is much ado about nothing. If he doesn't always throw the ball back to the pitcher than Diaz is being petty, but I don't really see how this changes the game one way or another.

If the catcher asks to throw the ball back, the umpire should let him and have no objection. The umpire does not have to throw the ball back to the pitcher. If the catcher doesn't request it, I have no problem, but to say "you haven't earned it," is a slap in the face to any major league baseball player and reason enough to raise question with that particular umpire.

George Anderson
05-31-2012, 03:21 PM
No way

The umpires are better trained than ever, and despite the recent stuff way less combative

There is no comparison to the past

No question, the problem is like I have said several times is the camera work is so advanced now that we can see plays missed that years ago we would not of seen. Also we now have 24/7 news that if a controversial play did happen every knows about it as with years past it was a simple blurb in the paper.

I have a hard time watching old games because the umpiring is so atrocious, todays umpires while far from perfect are the best in the history of the game.

RedlegJake
05-31-2012, 03:27 PM
Umps today can't get away with half the stuff they used to. They are better and more professional than ever. The other night I was watching the Yanks/Detroit and the pitcher got angry at the ump. The announcers said in the old days the next two pitches would have been balls no matter what he threw. Yet the next pitch was a called strike on the corner - and it was close. Would have been easy for that ump to "get even" and call that a ball. Sure, they make mistakes and sometimes they might irritate a player like this situation, but it's hardly a game changing thing. The old days of literally "umpiring with a vengeance" are gone.

RANDY IN INDY
05-31-2012, 03:44 PM
I would agree that umpiring is better than it's ever been. This incident had nothing to do with the quality of umpiring. It had everything to do with the character of the umpire and being a little bit of a.........

MikeThierry
05-31-2012, 04:07 PM
I'm a younger guy so I didn't get to see what Umpiring was like back in the 60's, 70's, or 80's. My perspective on this is from the 90's on. I feel though that there has at least been some regression in umpiring since the mid-2000's. Even if today's standard is better than it was 40 years ago, that doesn't mean that there hasn't been any regression as of recent.

westofyou
05-31-2012, 04:19 PM
I'm a younger guy so I didn't get to see what Umpiring was like back in the 60's, 70's, or 80's. My perspective on this is from the 90's on. I feel though that there has at least been some regression in umpiring since the mid-2000's. Even if today's standard is better than it was 40 years ago, that doesn't mean that there hasn't been any regression as of recent.

I see the opposite

They consult each other more, allow a little more venting, don't act as combative, are in better shape to be in the right place

AtomicDumpling
05-31-2012, 04:40 PM
I think umpiring is better than it has ever been, but it still has a LOT of room for improvement. The missed calls can be corrected with technology and instant replay. The egotistical, attention-seeking, antagonistic, hot-headed, player-baiting umpires can only be corrected with an increased commitment from the league office to impose strong disciplinary action when needed.

George Anderson
05-31-2012, 04:47 PM
Go to Youtube and type in "Earl Weaver is not happy". I have to warn you it is full of obscenities but it is funny as hell and a perfect example of how umpires act much more professional than they did back in the day.

edabbs44
05-31-2012, 06:22 PM
As Martin pointed out, it's a way to keep his arm loose so it's easier for him to throw out potential runners on base. It might be a minor thing, technically speaking, but it's a perfect example of the power trip these umps have formed over the years.

You have to think that he is embellishing it a bit, as I'm not sure that the foul ball throw backs are what is keeping his arm loose.

757690
05-31-2012, 06:37 PM
Isn't the proper procedure that the ump throw the new balls back to the pitcher? Isn't the reason for the procedure is to prevent the catcher from scuffing the ball on the the throw back?

It seems Martin is being just as arrogant in demanding the right to throw back new balls.

Maybe Marrin has a history of scuffing balls and that is what Diaz meant when he said Martin hadn't earned the right to throw back the new balls?

AtomicDumpling
05-31-2012, 07:48 PM
While it is an interesting consideration, I don't think scuffed baseballs have anything at all to do with the Martin/Diaz dispute.

