HS Umpiring

SomeBaseballDad posted:

hsbaseball101 posted

  That said, don't ever leave it in the judges' hands.  Swing the damn bat

I can't express enough how much I relate to the OP. If a pitch is so far outside that the batter can't hit it while staying in the batters box it should not be called a strike. Yet I see it all the time. What's worse is when you have college, and now pro scouts there to see your kid and the ump just screws him. 

Now as to what I quoted. My son is off to college next year. Only time will tell but he just might have a future in baseball. The last thing I need is for him to get into the habit of swinging at bad pitches just because some umpire might call it a strike. 

Edit to say, I love those ump's when the kid pitches. 

UMMMMMM, I am pretty sure that if the guy is coaching at the college level or a professional scout he can tell a ball from a strike.  I am going to go on record and be willing to bet you any amount of money you wish that if an umpire "screws" a kid on a bad call that is not going to cost the kid a draft slot or scholarship money.  On top of that, in that moment what the most important this is to that scout or coach is how the hitter handles it mentally and emotionally.

Yes RC's/scouts can tell balls /strikes. The thing is interest in the kid is because of how far he hits the ball. Fact is there are many players with higher batting averages, but I would guess not to many able to send a ball 450'. Between pitchers pitching around him and some very generous strike zones it can be a challenge to put the ball in play. 

The kid has his ticket punched college wise. I'm assuming the MLB will still exist in 3-4 years. The pitchers throwing around him,  and the umpires with very liberal zones enabling them, becomes very frustrating none the less. 

Call? 

SomeBaseballDad posted:

Yes RC's/scouts can tell balls /strikes. The thing is interest in the kid is because of how far he hits the ball. Fact is there are many players with higher batting averages, but I would guess not to many able to send a ball 450'. Between pitchers pitching around him and some very generous strike zones it can be a challenge to put the ball in play. 

The kid has his ticket punched college wise. I'm assuming the MLB will still exist in 3-4 years. The pitchers throwing around him,  and the umpires with very liberal zones enabling them, becomes very frustrating. 

Can you clarify the "pitchers throwing around him" comment? What do you mean?

CaCO3Girl posted:

Can you clarify the "pitchers throwing around him" comment? What do you mean?

All he gets is offspeed and FB's out of the zone. Or at least the zone as defined by the rule book. They don't care if they walk him, which is fine except for the umps and their "strike zones".

It's not unusual for him to get 3 - 4 AB's in a game and see 2 or 3 fastballs.

IEBSBL posted:

SomeBaseballDad posted:

hsbaseball101 posted

  That said, don't ever leave it in the judges' hands.  Swing the damn bat

I can't express enough how much I relate to the OP. If a pitch is so far outside that the batter can't hit it while staying in the batters box it should not be called a strike. Yet I see it all the time. What's worse is when you have college, and now pro scouts there to see your kid and the ump just screws him. 

Now as to what I quoted. My son is off to college next year. Only time will tell but he just might have a future in baseball. The last thing I need is for him to get into the habit of swinging at bad pitches just because some umpire might call it a strike. 

Edit to say, I love those ump's when the kid pitches. 

UMMMMMM, I am pretty sure that if the guy is coaching at the college level or a professional scout he can tell a ball from a strike.  I am going to go on record and be willing to bet you any amount of money you wish that if an umpire "screws" a kid on a bad call that is not going to cost the kid a draft slot or scholarship money.  On top of that, in that moment what the most important this is to that scout or coach is how the hitter handles it mentally and emotionally.

I can tell you this is the case. Scouts watch for this, and even talk to umpires before or after games.

I know of one 1st-round pick from the HS I attended that dropped a couple of slots because he had a tendency to visibly demonstrate his displeasure with umpires. I worked two of his games and in one of them, he got fooled on a beautiful slider that broke in on the inside corner. He started to argue--nothing ejectable, just him being foolish--and his coach pulled him right then and there, in the first inning.

The next game I had him, a scout came up to me and asked me if I knew anything about his demeanor. I chose to answer non-committally...to which the scout replied that they already were probably passing on him because of it, but they were just looking for something to change their minds. This guy still got his payday, it was just a little bit smaller because I know he dropped at least two picks further.

SomeBaseballDad posted:

Call? 

Can't tell for sure. It's possibly in the zone, or a little bit out.

SomeBaseballDad posted:

Call? 

