Quote:
Originally posted by mcrowder
It's EXTREMELY similar.
It's an example of the umpire changing the way he calls his play because of subsequent action.
Like a close play vs a no-brainer? Guess you never banged a runner out vs the obvious out by 20 feet out signal!LOL
It's an example of an umpire saying or doing things he shouldn't be saying or doing that could have an effect on action, when he should NOT be affecting action.
Like: "That's obstruction/interference/that's a catch/foul/time? If you have an out, declare the out!
This is a GREAT example.
I don't agree! It's like saying "Ball 1, ball 2,3. Who in da He!! does that?
99% of you out there would NEVER yell "Ball Four, Ball Four!!!" if you saw a catcher trying to throw R1 out when stealing on a base on balls. (Those that would can remain at their respective levels, and hope they never do such a thing in front of an evaluator or assignor).
Yet many of you who see why you should not make THAT call are proponents of "Batter's Out!! Batter's Out!!" as "preventative umpiring".
It's the SAME - and you should not do anything different on this play than you would normally.
I do it normally!
If you disagree --- tell me WHY "Ball Four!! Ball Four!!" is the wrong thing to do, but "Batter's Out!! Batter's
Out!!" is the right thing to do. I sit prepared to be dazzled by your logic.
|
I disagree!
And I'll tell you why.
IT'S AN OUT!!!!
THAT'S WHY! JEEZ!
Other experienced and respected officials on this site have given their view on this, which is to declare the out. "Batter's out"! Even saying it twice.
Have you not read the entire thread?
I don't see it as preventive officiating, I see it as calling an out when I see it.
I edited this to ask: how do you quote various parts of a post without it seeming as one, like I just did?
Sorry bout that! I'll get it sooner or later.
[Edited by thumpferee on May 4th, 2005 at 07:48 PM]