If scuffing the ball was a concern then why let the catcher throw the ball to the pitcher after he catches each pitch?

If scuffing the ball was a real concern then all umpires would throw the ball to the pitcher, but most umpires hand the new ball to the catcher to make the throw. If they were honestly concerned about scuffing they would hand him the ball and watch him to make sure he was not cheating. If he did they would eject him. Umpires examine the ball dozens of times during a game, if they found suspicious scuff marks they would react appropriately. Honestly, how often is scuffing discovered or suspected during a season? Very, very rarely. It is just not a real issue and is definitely not the reason Diaz refused to let Martin make the throws.

It is not as though pitchers and catchers are trying to find and exploit scuffed balls. Many times each game the pitcher himself asks for a new ball. Pitchers are more concerned with the height of the seams and the slickness of the leather than they are about scuffs.

RANDY IN INDY
05-31-2012, 07:50 PM
While it is an interesting consideration, I don't think scuffed baseballs have anything at all to do with the Martin/Diaz dispute.

If scuffing the ball was a concern then why let the catcher throw the ball to the pitcher after he catches each pitch?

If scuffing the ball was a real concern then all umpires would throw the ball to the pitcher, but most umpires hand the new ball to the catcher to make the throw. If they were honestly concerned about scuffing they would hand him the ball and watch him to make sure he was not cheating. If he did they would eject him. Umpires examine the ball dozens of times during a game, if they found suspicious scuff marks they would react appropriately. Honestly, how often is scuffing discovered or suspected during a season? Very, very rarely. It is just not a real issue and is definitely not the reason Diaz refused to let Martin make the throws.

It is not as though pitchers and catchers are trying to find and exploit scuffed balls. Many times each game the pitcher himself asks for a new ball. Pitchers are more concerned with the height of the seams and the slickness of the leather than they are about scuffs.

Exactly.

757690
05-31-2012, 08:28 PM
While it is an interesting consideration, I don't think scuffed baseballs have anything at all to do with the Martin/Diaz dispute.

If scuffing the ball was a concern then why let the catcher throw the ball to the pitcher after he catches each pitch?

If scuffing the ball was a real concern then all umpires would throw the ball to the pitcher, but most umpires hand the new ball to the catcher to make the throw. If they were honestly concerned about scuffing they would hand him the ball and watch him to make sure he was not cheating. If he did they would eject him. Umpires examine the ball dozens of times during a game, if they found suspicious scuff marks they would react appropriately. Honestly, how often is scuffing discovered or suspected during a season? Very, very rarely. It is just not a real issue and is definitely not the reason Diaz refused to let Martin make the throws.

It is not as though pitchers and catchers are trying to find and exploit scuffed balls. Many times each game the pitcher himself asks for a new ball. Pitchers are more concerned with the height of the seams and the slickness of the leather than they are about scuffs.

First of all, all pitchers scuff the ball, usually just enough to not get caught. And balls get scuffed naturally after just a few pitches anyway.

Regardless, maybe Martin developed a reputation for scuffing the ball when he was throwing new ones back to the pitcher. Because balls get scuffed naturally, it's nearly impossible to prove that he is intentionally doing it. That would explain why Diaz didn't want Martin to throw them. Just a theory.

The Operator
05-31-2012, 09:00 PM
Umpiring certainly sucks this year, but it can't possibly be the worst it's ever been.

http://www.affordablehomegoods.com/reds/pictures/bernie_carbo.jpg


Actually, consider that they are human beings, umpires today are quite amazingly good. But we have the technology to, if not replace them (which I wouldn't want), at the very least supplement them so that we can be sure the right calls are made on the close plays. That's what is so frustrating about today's state of affairs.

Spitball
05-31-2012, 10:20 PM
I don't know how anyone can unequivocally declare umpiring is better or worse from one era to another. There have been lots changes through the years. The major leagues have grown so there are more umpires out there. Unions have given umpires more security. Replay has created more accountability.

