Wave, wave, flap, flap, flap.....
Jim and Carl:
That's the sound of my white flag being waved furiously over this debate. YOU WIN. You have convinced me that OBR 7.07 is a pig in a poke, and I ain't gonna buy it no way no how.
In the case of the runner from 2nd in that District final I mentioned, he was decoyed back toward 2nd while F1 was just standing set, and was still leaning back when F1 pitched and R3 went from a long lead. No R2 wasn't a friend. In fact, his coach and I were to become avowed enemies. This guy knows so little about the game that even the title coach is too good for him. Maybe he didn't even tell R2 the steal was on, who knows?
Jim:
You went and got yourself a Macquarie Dictionary and Thesaurus, right? Either that or you've been holding out on your old china! (grin) "mullets and berks", "pull a tanti", "chuck a spaz", "get narky", "quids-in", "straight-up", "Struth", "choof off", "blunnies", "tinnie", "see what's on auntie", "cobbers"? My, my, James, we HAVE done our homework! (BIG grin) I can't believe you went to so much trouble for little ol' ME! It's enough to make a bloke bawl! Of course we're still cobbers, mate.
Carl:
So are you going to add this one to your list of statutes that are affected in their enforcement by knowing the history and tradition, as you promised HT? I would.
I still think the language difference exists between the two statutes, but I no longer think OBR 7.07 was intentionally left in. Maybe the harsher penalty of having a "stupid" s.o.b. advanced even when he wasn't stealing is still somehow legitimate, but I can now see that it doesn't make a whole lot of sense in the light of the current alternative statutes. So if Harry says leave the sucker where he is then that would do me, too.
Cheers,
|