Strike!  You know it's over the plate simply based on where the catcher set up and caught the pitch.  My question is if it was below the zone.  Hard to tell, but based on what I see I am 99% sure It was at the knees or above at some point while the ball was over the plate.  

SomeBaseballDad posted:

Call? 

Can't tell 100% from here.

In-out: Catcher's crotch looks to be on the outside corner and he doesn't reach across his body to receive the pitch. It's either ok or close on the in-out. 

Up-down:  It's dropping a lot, could have been high enough at the front of the zone. Nothing conclusive either way on the up-down from this angle.

Not a safe pitch to take with two strikes.

Why do you ask?

SomeBaseballDad posted:

Call? 

Meh, 80/20 it's a strike, given the relatively poor angle we have to work with? Not that it matters because that's nowhere near a controversial call or the worst call you'll see in a HS season (or even in just one game).

jacjacatk posted:

SomeBaseballDad posted:

Call? 

Meh, 80/20 it's a strike, given the relatively poor angle we have to work with? Not that it matters because that's nowhere near a controversial call or the worst call you'll see in a HS season (or even in just one game).

BTW, I was hoping to see your son throw yesterday...but he didn't.

Swampboy posted:

SomeBaseballDad posted:

Not a safe pitch to take with two strikes.

Why do you ask?

No particular reason besides we're talking balls and strikes. 

The kid at the plate (an IU recruit) didn't think it was a strike. That was the kid on the mound. Like I said there's a love/hate thing going on with the umps, LOL. 

Look where the ball is here. Guessing as to if this is at the front edge of the plate or not.

May not be a strike (impossible angle to know for sure), but it's way to close to take and then bat flip afterward.

3-2 and RISP, that's a hittable pitch that he got fooled on.  The ball's coming out slowly so if the catcher caught it where his glove was set up that would've been belt high.  It was probably knee high crossing the plate. He didn't extend his hand, just dropped down a bit.  Even if it's a tad low, that's going to be called a strike at any level.  

There is no black part of home plate.  Home plate is white, and no other color.

Some home plates that you buy come with a built-in border that is commonly black.  The black border has two purposes.  First, it protects the edges of the white home plate so that they remain straight and don't get eroded/jagged.  Second, it provides a sharp visual contrast to aid the umpire.

If someone says they are "giving the black," the translation is, "I am substituting my opinion on what the width of home plate should be for what is specified in the rule book." 

No umpire has been granted such authority, but many claim it.

Midlo Dad posted:

There is no black part of home plate.  Home plate is white, and no other color.

Some home plates that you buy come with a built-in border that is commonly black.  The black border has two purposes.  First, it protects the edges of the white home plate so that they remain straight and don't get eroded/jagged.  Second, it provides a sharp visual contrast to aid the umpire.

If someone says they are "giving the black," the translation is, "I am substituting my opinion on what the width of home plate should be for what is specified in the rule book." 

No umpire has been granted such authority, but many claim it.

It's not our opinion. It's what's expected.

An umpire that calls only the width of the plate at the levels we are discussing will not be umpiring long.

Matt13 posted:

It's not our opinion. It's what's expected.

An umpire that calls only the width of the plate at the levels we are discussing will not be umpiring long.

Do you really think that an umpire who calls a perfect zone would be canned at any level?

Stats4Gnats posted:

Matt13 posted:

It's not our opinion. It's what's expected.

An umpire that calls only the width of the plate at the levels we are discussing will not be umpiring long.

 

Do you really think that an umpire who calls a perfect zone would be canned at any level?

Yes. 

Midlo Dad posted:

There is no black part of home plate.  Home plate is white, and no other color.

Some home plates that you buy come with a built-in border that is commonly black.  The black border has two purposes.  First, it protects the edges of the white home plate so that they remain straight and don't get eroded/jagged.  Second, it provides a sharp visual contrast to aid the umpire.

If someone says they are "giving the black," the translation is, "I am substituting my opinion on what the width of home plate should be for what is specified in the rule book." 

No umpire has been granted such authority, but many claim it.

It usually takes a while, but strike zone threads eventually get around to someone saying why you don’t just call the zone as defined in the rule book or why is it that umpires have "their" zone and not the rule book zone.....