I have had opportunity to discuss umpiring at length with Mike Hawn who umpires college games in the Sunshine State Conference and mlb spring training games for over thirty years. I have also discussed umpiring with Bill Valentine who is a former major league umpire who was fired along with Al Soriano in the 1960s for trying to unionize mlb umpires. I'd say problems have existed for years. Like any profession, qualities and skills have varied throught the years. Is Joe West as good as Harry Wendlestedt? I don't know how anyone can say for certain. There are not statistics to back up arguments one way or the other.

Certainly, today's umpires are under more scrutiny than past generations. Instant replay has been around for nearly half a century, but ESPN and other networks have made every blown call a topic to be discussed and analyzed like never before.

I do not believe umpiring is better or worse from one era to another based on training or technological monitoring. The profession has been filled for years with individuals with a variety of skills and dediction.

Team Clark
05-31-2012, 10:36 PM
If anything, the scrutiny has progressed to a harmful level. I think the league's continued involvement and memos to umpires prior to certain series are out of bounds. Memos and mandates during Spring Training are confusing and leave interpretation to the wind. Much like the NBA telling refs how to officiate a game. Always seems to put everyone in a no win situation.

WVRedsFan
05-31-2012, 11:17 PM
If anything, the scrutiny has progressed to a harmful level. I think the league's continued involvement and memos to umpires prior to certain series are out of bounds. Memos and mandates during Spring Training are confusing and leave interpretation to the wind. Much like the NBA telling refs how to officiate a game. Always seems to put everyone in a no win situation.
I agree. The human element has always been a part of sports. Yes instant replay has helped at the risk of the time factor. Let machines do the officiating? I don't think so. As much as I hate the arrogant umpire or the quick exit and the crazy strike zone, I don't see any better way to do it. Call me crazy, but it's part of the game.

WMR
05-31-2012, 11:25 PM
Questec calling balls and strikes would make the game so much better. A uniform strike zone from game to game across the major leagues would improve the game in a major way, IMO.

Umping might be better overall, but it seems like attention whoring from umps is at an all-time high. The proliferation of media has been a major fact in this, IMO. Some umps obviously enjoy playing to their "audience."

George Anderson
05-31-2012, 11:31 PM
I do not believe umpiring is better or worse from one era to another based on training or technological monitoring. The profession has been filled for years with individuals with a variety of skills and dediction.



[img]http://www.affordablehomegoods.com/reds/pictures/bernie_carbo.jpg

I disagree and this picture alone shows just how much umpiring has improved. No current MLB umpire or any other umpire at the professional level would end up out of position like Ken Burkhart was above. This mistake by Burkhart is something you wouldn't likely even see at a small college game today let alone a WS game. Either through better training, technology or whatever, you do not see an umpire let alone a Crew Chief in a WS game like Burkhart was make this bone headed mistake.

The umpire Ken Burkhart is a former MLB player and in fact he played with the Reds. Burkhart played until 1949 when he was 34 and then became a MLB umpire in 1957 at the age of 42. I have a hard time seeing a system where a guy can take up umpiring at age 34 in 1957 is going to be a better ump than a guy taking up umpiring who today on average is in his very early 20's. When your young you can make up for your mistakes as an umpire by having a young body. Once you hit your 40's you don't rely so much on your body as you do your experience. Burkhart at age 42 had neither the experience nor the body so no way would someone like that make it to MLB as an umpire today.

Spitball
05-31-2012, 11:51 PM
[img]http://www.affordablehomegoods.com/reds/pictures/bernie_carbo.jpg

I disagree and this picture alone shows just how much umpiring has improved. No current MLB umpire or any other umpire at the professional level would end up out of position like Ken Burkhart was above. This mistake by Burkhart is something you wouldn't likely even see at a small college game today let alone a WS game. Either through better training, technology or whatever, you do not see an umpire let alone a Crew Chief in a WS game like Burkhart was make this bone headed mistake.

