Men in Blue are Seeing Red : As Baseball Players’ Salaries Soar and TV Exposure Increases, Some Umpires Become More Aggressive While They Protect Their Status

It was 1971 and Preston Gomez was managing the San Diego Padres. He was under pressure from then-General Manager Buzzie Bavasi to shed his passive demeanor and become more aggressive.

One way: Battle the umpires.

Gomez got his chance on a close play at third base. He approached umpire Harry Wendelstedt and said: “I’m sorry, Harry. I know he was out, but Buzzie wants me to put on a show.”

Wendelstedt smiled and replied, “I don’t mind, Preston. Take as long as you want.”

Take as long as you want?

Only 20 years ago, but, definitely, another time and place.

Now, most managers and players seem to believe that one wrong word or look can result in ejection or prolonged debate. They contend that umpires have become more belligerent and confrontational, more apt to carry a grudge.

“I’d like to think--and I do--that they all have the ability to be outstanding umpires, but attitude has gotten in the way of performance,” said Lee Thomas, general manager of the Philadelphia Phillies. “They act embarrassed if someone gets on them. Didn’t their mothers ever tell them that umpires get called a lot of names?”

Generalizations are dangerous, but the perception of a more temperamental and aggressive umpire is so widespread that some owners privately recommended the hiring of an entirely new staff when collective bargaining talks with the umpires union began in November.

Short of a dramatic move that would have evoked memory of then-President Reagan’s firing of the air traffic controllers, the American and National leagues initiated those talks seemingly intent on:

--Regaining some control from the umpires union.

--Reestablishing accountability by the umpires.

Said an American League general manager, citing the legal complexities involved in any attempt to fire or option a poor umpire to the minors:

“The way it is, they think they work for the union and not the leagues.

“They have so much security that there’s little pride in performance and appearance.”

It is difficult to determine where the negotiating issues are now. The talks have been conducted without public displays of rancor, emotion or explanation.

Robert Kheel, management’s principal negotiator, downplays the control and accountability aspects. He points out that those are not really bargaining issues, because the leagues already have significant rights under the current agreement and because the negotiations are essentially tied to economic proposals.

Union counsel Richie Phillips, who began briefing the umpires on the status of the negotiations Monday in Orlando, Fla., recently sent a letter to his constituents claiming the leagues are prepared to ban the umpires from working exhibition games if there is no settlement by March 7.

Kheel would neither confirm nor deny that, saying only, “Richie is a very colorful guy.”

Knowledgeable sources insist that the union’s eventual desire--short of a work stoppage--is to involve Commissioner Fay Vincent as a mediator. The union believes him to be an ally because of his conciliatory role in last season’s dispute between National League umpire Joe West and league President Bill White, and his success in getting a $500 annual raise for minor league umpires despite opposition by the minor leagues themselves.

In the current negotiations, the American and National leagues have had the support of a rare ally--the Major League Players Assn.

Executive Director Don Fehr believes the umpires have become “too contentious, too emotionally involved in the game.”

“We haven’t been directly involved in the talks, but we have made our feelings known,” Fehr said. “Something has to be done.

“The level of player complaints goes up every year--whether it involves calling the game, carrying a grudge, following a player around the field or picking one up by the neck and throwing him down, as Joe West did last year.

“I know I’m going to get questions this spring from players wanting to know what they should do if that happens again, and I don’t know what to say. I mean, the impression that umpires can’t be criticized, that their conduct is inviolate, is silly. They should have thicker skins. They’re not automatically right even if they’re wearing the blue uniform.”

Take as long as you want?

It’s a delicate subject, with most managers and players--concerned about retribution--unwilling even to discuss it.

Oakland A’s third baseman Carney Lansford hesitantly went on record late last season, saying:

“There’s probably just one or two umpires who let you question a call anymore. Most of the time, the only response is, ‘No, it was a good pitch,’ or, ‘Shut up and get back in the box.’ And the worst thing you can do is argue. Then they’ll hold a grudge--sometimes for years.”

Said one National League manager, “I got ejected last year and the only thing I said was that a pitch was low. They turn on you now for no reason at all.”

Said an American League counterpart, “I’d estimate that 40% of our umpires have become confrontational. I mean, we’re all human, we’re going to make mistakes, but only once in a thousand games can I remember an umpire saying, ‘I blew it,’ and walk away.

“Now they even bait you with their mistakes.”

Take as long as you want?

The camera of the mind focuses on the 1990 season. Are the snapshots those of dramatic moments, great catches?

Or do we see umpire Terry Cooney ejecting Roger Clemens from Game 4 of the American League playoffs and West putting a bear hug on pitcher Dennis Cook during a beanball fight in Philadelphia and throwing him to the ground?

Is what we see, perhaps, the first two weeks of May?

--May 7 in Boston. Seattle Mariner Manager Jim Lefebvre is ejected by home plate umpire Dale Ford for yelling “bear down,” a common phrase. It is yelled at Ford maybe, but maybe not, in reaction to a called strike.

