Quote:
Originally posted by His High Holiness
3. There was malice of forethought in my post. I was fairly sure that some MLB groupies here at eumpire would jump on the bandwagon and support an MLB umpire, no matter what his qualifications. That would get the ball rolling as the purests among us would see the fallacy of the ancient MLB umpire. The fact that Jim Porter joined the groupie party was icing on the cake.
Garth was right to call Jim Porter on Jim's lack of scholarly argument in backing up the postion to call it a balk. I can't prove it, of course, but I would bet that Jim would have been on the other side of the argument had it not been an "MLB umpire" (ooooooh) saying it was a balk.
|
Wrong. I argued this same topic on the original UmpireTalk years ago. I was alone then, too. I have it in the archives. Would you like to see? Fact is, your little story about the MLU had nothing to do with the opinion I drew and I can prove it.
I don't have a problem being alone with my opinions. For example, I was alone with my opinion that a right-handed pitcher who steps backwards with his pivot foot toward first has not committed a balk. Garth acted like a child and started calling me names when I held that position, too. Turned out the PBUC backed up my lone opinion. The difference? I didn't blow trumpets and set up a parade to show the world how right I was. I also didn't seek to embarass Garth or anyone else for their incorrect opinion.