Quote:
Originally posted by Dave Hensley
--- [snip] ---
>I don't see that as against the spirit and intent of OBR
> 9.02(a) in the same way that getting help from another official after
> a call has already been made, and after being approached by a
> coach/manager, most certainly would be.
This strikes me as a bit of a crawfish move on your previous statement:
> That is not the same as if you had NOT seen the ball on the
> ground in the first place, in which case your PU would have been
> legally entitled to help you out and you would have been legally
> entitled to change the call.
but it is still good to know that you at least agree with the "legality" of an umpire reversing his own call due to bad timing (the classic "out - no, safe!" call on dropped balls.) Your statement made elsewhere in a related thread that the first sentence of 9.02(a) should be interpreted to prohibit an umpire from changing his own judgment call, had me worried a bit.
|
How my posts "strike you" (sic) is of little consequence to me. We have generally been discussing the issue of umpires changing calls
when approached by a coach or manager to "get help". I haven't resiled one jot from my position in that regard. However, changing one's mind mid-decision, before being approached to do so, is very poor timing but nevertheless a perfectly legitimate part of the decision-making process. I don't see any contradiction between those two points of view and my contentions regarding OBR 9.02(a).
Quote:
> (BTW, the typo you pointed out has been corrected in the original
> post. Yet another nit well picked.)
Well, heck, Warren, since "nit-picking" is a characteristic generally considered by most people to be a less than desirable trait, I have to assume your intent in using that phrase was to throw a little barb my way.
|
Oh no, Dave, nit-picking is a perfectly respectible pastime for some, just as long as it doesn't become the chief or only source of "contribution" to our society. Rules nuts like myself are well known to be occasional nit-pickers. It's just that we believe in regularly contributing something more than the picking of a few nits from time to time.
BTW, when you
email someone and privately advise them of an error - as you did for Garth - that's helpful nit-picking. But when have someone's email address and you choose instead to
publicly post their minor error, that's not helpful nit-picking it's oneupmanship! You wouldn't deliberately engage in THAT though, would you Dave?
Cheers,