The umpire Ken Burkhart is a former MLB player and in fact he played with the Reds. Burkhart played until 1949 when he was 34 and then became a MLB umpire in 1957 at the age of 42. I have a hard time seeing a system where a guy can take up umpiring at age 34 in 1957 is going to be a better ump than a guy taking up umpiring who today on average is in his very early 20's. When your young you can make up for your mistakes as an umpire by having a young body. Once you hit your 40's you don't rely so much on your body as you do your experience. Burkhart at age 42 had neither the experience nor the body so no way would someone like that make it to MLB as an umpire today.

I totally disagree. These situations happen and have happened many times through the years. Bad calls in World Series games get much more publicity. How would it have been different today?

George Anderson
06-01-2012, 12:14 AM
I totally disagree. These situations happen and have happened many times through the years. Bad calls in World Series games get much more publicity. How would it have been different today?

Todays umpires do not stand right in front or on top of the plate to make a fair/foul call like Burkhart did. You stand a good 6 feet back so you don't have problems like above. You can still see the play you just are not right on top of it. IMO its a combination of mostly bad training and a little bit of lack of experience that made Burkhart screw this play up. This screw up in the umpire world is the equivalent in the players world of a MLB player hitting a HR and missing 1B . Yes there are all kinds of screwups but this is one by Burkhart is a little league style screw up.

WVRedsFan
06-01-2012, 12:18 AM
Questec calling balls and strikes would make the game so much better. A uniform strike zone from game to game across the major leagues would improve the game in a major way, IMO.

Umping might be better overall, but it seems like attention whoring from umps is at an all-time high. The proliferation of media has been a major fact in this, IMO. Some umps obviously enjoy playing to their "audience."

Electronics make mistakes, too. I'd rather have the human factor. In my line of work we have computer mistakes everyday. The human factor is part of sports. Might as well put robots out there to play the games.

Big Klu
06-01-2012, 12:20 AM
Todays umpires do not stand right in front or on top of the plate to make a fair/foul call like Burkhart did. You stand a good 6 feet back so you don't have problems like above. You can still see the play you just are not right on top of it. IMO its a combination of mostly bad training and a little bit of lack of experience that made Burkhart screw this play up. This screw up in the umpire world is the equivalent in the players world of a MLB player hitting a HR and missing 1B . Yes there are all kinds of screwups but this is one by Burkhart is a little league style screw up.

He was in his 14th year as an umpire. I don't think lack of experience is a valid excuse.

George Anderson
06-01-2012, 12:26 AM
He was in his 14th year as an umpire. I don't think lack of experience is a valid excuse.

Then maybe he was just bad but in 1970 MLB he was one of the best by evidence he was Crew Chief in the WS.

Likely training or the technique taught today is better than it was back in the 1960's.

gonelong
06-01-2012, 12:28 AM
Electronics make mistakes, too. I'd rather have the human factor. In my line of work we have computer mistakes everyday. The human factor is part of sports. Might as well put robots out there to play the games.

I am not the least interested about the "human factor" as it relates to the umpires, only the players.

GL

/IMO umpires are light years better today than they were in decades past.

WVRedsFan
06-01-2012, 12:52 AM
I am not the least interested about the "human factor" as it relates to the umpires, only the players.

GL

/IMO umpires are light years better today than they were in decades past.

I understand your sentiment, but believe me, this is not the answer.

Cooper
06-01-2012, 01:14 AM
Watch a game from teh 70's -you'll be amazed at how bad it was. If the ball reached the fielder before the runner he was often called out whether the tag was made or not.

The umps don't bait players who argue -up until the 2000's this was a common practice that grew tiresome.

They have done a nice job of trying to implement the K zone and make it uniform. I also believe they are better at making calls on a tag play (one of my favorite stats of all time: saw a study that reported that when umps did get it wrong they were 7 times more likely to do so calling an out on a tag play then calling the runner safe). That's info a teacher can use.

Country Joe West leaving the game improved umpiring by 50%. he was terrible.