My zone is just what happens when I am behind the plate attempting to judge a 3 dimensional strike zone that changes based on the batters height. If you can imagine an invisible floating column, 17 and a half inches wide that extends from a horizontal line at the midpoint between the top of the shoulders and at the lower level is the hollow beneath the knee cap. The zone is determined by from each batters stance as the batter is prepared to swing at a pitched ball....the strike zone changes for a 5'6" batter to a 6' batter......

All of this adds to each umpire having their own zone....even as he may be trying to adhere to the rule book definition. It is just the reality of doing the job. I am known as an inside and low ball umpire. I know this from video tape of my cage work at umpire clinics. I am more apt to call a ball a strike inside and low than I am at the outside and high side of the zone. It’s just my reality...maybe it’s because I am shorter that I see that lower ball as a strike. I don’t know, and I’m not sure what I can do as a human to improve on that. I try and keep as consistent a zone as possible to avoid problems, but it is what it is. This is how I come to say what is defining "my zone" over the strict rule book zone....

Despite all our efforts, I feel there will always be some variance.......but I will try to get better......if at any time I feel I am doing "good enough" and fail to work on refining my game.....it’s probably my time to quit.

I hesitate to offer this statement since usually this is the child’s way out, but I will offer that it isn’t as easy as it seems.....If it was then anyone could do it, and over the years, I can confirm that many cant. Some develop an eye for it, the temperament for it, the patience for it and some never do.

Since I’ve admitted to having “my zone” I guess I am substituting my opinion on what is a strike for what is the “rule book zone. But I will take exception to one thing Midlo states and that is that NO umpire has been granted such authority.

The rule book absolutely gives us the authority. NFHS Rule 10 Art 4. Any umpires decision which involves judgment such as whether a hit is fair or foul, or a pitch is a ball or strike or a runner is out or safe is FINAL.

You may question the judgment of the umpire, but not his rule book given authority.

Thanks for responding PIAA: question for you and HS umpires in general. Do you ever just have an off-game in terms of calling balls and strikes and you KNOW it? And if so, is that awareness linked to extra chirping from the peanut gallery?  

Quick follow-up question - how do you manage the various stances, especially some taller players scrunching down trying to minimize the zone?  Is the some rule or guidance that addresses the "normal" stance?

Matt13 posted:

Yes. 

That seems like a shame to me. Why bother with rules then, and what’s gonna happen when MLB finally goes to calling pitches not swung at using technology?

Stats4Gnats posted:

Matt13 posted:

Yes. 

 

That seems like a shame to me. Why bother with rules then, and what’s gonna happen when MLB finally goes to calling pitches not swung at using technology?

People stop watching?  People stop coming the ballpark?  Games are longer?  Pitchers learn how to throw the eephus pitch and baseball turns into slow pitch softball.  Part of the joy of this game is discussing and/or complaining about "stuff" that you cannot control.  Not every stat ever recorded is done in a consistent manner (error or hit - I don't know depends on the fielder sometimes) - there is always judgement a/k/a "scorer's decision" involved. Guess we can have a computer tell us that too ;-). I personally know a few college pitchers ERA's that will be much lower if the decision for an error or not was left to a computer program!!!

I can't wait for the technology that "thinks it knows" the difference between a trapped ball and a caught ball... Or something that can tell if it's a foul tip or a foul ball.  Will the ball know if it's touched the ground and light up or something?  Green is good catch, red is not a catch.  (similar for out/safe, fair/foul, ball/strike).  Will a ball know if it's "touched" any part of the plate? Even by a nanometer... The 88th lace of the ball on it's journey was slightly frayed and it passed through the zone causing the computer program to decide the pitch was a strike. Who does the player or manager yell at then? What about a fair/foul line?  Damn, I have chalk on myself - I must be fair.  Smart balls, the new technology - own a pair.

Would love to see technology call balls and strikes.  My son is way too old for any cheap technology to get to the lower levels.  He will never see it.  For lower level ball you could set the zone at 20" or more.  I understand a 9 year old baseball game will never get over if you call a strict strike zone.  But we are talking high school here.  You should be able to throw strikes.  But umpires have their own little kingdom and usually have the personality where that control and authority is very important to them.  There is a shortage at least in our area of umps.  They are like weathermen they can keep getting it wrong and keep getting paid.  Sad.

