Originally Posted by FlightRick
Yeah, but if you did the job well, who cares what they think? That's kind of the core of my point, and maybe we actually agree on the main point: SOMEbody can always find fault. But a lot of times, SOMEbody's opinion really doesn't matter, because they're wrong. This is why you don't have to umpire with an iron fist: unless you are thin-skinned drama queen, you don't have to ump every game like it's the 7th game of the World Series and you're some kind of delicate porcelian doll whose authority cannot ever be questioned.
This whole debate centers around whether people think umpires are doing a good job. So clearly what people "think" is relevant. The grading system that grades umpires say that umpires generally get over 95% of the calls correct. Yet no matter how good 95% is, people are spinning this like it's easy so therefore a chimp could get 95% correct. So what's reality? What people *think* or what is actually true? The truth is umpires do a good job at this level in terms of accuracy. But people still perceive them doing a poor job. That fact that people are making umpires an issue despite said accuracy is proof that apparently it does matter.
Thing is, most umpires don't umpire with an iron fist. When coaches start chirping and continue harping on calls, that's when umpires usually raise their voices and warn them. You yourself admitted that you usually had to give a "stern" warning to coaches to get them to stop. That's the whole point. You have to drop the nice guy act and be a little strong with your words and mannerisms in order to get them to pipe down. But people are criticizing umpires here for yelling because it comes across as egotistical.
I've seen these words/phrases here to describe these umpires:
It seems being stern, authoritative and yelling back is being equated to something far more.