Originally Posted by George Anderson
So you have no proof that replacement umpires were better than the MLB umpires other than not recalling anyone complaining about them.
George, what's your criteria for a "better" umpire?
In other posts, you've stated that it's ok on a 3-2 count for the ump to call a ball a strike if the player starts walking to 1b before the ump makes the call.
Because of your opinions like this, we are never going to agree on what a "good umpire" is.
My criteria for the best umpire.. Makes the highest percentage of calls correctly and quickly. Realizes that he is a background player and not the main attraction. Does not pick fights with players and play other stupid games.
I watched the sub umpires. In my opinion, there was no drop off in quality.
IIRC, some the sub umpires were hired permanently, so they became the people that you consider the best...
The fact is, the umpire union was crushed, and a good percentage of them were replaced, and very few people noticed or cared.. In contrast, when the owners used replacement players, there was an obvious drop off in talent. (Other than Rick Reed and maybe 2-3 other guys, none survived after the regular players were brought back).