|
[QUOTE]Originally posted by mcrowder
[B]Uh... what?
You said: "Interference can be intentional or unintentional ie an accident." I agree with this statement 100%.
Then you said: "Intent has everything to do with it." This is the opposite of what you just said. What exactly do you mean then?
If I'm making judgements on you, it's based on what you wrote - which is all I have to go on. It was you that said you'd give benefit of the doubt to the defense.
Exactly borderline play could argue interference no interference I give the benefit of the doubt to the defense.
Your apparent justification is because giving the benefit of the doubt to the defense gets you home earlier.
Never said that nor implied that.
You should be run out on your ear for that alone. If
I've misunderstood your motive, then tell my why you would give the benefit of the doubt to the defense, as opposed to giving the benefit of the doubt to the offense.
Concerning interference because the offensive player the runner or batter runner is ALWAYS supposed to allow the defensive player the opportunity to make a play. If the question of interference did he or didn't he (could theoretically argue either way) Then obviously the runner or batter runner either intentionally or unintentially was trying to gain an unfair advantage.
(PS - there should be no doubt. Call what you see. Period.
Always do.
The thought of, "Well, I'm not really sure what I saw there, so I'll give it to the defense" is quite frankly awful.)
Never done that.
Yes, of course I've heard of umpires that simply want outs and strikes.
What's wrong with that as long as you make the proper calls on the bases or behind the plate.
If you recall correctly, I mentioned firing one for just that.
Why? Was he calling players obviously safe out? Did he have a bad strike zone? You were his boss why didn't you help him out?
Umpires should not WANT anything (or root for anything) lest it cloud their judgment. We are there to officiate the contest, not to wish for certain outcomes.
Never done that I could care less who wins. But I do like good games.
Do I enjoy a 70 minute 1-0 game more than a 3 hour walkfest? Of course I do, and so do my kids when I get home early ...
but I'm not there for my enjoyment.
If you're not there for the enjoyment then you should quit. If you're not their for the love of the game than you should quit. If you're not their for the challenge of getting better at the craft then you should quit.
I can't think of anything better than having the dish and behind you a half a dozen scouts with radar guns scouting a prospect. I don't know if you've ever experienced that and until you have it's almost better than...... On second thought maybe not but close.
I'm there to officiate. I'm certainly not rooting for strikes or outs,
I'm not rooting I'm hoping for strikes and outs (don't always get them). When the pitchers are throwing strikes and routine plays are made you've got a good game. Nothing like a well played game by both teams.
What's wrong with hoping for that?
or rooting against balls and errors.
What's wrong with that? See above.
I'm there to officiate.
I'm there to umpire.
You, obviously, are not, and clearly you need to rethink your reasons for being on the diamond. Truly --- why are you there? Everyone has a different answer to this - and I'm truly curious... why are YOU there?
See above.
|