Quote:
Originally posted by Bfair
Peter appeared to be trying to make the point that 2 umpires cannot have "equal juridistiction" over a call. I believe a previous post on the board had referred to the effect of "equal jurisdiction" and Peter was merely refuting it.
This is one of the problems with board censorship. Due to the deletion of Peter's post (and those of others), you could not check his post before making your statement in order to insure that you were accurate. The rest of the readership cannot check the post either to see if it was a misquote (accidental or otherwise).
Just my opinion,
|
If that truly WAS the point that Peter "
appeared to be trying to make", that "
2 umpires cannot have equal jurisdiction over a call", then I suggest that he would have been quite wrong by
any reading of OBR 9.04. Certainly his quoted claim in the above post, that if two umpires made different calls on the same play then in that case the PU's call should prevail because his was the primary responsibility, is just plain WRONG when OBR 9.04(c) is taken into account. According to that rule, the final decision belongs to the UIC who shall decide according to which umpire had the better view, not according to who had the primary responsibility.
I don't see the proper moderation of this
restricted discussion board, in accordance with the guidelines that EVERY poster had to agree to when registering to post, as "censorship". If it really bothers you that posts get deleted, Steve, then may I suggest that you encourage every poster to leave personal criticisms out of their posts, including yourself. I, for my own part, am happy to promise NOT to intentionally post criticism on a personal level unless I am first addressed on that level. I can't Bfairer than that! (grin)
Cheers,
[Edited by Warren Willson on Feb 23rd, 2001 at 12:51 AM]