2020dad posted:

Would love to see technology call balls and strikes.  My son is way too old for any cheap technology to get to the lower levels.  He will never see it.  For lower level ball you could set the zone at 20" or more.  I understand a 9 year old baseball game will never get over if you call a strict strike zone.  But we are talking high school here.  You should be able to throw strikes.  But umpires have their own little kingdom and usually have the personality where that control and authority is very important to them.  There is a shortage at least in our area of umps.  They are like weathermen they can keep getting it wrong and keep getting paid.  Sad.

Wrong, yet again...

Stats4Gnats posted:

Matt13 posted:

Yes. 

 

That seems like a shame to me. Why bother with rules then, and what’s gonna happen when MLB finally goes to calling pitches not swung at using technology?

We aren't talking MLB, though...

Funny you mention it, though--the reason that the strike zone changed this year is because umpires were calling it very consistently and MLB did not intend for that to happen when they set the last one in 1996.

JohnF posted:

People stop watching?  People stop coming the ballpark?  Games are longer?  Pitchers learn how to throw the eephus pitch and baseball turns into slow pitch softball.  Part of the joy of this game is discussing and/or complaining about "stuff" that you cannot control.  Not every stat ever recorded is done in a consistent manner (error or hit - I don't know depends on the fielder sometimes) - there is always judgement a/k/a "scorer's decision" involved. Guess we can have a computer tell us that too ;-). I personally know a few college pitchers ERA's that will be much lower if the decision for an error or not was left to a computer program!!!

I can't wait for the technology that "thinks it knows" the difference between a trapped ball and a caught ball... Or something that can tell if it's a foul tip or a foul ball.  Will the ball know if it's touched the ground and light up or something?  Green is good catch, red is not a catch.  (similar for out/safe, fair/foul, ball/strike).  Will a ball know if it's "touched" any part of the plate? Even by a nanometer... The 88th lace of the ball on it's journey was slightly frayed and it passed through the zone causing the computer program to decide the pitch was a strike. Who does the player or manager yell at then? What about a fair/foul line?  Damn, I have chalk on myself - I must be fair.  Smart balls, the new technology - own a pair.

I’m not at all sure how you took what I said about technology calling pitches not swung at, which they’ve already done at a professional game and do every day to grade and help umpires, and taken that to mean I said technology should call hits and errors, caught balls, and foul tips.

So are you saying that if pitches not swung at are called by technology you’ll quit watching baseball and that will be the complete demise of the game?

I had one rule for my players. "It is not his job to adjust to your interpretation of the strike zone. It is your job to adjust to his interpretation of the strike zone. So watch and learn, quickly."

I had one request of the crew - "Please be consistent for the entire game regardless of the situation."

My idea of a bad call is anything that falls outside of the "consistent" area. Once the zone has been established lets keep it right there. I understand you are going to make some calls during the game that might be inconsistent. As long as you are not consistently inconsistent I will stay quiet and leave you alone. You have a tough job. A very tough job. I appreciate you and respect you, and my players will appreciate you and respect you as well.

2020dad posted:

Would love to see technology call balls and strikes.  My son is way too old for any cheap technology to get to the lower levels.  He will never see it.  For lower level ball you could set the zone at 20" or more.  I understand a 9 year old baseball game will never get over if you call a strict strike zone.  But we are talking high school here.  You should be able to throw strikes.  But umpires have their own little kingdom and usually have the personality where that control and authority is very important to them.  There is a shortage at least in our area of umps.  They are like weathermen they can keep getting it wrong and keep getting paid.  Sad.

Actually, I think if that technology were to get to 9YO ball games it would cause something to happen that should have happened many years ago. They’d make different length and width plates for different levels, and the upper and lower limits would be defined differently as well. Since that’s evidently what happens anyway, and in fact will get an umpire fired if he doesn’t do that, the next logical step would be to admit it has to happen, make the changes, and go on with life.

Here’s a bit of personal trivia. So far this season we’ve played 19 games. There have been a total of 3,853 pitches. I also keep track of “bad pitches” defined this way. A bad pitch is one either in the dirt or so high or wide the catcher exhibited more than ordinary effort to keep from getting past him. There have been 365 bad pitches. That means 9.47% of the total pitches have not only been balls, but have been pretty bad as well.

I’m sure the percentage of bad pitches at the 9YO level would be worse, but I don’t want anyone to get the idea that HSV pitchers can hit a gnat in the gnuts from 60’.