Big Klu
06-01-2012, 03:38 AM
Watch a game from teh 70's -you'll be amazed at how bad it was. If the ball reached the fielder before the runner he was often called out whether the tag was made or not.

The umps don't bait players who argue -up until the 2000's this was a common practice that grew tiresome.

They have done a nice job of trying to implement the K zone and make it uniform. I also believe they are better at making calls on a tag play (one of my favorite stats of all time: saw a study that reported that when umps did get it wrong they were 7 times more likely to do so calling an out on a tag play then calling the runner safe). That's info a teacher can use.

Country Joe West leaving the game improved umpiring by 50%. he was terrible.

Unless I missed something, Joe West is still an active umpire.

cumberlandreds
06-01-2012, 08:02 AM
Unless I missed something, Joe West is still an active umpire.

Yes he is. I saw him doing a game the other day.

Umpring is much better today than in the past. The Neighborhood play was in full force back in the day. I can remember Joe Garagiola always pointing this out in games. The SS or 2b would never be close to the base on a DP. Now this is enforced much better. Balls and strikes are better too. Mainly from the point that umpires usually don't call strikes or balls depending on the situation if the batter or pitcher has been griping about the calls. Used to if a pitcher griped the K zone got much smaller or if the batter griped the K zone much wider. Still happens some but not nearly as much. Umpires aren't nearly as confrontative either. There was a time they would almost stalk a player or manager into just wanting a fight. You don't see that nearly as much either.
My main thing is that replay could do wonders for the game. especially on plays at 1b. Could be easily and quickly reviewed. With point being the call would be correct. I saw a play last night in the Tiger/Red Sox game in which Brandon Boesch was called out at 1b on a close play. Yes it was a bang bang play but with replay he was clearly safe. Also caused the Tigers 1b coach to be tossed. I don't know about anyone else but I like the calls to be right and if you have the technology to do it, then do it.

dougdirt
06-01-2012, 08:08 AM
I understand your sentiment, but believe me, this is not the answer.

Why isn't it, other than MLB won't allow it?

gonelong
06-01-2012, 01:41 PM
I understand your sentiment, but believe me, this is not the answer.

It is the answer, maybe just not yet.

Balls and Strikes will eventually be called electroncally, no ifs, ands, or buts about it. I give it less than 20 years to implementation.

GL

Bumstead
06-01-2012, 02:03 PM
It's a lot more fun to see players and managers yelling at umpires than it will be to listen to them gripe about computers...Let's dull the game down, that's the solution.

Bum

dougdirt
06-01-2012, 02:21 PM
It's a lot more fun to see players and managers yelling at umpires than it will be to listen to them gripe about computers...Let's dull the game down, that's the solution.

Bum

You know what I don't find fun? When a pitch hits the exact same spot in the strikezone one is called a ball and one is called a strike. Nothing about being more accurate with the calling of the rules makes it boring in my opinion.

OnBaseMachine
06-01-2012, 02:42 PM
Go to Youtube and type in "Earl Weaver is not happy". I have to warn you it is full of obscenities but it is funny as hell and a perfect example of how umpires act much more professional than they did back in the day.

That's one of my favorite videos around. There are some good ones of Wally Backman on Youtube too.

Bumstead
06-01-2012, 03:04 PM
You know what I don't find fun? When a pitch hits the exact same spot in the strikezone one is called a ball and one is called a strike. Nothing about being more accurate with the calling of the rules makes it boring in my opinion.

I tend to watch the game and not the umpires. The MLB umpires are pretty consistent with their ball/strike calls so I don't pay much attention to that. They tend to lose consistency when pitchers are throwing the ball all over the place, but that's the pitcher's fault. But hey, if you want to watch the umpires every move instead of the game, carry on.

Actually, I watch the umpires quite a bit now just so that I can see how they position themselves on certain plays and how they make their calls. But, at this point they are so good that I generally lose track of them and just watch the game, which is why the game is played.

