View Single Post
  #22 (permalink)  
Old Thu Apr 28, 2005, 09:50pm
DG DG is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 4,022
Re: AGREED!

[/B][/QUOTE]

That would be crazy. The restriction is a good idea but it just don't seem to work. All you are going to have now is a coach sitting in the dugout chirping about balls and strikes.

My BU had a Asst. coach arguing a call at first last week in playoff game. The call was not that close IMO as I was following the BR up the line following a bunt.

I saw my BU motion to the dugout so I knew he was restricting him to dugout. What followed was about as immature display by a coach - thought it was Lou Panella on the field. Needless to say he was history, but just reminds me that all a restriction does it make them mad.

Thanks
David

[/B][/QUOTE]Just because he is restricted does not mean he has liberty to go to the dugout and continue to run his mouth. And of course this is direction from the state, you don't think I would think this up on my own, surely. There are stiff penalties for coaches and players who are ejected, so they want to restrict first, unless it is one of the big 6 that will get you ejected immediately. Arguing balls and strikes is not one of them.
Reply With Quote