--May 21 in Baltimore. Umpire Drew Coble reverses baseball tradition by running to the Oriole dugout to quiet Manager Frank Robinson after Robinson has merely signaled with his hand that a called strike on Joe Orsulak was high.

--May 22 in Seattle. Gary Sheffield of the Milwaukee Brewers takes a called third strike and flips his protective foot shield toward the on-deck circle as he walks toward the dugout. Plate umpire Don Denkinger doesn’t even see it, but second base umpire John Shulock does--and ejects Sheffield.

Take as long as you want?

There were 84 regular-season ejections in the American League last season, compared to 75 in 1989. There were 105 in the National League, compared to 77 in 1989.

The statistics might not be conclusive, but the consensus is that the attitude of the men in blue has changed, that they no longer believe their role is to blend into the action, but to upstage it.

Why? What has happened?

Nothing, the umpires insist.

They contend that they are actually doing a better job with fewer arguments than ever. If it appears that they are more confrontational, they say, it is only because of the television exposure that 1) makes one debate seem to be several through replays on every channel, and 2) compounds the job’s inherent stress via reruns of controversial calls.

They also say that it’s a two-way street, that players have become more aggressive because of:

--Incentive contracts that make every pitch, every swing, financially critical.

--An intolerance for the inside pitch, leading to more fights and an attitude among younger players that charging the mound is the accepted response.

--The exposure given college players, who now come to the majors with the attitude that they don’t have to take anything from anyone.

--An outdated system of fines that fails to serve as a deterrent, an aspect that might have changed dramatically when the American League fined Clemens $10,000 and suspended him for the first five days of the 1991 season because of his playoff behavior. That translates to a $77,000 penalty.

“What does $100 or $200 mean to a player now?” National League umpire Bruce Froemming said. “I warned a couple of players in Cincinnati last year and they both said, ‘. . . the fine, we’ve got a lot of money.’ The fines are a definite problem.”

As is TV exposure, Froemming added.

“The guys we think of as the dynamite umpires of the past, guys like Al Barlick, Frank Dascoli, Augie Donatelli and Shag Crawford, were always in wars, but no one saw it besides the people in the stadium because there was no one to show it,” he said.

“Now we’re part of your living room. You see the same umpiring crew three or four times a week.”

And that exposure has fed the perception of a more confrontational umpire, said the American League’s Joe Brinkman.

“It’s kind of like watching the evening news,” Brinkman said. “You’d swear the whole country is going to hell.

“There’s so much sports coverage on TV now, you see one umpire involved in an argument, and you see it so often that you’d swear it’s six or seven.”

Club and league personnel concede that there is truth in all of the umpires’ points. But they do not quickly dismiss the confrontational question and the deterioration in the overall relationship between the game and its umpires.

Indeed, American League President Bobby Brown said last season that he was embarrassed by the recurring incidents.

And it remains a popular theory that the umpires have gained so much security and independence through the union that, for the most part, they no longer have pride and incentive in their performance or appearance. They know that there is little the leagues can do to discipline or demote a bad umpire once he has a tenure clause--automatic after four major league seasons.

The following are also believed to be factors in the alleged loss of drive and pride by the umpires:

--They now qualify for postseason assignments through a rotation rather than a rating system.

--They share equally in postseason money, no matter how they performed during the regular season.

“The league asks its managers and general managers to rate the umpires at the end of each season,” an American League general manager said. “But most of us don’t even bother anymore because nothing ever comes of it, and we’re afraid that if the information leaks out, the umpires will make us pay on the field.”

There is also a feeling by management that the umpires’ aggressiveness reflects the aggressiveness of union counsel Phillips.

Froemming denied that.

“Richie is obviously a good attorney,” Froemming said. “He’s got us a lot of money. He’s got us a lot of things we should have had 25 years ago. But he has nothing to do with how we perform on the field. I’ve never heard him tell an umpire he had to do this or that.”

Phillips’ aggressiveness was seen again last season when he bypassed protocol and went directly to Vincent to mediate the West-White dispute. His effectiveness can be judged by the gains the umpires have made in the areas of finance and security.

Marty Springstead, supervisor of American League umpires, said that when he arrived in the major leagues in 1966, he earned $7,500 a year and $60 a day in expenses, which covered hotels, taxis, meals and laundry.

Now the starting salary is $42,500, with a per diem of $175. Also, first-year umpires immediately become eligible for an $8,500 share of the umpires’ postseason pool, a share that goes to $12,500 a year after they have been in the majors for six seasons.

Obviously, there have been significant and overdue financial gains under Phillips’ leadership, but not at the pace of player salaries.

The minimum salary for a 20-year umpire is $105,000, only $5,000 more than the minimum for a first-year player. It is theorized that the wide disparity between player and umpire salaries has contributed to the friction by causing envy and frustration among the umpires.