Anyone who's been a pitcher knows how hard it is to hit the strike zone.  The plate looks like 2 inches wide from 60ft.  Pitchers in our division are averaging 200 pitches per 9ip, so it's an arm health concern as well.  

hsbaseball101 posted:

Anyone who's been a pitcher knows how hard it is to hit the strike zone.  The plate looks like 2 inches wide from 60ft.  Pitchers in our division are averaging 200 pitches per 9ip, so it's an arm health concern as well.  

WHAT?  Was that a mistype?  200 pitches per 9 innings?  So 100 pitches per 4.5 innings?

Um, are these numbers typical because I have to say that is NOT what I'm seeing in my neck of the woods.

hsbaseball101 posted:

Anyone who's been a pitcher knows how hard it is to hit the strike zone.  The plate looks like 2 inches wide from 60ft.  Pitchers in our division are averaging 200 pitches per 9ip, so it's an arm health concern as well.  

What division and age level are you talking about?

Batty67 posted:

Thanks for responding PIAA: question for you and HS umpires in general. Do you ever just have an off-game in terms of calling balls and strikes and you KNOW it? And if so, is that awareness linked to extra chirping from the peanut gallery?  

Yes, we all have had that inning or even a whole game......

I have known it and:

• struggled to correct it and no one even noticed...no chirping... no complaints.
• struggled and took heat for it.
• Called a great game...

At a certain point in your umpire career "chirping from the peanut gallery" just fades into the background. At a HS game I assume I'm going to see 200+ pitches....there are going to be called pitches that both teams fans aren't going to like.

The trained umpire has methods to get back on track if they feel they are loose in the zone. I think the one thing we don't give a lot of focus on is "real life". There are going to be times when the stress and demands of real life can interfere with the focus that is needed on the ball field.

I don't believe we teach new umpires when to book off a game. Or when to ask their partner to take the dish on days when they feel they may not have the required focus to do the plate.       

2017LHPscrewball posted:

Quick follow-up question - how do you manage the various stances, especially some taller players scrunching down trying to minimize the zone?  Is the some rule or guidance that addresses the "normal" stance?

There are a number of mechanical guides taught to  assist the umpire in establishing the normal batting stance of a player. Watch an umpire when a batter enters the box and takes a few warm up swings.  His eyes will be checking heights and distances....then he will sink into a stance that allows him to gauge the natural stance.    

CaCO3Girl posted:

hsbaseball101 posted:

Anyone who's been a pitcher knows how hard it is to hit the strike zone.  The plate looks like 2 inches wide from 60ft.  Pitchers in our division are averaging 200 pitches per 9ip, so it's an arm health concern as well.  

WHAT?  Was that a mistype?  200 pitches per 9 innings?  So 100 pitches per 4.5 innings?

Um, are these numbers typical because I have to say that is NOT what I'm seeing in my neck of the woods.

I recalculated taking a random sample of 6 teams, and it's actually 150 pitches per 9 innings on average.  This is the lowest division in CA.  

Stats4Gnats posted:

JohnF posted:

People stop watching?  People stop coming the ballpark?  Games are longer?  Pitchers learn how to throw the eephus pitch and baseball turns into slow pitch softball.  Part of the joy of this game is discussing and/or complaining about "stuff" that you cannot control.  Not every stat ever recorded is done in a consistent manner (error or hit - I don't know depends on the fielder sometimes) - there is always judgement a/k/a "scorer's decision" involved. Guess we can have a computer tell us that too ;-). I personally know a few college pitchers ERA's that will be much lower if the decision for an error or not was left to a computer program!!!

 

I can't wait for the technology that "thinks it knows" the difference between a trapped ball and a caught ball... Or something that can tell if it's a foul tip or a foul ball.  Will the ball know if it's touched the ground and light up or something?  Green is good catch, red is not a catch.  (similar for out/safe, fair/foul, ball/strike).  Will a ball know if it's "touched" any part of the plate? Even by a nanometer... The 88th lace of the ball on it's journey was slightly frayed and it passed through the zone causing the computer program to decide the pitch was a strike. Who does the player or manager yell at then? What about a fair/foul line?  Damn, I have chalk on myself - I must be fair.  Smart balls, the new technology - own a pair.

 

I’m not at all sure how you took what I said about technology calling pitches not swung at, which they’ve already done at a professional game and do every day to grade and help umpires, and taken that to mean I said technology should call hits and errors, caught balls, and foul tips.

