|
Philly,
Please understand first that Pete and I go back quite a ways on the internet boards. We have also had "off line" e-mail conversations about issues. Pete can stand up for himself.
My post is mainly an opinion about the "self made" historical "experts" that think that knowing the complete history of rules is paramount to understanding the rules as we call them in today's game.
Judgement and knowledge of rules is NOT what the post is about. I "expect" umpires to know the rules they are calling . . . I expect nothing more, and they need nothing more about "history" of the rules or the game to be a great umpire.
Hey being in your area means that you have GREAT fresh crab, good golf and a green landscape. What you do not need, in my opinion, is "some history" about a rule to call it correctly.
That is the point.
THAT'S THE LIST!!
Philly I understand that Pete was just trying to start a thread. I answered that by giving almost a view 180* different than his feelings, I cannot think that there would be a BETTER answer to the original post than my answer.
It gives two divergent points that come to the exact same conclusion -- a perfect start to a thread that could last the winter.
[Edited by Tim C on Dec 23rd, 2002 at 11:44 AM]
|