Quote:
Originally posted by UMP25
I've read it and am quite familiar with it. Sorry, Luke, but there IS something wrong with giving the defense a huge advantage in having a balk enforced rather than, say, a 3-run homer counting.
Not every Fed rule makes sense, and this is clearly one of them.
|
Is there something wrong with this: There is R1, F1 balks, and B2 hits to RF, R1 tries for third but is thrown out, the umpire then sends R1 back to second and enforces the balk?
The NF writes rules for "ease of administration", as they know not all of their officials are competent. It is much easier to enforce the balk when the ball is dead, than have to think about when to enforce the balk and when not to.
Quote:
|
Originally posted by SanDiegoSteve
|
Yes, the coaches would be correct. No insult intended, but we are. More MLB umpires from us that any other single association in America. Facts are facts. One of our instructors (for the probationaries), is a MLB umpire.
By the way, there are many associations here, I was only refering to mine in particlular.[/QUOTE]
Don't pro umpires have to go to pro school before they get into MiLB? Therefore, you could have some rookie umpire in your association who really sucks. He goes to school, and get to MLB. Now when he was in your association, he was terrible, but now you go around bragging about how your association has another MLB umpire (That is assuming that this guy is no longer active in the association, as he has works enough games for MLB).
I'm not saying that your association is bad, or that you guys don't have good members, but you can't really gauge how good an association is by how many ex-members work pro ball.