 

So are you saying that if pitches not swung at are called by technology you’ll quit watching baseball and that will be the complete demise of the game?

Interesting which part of my response you chose to focus on and which you chose to ignore.  There was certainly a lot of tongue in cheek though - an absurd response for the premise that using technology to call the game for pitches not swung at ostensibly "just" to make the strike zone better.  

Once you start down the path of technology people strive to keep improving it and to keep using for more things (which is what I was trying to illustrate)... Although I do recall one technological change that fell flat on its face - a chip inside a hockey puck so that TV viewers could "see" the puck. Luckily 60" HD televisions came along and fixed that ;-).

In any case, my point part of the joy of baseball is having the human element involved where mistakes are made and decisions are left open for interpretation.

JohnF posted:

 

In any case, my point part of the joy of baseball is having the human element involved where mistakes are made and decisions are left open for interpretation.

Says the guy who's not out there actually playing the game.

Let's see, wasn't there a game a few years ago where the ump made a bad call at first and cost a kid a perfect game? Yeah the pitcher was very magnanimous about the whole thing and cars where rewarded and everyone had a group hug, but I bet all involved just wish the right call had been made.

JohnF posted:

Stats4Gnats posted:

Matt13 posted:

Yes. 

 

That seems like a shame to me. Why bother with rules then, and what’s gonna happen when MLB finally goes to calling pitches not swung at using technology?

People stop watching?  People stop coming the ballpark?  Games are longer?

IDK, I guess you would have to look in depth and see where umps make the most mistakes, ball instead of strike or strike instead of ball.

Lets face it, people want to see action. They want to see the ball put in play. Sure pitching duels are fine, but not game after game. When I was a kid they were waiting for the player who was going to break the .400 batting avg mark. You never hear about that anymore. Now we live in the day of the .200 average and 3-1 games.

So if a computer generated strike zone were to turn the game more in the offences favor it would have a positive effect, IMO.

SomeBaseballDad posted:

So if a computer generated strike zone were to turn the game more in the offences favor it would have a positive effect, IMO.

It won't, though. Hitters have figured out that selling out for more power is more valuable than putting the ball in play at the cost of that power, and that's the primary driving force for three true outcomes hitting approaches. Changing the strikezone is just going to alter the ratio of those outcomes more than anything else.

I don't know that there's a fundamentally easy way to fix that (assuming it's something that needs to be fixed). Larger outfields would probably go a ways, but that's not especially feasible.

SomeBaseballDad posted:

JohnF posted:

 

In any case, my point part of the joy of baseball is having the human element involved where mistakes are made and decisions are left open for interpretation.

Says the guy who's not out there actually playing the game.

Let's see, wasn't there a game a few years ago where the ump made a bad call at first and cost a kid a perfect game? Yeah the pitcher was very magnanimous about the whole thing and cars where rewarded and everyone had a group hug, but I bet all involved just wish the right call had been made.

Yep it's a game or are you missing that point? It's amazing how a bad umpire call gets magnified 1000%. You think Jim Joyce wanted to make that mistake? He did apologize... To err is human, to forgive is divine, right?... A little reality check just in case you've forgotten - for a pitcher to have a perfect it game it takes a lot of things going right, when one doesn't does that get remembered for years on end?  Has any pitcher "lost" his perfect game w/ 2 outs in the 9th as a result of a hit, walk, error, hit-by-pitch, etc.? Has any pitcher given up 1 hit early then had a "perfect game" beyond that? Or any other such combination where just 1 mistake caused him to not have a perfect game? IDK - couldn't remember, but I (and others) do remember the umpire mistake. Curious, isn't it?  Are the only individuals on the field that are expected to have a perfect game every night out umpires? No one expects a pitcher to throw a perfect game every 5 days or end a season with a 0.00 ERA. No one expects a batter to bat 1.000 for a season or have a 1.000 OBP.  No one expects a fielder to not bobble/drop a ball ever.  No one expects that a coach will make decisions throughout the season that everyone that roots for the team will agree upon. That peanut vendor in the stands isn't going to hit his target every time either. So reality check - sit back enjoy the *game* that's being played. Those who are fortunate enough to keep playing or those that are fortunate enough to continue to watch their children keep playing should be proud of themselves/their children. Some day it does end - enjoy it while it's happening though because you never know when it ends.