|
Bob,
JJ deleted the post after some of our forum contributors became caustic. Carl did throw those barbs and I did not respond with name calling. I actually encouraged him to pursue the high road. JJ can verify the exchange, his integrity is rarely challenged here.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I was disappointed to see it take so long. When I first entered "the fray", I was forced to choose a new name. I did not try to use WCB, I actually selected my nom de net from a frequent jibe at umpires. I figured that my writing style, decision to address yet another "Get it Right" piece, and direct mention to Carl that I was back where I belong would be enough clues. As many have noticed, I have adapted my style in order to opine on this forum. While it is regrettably easy to taunt those with weaker writing skills, I will try to remain above the mudslinging.
I did notice that only one other member has taken the time to address my concerns. Where do you draw the line in when making subjective calls? I asked if the umpire would allow the home run hitter to miss first and that was ignored. Why? If home is more important in the Robin Ventura example, I would like to see why it is less so in yours.
I'm not sure why you won't respond directly, if you've read my pieces and were honest with yourself, you'd know there is validity in my cause. I was castigated three years ago when I first proposed that umpiring was changing and conferencing would replace replay as the modus. I said that it would sneak into collegiate baseball and it did. Our world is changing and we are more accountable, even on the LL fields. Video cameras have changed the way we behaved thirty years ago. We are paid to do a job and I believe that means hustling, being in the best position to make the call, communicating and relying on your crew for help. Maybe this isn't the way it is done in your neighborhood. If that is the case then you have a much more difficult job than I.
Agreeing to disagree was first put forth by Carl in the now deleted thread. I agreed with his diplomacy and have tried to promote this concept. My job is not to enlighten or convince you anymore than Carl, JJ, Sal or any other reasoned umpire. Providing a valid counterpoint when appropriate is. You say safe and I say out. Each of us believes we are correct. We should be used to that after all of these years.
|