[GarthB]

A reality check.

A forced overruling is at best a third world event that occurs primarily in the games of some of those writing at officiating.com If one cannot convince a partner that he has made a mistake (we are assuming, of course, that he HAS made a mistake) by intellect, a persuasive discussion or force of personality, he should not take matters into his own hands and begin a public war of wills with his partner. It will forever tarnish both umpires and it is prohibited by rule. Even in the recent MLB examples the original umpire was convinced (coerced?) to go along with a change.

Most often, in my personal experience, the game is being worked with dogs of the same calibre. One will award bases based on TOP when it should have been TOT.

The other umpire will call time and they will meet halfway.

"Uh, Spot....that should have been two from time of throw."

"You sure, Rover? I could have sworn that was a TOP."

"Trust, me on this one. If I'm wrong you can piss on my porch."

"Okay, but let's take another second here so it looks like we had to both think about it."

"Fine...see that BILF in the third row...I think she's in heat."

My argument was never about changing a call, or a partner initiating the change. My argument has been regarding what would be a tragic public spectacle should umpires accept the advice of the author at officiating.com who stated that when your partner refuses to change his call "change it anyway."

My disagreement with Peter is not in how he personally handles these situations. I just believe that sometimes Peter makes statements that come across as universal. Not everyone reading his posts has his experience, his skills, his games or his partners. 90% of those reading his posts never will. Peter knows how to manage his games and how to work with umpires with similar backrounds, but his posts, at times, should come with a caveat, "Don't try this at home."