[Bfair]

These threads started with discussion regarding a reversed call by Mr. Moose. He was relatively persecuted by our Internet Authorities for his reversed call which was stated as illegal because it did not fit within the list of 5 Changeable Calls presented by Childress.

Considerable discussion questioning various rules, interpretations, and legalities ensued. Low and behold, we have a play in Texas occur that fits as an ideal example. The highly rated officials in this game do not follow recommended procedure due to the way the situation developed. All officials, those on the field and those on the boards, agree it could have been handled better. However, it is quite obvious the reversal did not fall within the list 5 acceptable types of calls to change.

It is obvious to all only one call (a judgement call) was made on the play---that being a judgement call that the batter was not hit by the pitch. No other call on the play was made prior to the coach coming out to protest the call. After extensive protest by the coach to both U1 and U2, the judgement call was ultimately reversed to get the play right.

Now, our Internet Authorities, in an apparent attempt to save face, scramble to try to make this play fall into one of the categories within the list of 5. They attempt to tell the people of the land that this was "correcting two calls made on the same play." That the "decision" made by U2 at the time of the pitch was in fact a call. Upon questioning (ridiculing the ludicrousy) of this we are told there was a PBUC ruling advising that a "decision" and a "call" are, indeed, the same thing. Upon questioning this authoritative statement regarding the PBUC ruling, we find an error has been made and the point, indeed, is not true. A decision (undeclared) and a call are not the same and never should be the same. That dog just won't hunt. It seems some have attempted to stretch the interpretation farther than a pair of bikini underwear on Jaba the Hut--- trying their best to make it fit.

The umpires did what was necessary to get the call right. I agree with what they did. The circumstances were such that they were able to follow the General Instructions to Umpires and they chose to get the play right over protecting their dignity (egos). They did not choose to ignore the General Instructions (as recommended by Childress in his thread General Instructions: Generally Ignored) where it is the opinion of Childress to ignore this portion of the OBR rulebook. (BTW, it is understood it is not part of the NCAA rulebook).

Childress (quoted from "Change that Call"):

The neo-romantics are lost in a dream world, a fantasy where they believe the adversaries respect right, truth, justice, and the American way. Santa Claus, Cinderella, The Never-Ending Story: "The kids deserve the right call, and I’m gonna give it to them.”
_________

Childress (quoted---this thread):

Jon Bible continues to be one of the Neo-Romantics. He is, I am certain, the foremost umpire of the last quarter century to preach consistently: "Get the call right!" Come hell or high water, Jon expects only "right" calls. He and I have agreed to disagree "slightly" on this point. I say "slightly," because in this instance "getting the call right" was also legal.

Childress, now that you have accused both Jon Bible and me of being Neo-Romantics you need to understand it is not as bad as you make it seem. We understand the game, the rules, and the intent of the rules-----and that, when possible, we make getting the call right more important than protecting our egos. I don't believe Jon Bible and I are "lost in a dream world" as you state. I guess we all may need more Bible Study vs. BRD.

Despite your habit of presenting and co-mingling your opinions and interpretations with the unofficial "official interpretations", I do admire your rules knowledge. However, please remember my preference is to think and understand rather than to merely accept doctrine. It is not wrong to question that which you do not understand and that which is illogical. I do not stand alone.

Just my opinion,

Steve
Member
EWS







[Edited by Bfair on Feb 26th, 2001 at 01:43 AM]