Quote:
Originally posted by Carl Childress
In nearly 50 years of baseball only two people have continued to argue this point. Each of them adopts the contrary approach because, as Mike suggested, each wants to make a reputation for himself as the man who tweaked my nose. You'd think they would pick one of the (many) subjects (like mechanics?) where I'm wrong. (LOL!)
BTW1: The other guy posts on RSO and is best friends with their "By the Rules" columnist. That should explain a lot.
BTW2: The first-best selling book for umpires in the 1980s was Behind the Mask. Uh, I wrote that one, too.
|
Truly a rather arrogant and egotistical view to think I am here only to tweak your twiddle, Childress---but not surprising. I would hope even you would agree that I have provided legitimate support and logic to back my position while receiving far less evidence in rebuttal. At the very least, I fuel a legitimate topic for discussion and learning. Is that not a part of what the forums are here for?
Unfortunately for me, I DO consider you among the best regarding rules knowledge and have always tried to provide you that credit, correct?? I also have not found you to be flawless. I congratulate you on the sales of your writings but must add that it should be mentioned that the JEA is not for sale to the general public. I might suspect that Chevrolets outsell Mercedes but, of course, there is a reason for that. Sales figures, alone, CAN be misleading. I am a proud owner of your BRD and have even plugged it for you elsewhere due to it's value to umpires. Consider this an addtional plug. It's win-win for the buyer and the seller and an excellen reference for those umpiring games using the various sets of rules. It should be included among your earliest purchases available to you for your reference library.
I am not concerned in building any reputation as you inaccurately stated. Far more importantly, I am concerned in officiating the game fairly and as safely as possible by the rules as I feel, through my experience and continued learnings, the game was intended to be played. As stated before, I have no desire to be another Childress; one is certainly enough for me.
I would, however, like to thank you for interjecting your post. Your knowledge and opinions are highly regarded (or should be) by most. I would like to ask if you would consider answering the questions I posed regarding the (other?) authoritative opinions and PBUC in their lack of coverage regarding this claimed exclusion to the written rule. After all, yours is the ONLY one specifically addressing it, and it is my understanding that these other sources are prime references for the content of the BRD. Therefore, the summation you quote appears to be YOUR opinion rather than theirs. That totals the overwhelming number of "one".
1)
Why do you feel it is not specifically listed anywhere, other than your writings, among the major publications of JEA, J/R, and PBUC?? (In fact, J/R does not include it among their listed exclusions, which therefore, would contradict your opinion). None mention in any words to "exclude" those plays not originating from the home plate area.
2)
Would not any interpretation that directly contradicts the written rule warrant specific attention rather than "acceptance through deductive process" or "common usage"??? If so, it leads back to the question of why have others not more specifically addressed it if it were true.
3)
Since it is NOT specifically addressed,
would it warrant you seeking a specific ruling if, indeed, it is accepted as broadly as you indicate?? Would not such a ruling aid to legitimatize the claim in YOUR writings?? (My personal questioning of umpires, BTW, does not show that this point is widely known or practiced as you profess). Consider the play I use for the example which is
based on a good throw (as defined by JEA) on the home plate side of first base over fair territory. Why should the BR be allowed to come out of the lane and into fair territory to contact a fielder and prevent the gloving of the throw??
4)
How is this addressed for Fed interpretions??? Is it the same as you claim for OBR??
I would appreciate your attention to these questions if only to provide you further opportunity to make me look even worse than you already feel I have attained without your assistance.
Thank you,
Freix