[GarthB]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Kaliix
I don't claim to own logic. But I can follow and make good logical arguements. While I have gotten emotionally invested in this discussion, I have always argued the points using logic to make my arguements.

Others, including yourself, keep avoiding the really hard questions. No one will answer them. No one will try to logically argue them. Instead the umpires who would not call this a balk have ignored the salient points. Just as you did in your reply.

Instead, all those who believe this not to be a balk would believe that lifting the leg up to ones chest has backward direction, that there is any legitimate reason to lift the leg in that manner except to throw, either to a base or the plate, and that it was just a weird step off and not an intentional move to deceive.

I honestly can't believe that so many people believe the above paragraph.



Wow. What an a$$. Not only are you so much smarter than anyone else, you're also I mind reader and can tell me what I believe. Avoiding hard questions? Please. Who the F do you think you are? You want to lecture because someone was wrong about a balk they never saw? Wow. What an a$$.

I answered your questions. I even admitted that I got hung up on a small point and would be proven wrong on the bigger issue.

I probably should have confined myself to discussing this with Dave Hensley. I wouldn't have been distracted by your arrogance and emotionalism and wouldn't have concentrated on the head of the pin issue.

The difference in your posts and Dave's, while taking the same side of the issue, is very telling.

I don't know what more you want. I said I was wrong. God forgive me. I lost an argument with a book umpire. Is there anything I can do to help you gloat some more? Not to be redudndant, but: Wow. What an a$$.

Dave, thanks for taking the time to clear up the issue. Isn't it amazing how Evans can explain his point of view without dramatics, accusations or emotionalism?