Bum

George Anderson
06-01-2012, 03:10 PM
That's one of my favorite videos around. There are some good ones of Wally Backman on Youtube too.

In that video Weaver reminds me of the sargeant on "Full Metal Jacket".



The 2:00 mark is my favorite part where they were going around about neither one going anywhere.

"Earl, you think your going go to the HOF for (blankin) up the WS?"

OnBaseMachine
06-01-2012, 03:12 PM
In that video Weaver reminds me of the sargeant on "Full Metal Jacket".



The 2:00 mark is my favorite part where they were going around about neither one going anywhere.

"Earl, you think your going go to the HOF for (blankin) up the WS?"

That's my favorite part too. I always crack up when I hear that. Earl was right though.

George Anderson
06-01-2012, 03:18 PM
That's my favorite part too. I always crack up when I hear that. Earl was right though.

I have had a few long road trips with former professional umps and trust me this stuff is the norm. The war stories of hardcore personal attacks thrown back and forth between umpires and managers were pretty routine. From my experiences in the minors anyway there is zero love and respect between managers and umpires because I got the impression both sides were miserable being in the minors, so they needed to blame the others for why they were stuck there and not in MLB.

elfmanvt07
06-01-2012, 03:46 PM
The Neighborhood play was in full force back in the day. I can remember Joe Garagiola always pointing this out in games. The SS or 2b would never be close to the base on a DP. Now this is enforced much better.

I vividly remember being at a game at Riverfront and witnessing this for the first time. I was aghast as my father explained to me that this was just "part of the game." I'm glad it's not any longer.

Bumstead
06-01-2012, 03:49 PM
I vividly remember being at a game at Riverfront and witnessing this for the first time. I was aghast as my father explained to me that this was just "part of the game." I'm glad it's not any longer.

Funny, I had a kid who joined our softball team a few years ago tell me he didn't have to touch the bag at 2nd as long as he was close to it. I told him that if I was pitching and a guy got called safe while he straddled the bag at 2nd that he could enjoy RF immediately. He learned to touch the bag...

Bum

MikeThierry
06-01-2012, 04:40 PM
I have mixed feelings on whether or not machines should be involved with the game. To me, the human element should only apply to balls and strikes at the plate. When it comes to plays on bases, foul balls, trapped balls, etc, there has to be replay. In those scenarios, there are clear definition within the rules as to what an out is, what a foul is and what is considered a trapped ball. I think baseball could come to an agreement that would please both sides. Allow replay to be made on close plays in the field while keeping the human element of strike calling at the plate.

Team Clark
06-01-2012, 07:32 PM
Unless I missed something, Joe West is still an active umpire.

Might be thinking of Froemming? :confused:

gilpdawg
06-02-2012, 12:38 AM
Electronics make mistakes, too. I'd rather have the human factor. In my line of work we have computer mistakes everyday. The human factor is part of sports. Might as well put robots out there to play the games.

Aren't the players human? There's your human factor. :p

mth123
06-02-2012, 01:31 AM
I don't think umpires are worse than ever, they just aren't as good as they could be if they took advantage of technology. I think its a matter of positioning more than anything. One of those umps needs to be repositioned from the field to the booth. One ump could watch replay on every play and quickly correct any calls on the field that are wrong. If it takes multiple looks over and over that would delay the game, then it probably is too close to overturn, but lots of obvious errors would be corrected with little or no delay in the game at all. Balls and Strikes would be excluded, but everything else would be reviewable. The umps would still be in charge of the calls, they just would be getting better looks than they do today.

Just my two cents.

Yachtzee
06-02-2012, 01:41 AM
In my mind, umpires, like officials in other sports, are best when they go unnoticed. When calling a good game, nobody focuses on the umps.

I'd say one of the reasons why umps are getting much better is that, in addition to better training, I think there has been a bit more emphasis on fitness. Good umps are now running to get in position for a call. I can recall umps like McSherry, Gregg, and Froeming hardly moving from their spot on the field.