[Ump20]

Warren,

Once again you have served us with an outstanding and thoughtful post in response to Bfair's one about the General Instructions. I am sure many lurkers and other "peasants" who frequent these Boards to learn the art and science of umpiring will appreciate the fact that you suspended your practice of no longer commenting on Bfair's posts.

I cannot keep you from engaging in point counterpoint when he issues, as most surely he will, a reply to your post. I would urge you to resist the temptation knowing full well he appears to be most set in his ways and will not change on this issue. Your posts should be judged by all in context with those of others such as Carl Childress and Jim Porter and in light of their own personal experiences. Although everyone is equal umpiring is not a vocation in which the rules of how an umpire is to act is decided by popular vote. The reader must decide the credibility of each presenter.

I would remind anyone who is a new member that your thoughts are fully appreciated. I have seen a number of recent posts from newer members albeit not necessarily newer umpires.

Finally, I will remind others that I posted this play simply because it seemed an aberration of the List of Five exceptions to umpires changing judgment calls after the fact. I do not agree with Terry Cooney seeking help on his call. In my humble opinion I do not think that MLB at the time should have reversed the George Brett call. The rule was unmistakably clear and the umpires ruled within the context of the rules as then written. Change the rules -- don't overrule the umpires. Jim Simms/NY