Phillips, of course, is trying to build on the financial gains in the current negotiations. He also is seeking to:

--Get a fifth umpire on every crew, which would mean a day off every fifth day and some relief from the stress of constant travel. That would complement the two weeks of summer vacation Phillips won for his clients in the last collective talks.

--Get an extra crew for postseason events, allowing the umpires to work on a geographical basis, reducing travel and involving more of them in the postseason economics.

Phillips has been uncharacteristically low key and unavailable during the current talks, but in briefly responding to questions, he said:

“I’m pleased (the umpires) feel more secure now. They don’t have to worry about making a call, getting somebody angry and losing their job because of it.

“They do have a certain amount of independence they didn’t have before, and that’s good because it contributes to an aggressiveness that an umpire has to have or he’ll be run out of there.

“I mean, he doesn’t have the penalty-and-foul mechanism that serves as a control and warning system for an official in football, basketball and hockey. The only thing a baseball umpire has is the ejection.

“He has to umpire aggressively to keep players in the game.”

Said American League umpire Dave Phillips: “We have to be egotistical to do our job. We have to be aggressive to gain respect.”

Former National League umpire Jerry Dale wrote a master’s thesis on the characteristics of umpires and the changes they undergo as they progress through the minors and majors. He concluded, as Phillips has, that an umpire has to develop an aggressive and volatile personality to survive.

Dale teaches business and social science at Maryville College in Maryville, Tenn., and now says the volatility seems to have gotten out of hand.

“When an umpire stays calm, he elicits a similar response from a player or manager,” Dale said. “If he gets mad, he’s only pouring gasoline on the flames. Bad language is one thing; an umpire shouldn’t tolerate that. But I was always taught that you were doing a good job if the fans didn’t notice you. They’re not paying $10 to see the star thrown out of the game.”

The question is how much should an umpire take? How often should he turn his back?

The concern now is that umpires seem to give more than they take. They seem to bait, challenge, invite bad language, causing confrontations in which their worst fear is certain to be realized: At some point, the player or manager will do something the umpire can say was an attempt to “show him up”--the deadliest of sins.

Said veteran second baseman Willie Randolph: “When I came up, the umpires were more apt to cut you some slack. They turned a deaf ear. They walked away and let you have your piece. Now it seems like they hear everything. They’re determined not to be shown up. They’re much quicker to react.”

Cooney, in the playoffs, never removed his mask or left the plate area to issue a warning, insisting he could hear Clemens from 60 feet 6 inches, and that what he heard was enough to warrant an immediate ejection.

John Hirschbeck, a member of Cooney’s crew that day, said, “People talk about the magnitude of the playoffs and all that, but is that really the way they want to bring their kids up, that it’s OK to say whatever you want, then lie to the national press about it?

“We’re supposed to be the law and order on the field. If Clemens can stand out there and call somebody a gutless . . . and get away it, kids see that and say, ‘Hey, Dad, didn’t he just say the bad word I heard in school?’

“People have to know that nobody’s above the law, no matter what the situation is or the importance of the game.”

Ed Lawrence, head of the umpires’ development program, agreed.

“Any time anybody verbally or physically attacks an individual personally, then you’re gone,” he said. “We teach that and we preach it, because we’re all human beings and no one has the right to take somebody’s dignity away.”

American League umpire Rocky Roe, who refers to himself and his umpiring compatriots as the mothers-in-law of the sport, said nothing really has changed, that the umpires have always been under fire for being too confrontational.

“I can remember walking into the American League office and being shown letters with the dates crossed out,” Roe said. “They were letters contending that the new umpires were too aggressive, too sensitive. They were letters from between 1917 and 1925.”

But it does seem to have changed.

“Instead of working together, it is as if we’re enemies,” said the Phillies’ Thomas, who at one point last season complained to the National League office that West seemed to be carrying a grudge against his team.

Likewise, the Cincinnati Reds said they were victims of a vendetta by Dutch Rennert’s crew, and Frank Robinson has gone so far as to say he has been the victim of umpiring racism on occasion.

The players’ union is appealing Clemens’ fine and suspension to the league president and will appeal any adverse ruling to the commissioner, a union source said, adding that the union has information it says confirms that Cooney’s crew was waiting to nail Clemens.

American League umpire Vic Voltaggio conceded that the game doesn’t always end with the final out, that memories are long, that emotions can carry over to the next day, week, month.

“It’s human nature,” he said. “If a guy keeps ragging on you, you’re going to react.”

The problem, Lansford said, goes back to the strength of the union.

“There’s no recourse against a bad umpire,” he said. “There’s no incentive for them to be good except pride. And with a lot of them, I guarantee that the No. 1 thing they’re concerned about during the regular season is, ‘How soon can I get off the field?’ ”

What needs to be done, according to league and club sources:

--Improve salaries to relieve the envy, and schedule regular days off to relieve the stress.

--Return accountability and control to the league offices, along with a rating, rewards and disciplinary system that would help restore incentive and pride.

--Go to heftier fines and suspensions as a deterrent against players who fight and argue.

Take as long as you want?

A nice memory, but apparently nothing more.