Quote:
Originally posted by WhatWuzThatBlue
And you don't have the ability to argue logically.
But, then again you are the King of The Expected Call Millieu. (big grin)
You love to play fast and loose with the facts. No one ever said that the interp for the lodged ball would be changed. On the contrary, many argue how ridiculous the rule is and used their voices to effect change. Maybe it will happen, maybe it won't - like the missed base that you see and ignore, some of us use our judgement differently. If you can't see the infraction, you don't make the call. Maybe they don't teach that in Texas anymore.
Once again, you couldn't help yourself. You took it personally and found that the only way you can argue is to defame an entire state. Why don't you email Anthony Holman directly and impugn Illinois high school baseball again? I'm sure that your reputation will remain unsullied when you've alienated an NFHS Baseball Committee member. I'm sure he knows no one with TASO.
I'm not worried about debating TAC, he seems to be able to stick to the facts and not resort to first grade histrionics. Confidence in our abilities is not misplaced ego. You keep living in the gutter but claim the palace as your home. The King seems to have forgotten his clothes. Once again, your true colors are there for everyone to see.
|
All right, perhaps I was wrong. Here's what you wrote last year in the "toss glove" thread. (Enlarged type indicates the words of WCB, a.k.a. WhatWuzThatBlue.)
9/1/2004
[Rich Fronhesier pointed out that the lead interpretation for 2005 would be a "lodged ball is dead." In response to WCB, Rich said he'd hate to be the umpire who refused to enforce the first iinterretation of the year.]
Sorry Rich,
I just got off the phone with one of the IHSA Rules Interpreters and he confirmed that NFSHS even had an overhead Point of Clarification on this exact play.
Any player that secures the ball in a glove or hand in order to effect the out has complied with the rules. There is no penalty for tossing, handing or kicking the mitt to the other player.
Further, If that ball gets hung up in the laces of the glove or between the fingers, who is in jeopardy? What advantage does the defense gain? What disadvantage does the batter or runner have? His/Her job is to beat the ball to the bag...they failed.
You can disagree with this all you want. Call it and see what happens. You will be wrong, two rules support it.
BTW, the state interpreter I spoke to, sits on the rules committee that advises the NFSHS about points of emphasis, clarification or rules updates/alterations.
[So WCB argued that the interpretation quoted would NOT be adopted: "The NFSHS even had an overhead Point of Claification on this exact play." The ball isn't dead.]
9/3/2004
A "National Interpretation" may be of no consequence for those of us that have logical rule interpreters in our state. Once again, check with your official rule interpreter or state association. We have already seen several states that will not permit the "national interp".
9/7/2004
[Arguing still that the NFHS rules committee was populated by people who know nothing about baseball.]
These are the same geniuses that tried to make it illegal to throw it around the horn after a strikeout. It figures that they would get this one wrong, as well. I'm proud to live in a state that has disagreed with illogical NFSHS rule interpretations. Our rule interpretors [sic] use common sense to govern the game. I feel sad for those of you that will HAVE TO call this according to the Fed interp.
-------
I think everyone who reads your words can understand why I believed the boys in Illinois had decided to step to the beat of a different drummer.
The FED believed the "lodged ball" play happened only once in California. You told us it happened in Illinois and Colorado though you offered no internet sites where we could verify that.
But, so be it: three times.
On the other hand, the action (verbal inferference) you plan to ignore this time happens once or twice a game - unless the FED umpire puts a stop to it by enforcing the rule.
Once again, I can explain the difference between our philosophies:
I have argued the umpire should ignore a technical balk: The pitcher, reacting to his coach, steps back slowly from the pitcher's plate
with the wrong foot and moves to the set position. He did not gain any advantage, so I won't call that balk.
You argue that the umpire should ignore a defensive player pretending to be a coach. Everyone knows the defense can gain an advantage that way.
But you won't enforce it because you don't like it.
Shame on you. Again!
By the end of
Twelve Angry Men, Henry Fonda has convinced 10 other jurors that the defendant is not guilty. One, Lee J. Cobb, holds out. Fonda tells him: "You're all alone. How does it feel to be all alone?"