Quote:
Originally Posted by mbyron
The personal comments about you were not the initial response. First, people said that you were wrong to be charitable here: there's just no way to call obstruction on this play. You were also wrong to suggest a warning, as there is nothing against the rules on this play, and no provision for warning in the rules.
Your charity is admirable in trying to find some way to make the chuckleheads from the OP turn out to be correct. But your resistance to correction and unwillingness to apply the rules led to the personal comments about you. Apart from the question of their appropriateness, that's my take on what caused them.
So if you're sincere in your desire for help, be prepared to accept it in the form of statements to the effect that you're wrong. You can choose to accept that and learn from it, or you can get defensive and try to justify yourself. Some folks would not regard the second option as learning.
|
Exactly. Not only was there nothing happening to rule against. There was nothing happening to warn about.
Doing either would be outside the rules.
Fittske's insistance to the contrary is what exposed him to criticism and made him appear to be, at best, inexperienced.