
Thu Feb 27, 2003, 07:20pm
|
Official Forum Member
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: USA
Posts: 14,565
|
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Roger Greene
A couple of observations.
I think umpires could stay out of this arguement if we would refer to "trained" umpires vs "untrained" umpires. I suspect that is what the author meant when he unfortunatly used the words volunteer and paid. (I can't be sure, as I'm a bit too cheap to pay for the online magazine.) Most of us would agree that any umpire needs to be trained and educated, paid or not.
The second point is that I don't think I would question the intellegence of Carl Childress. He is very knowlegable with regard to baseball rules and mechanics. He is a retired educator, and accomplished author. He does not profess to know beans about softball. He has a "crusty" internet personality untill you establish a relationship with him, just as many characters I meet around ball fields do in real life.
Is Carl a baseball snob with regard to the softball game. Yes. Just as some of our posters are softball snobs or maybe ASA snobs. Does that lessen their intelect, value as a person, a cyber-personality or as a poster of information? Heck no. I expect even Mike and I could enjoy doing a game together.
Wha-d-ya-think, Mike?
Roger Greene
|
I never questioned his knowledge of baseball. I have had conversations (online) with Carl concerning softball and umpiring, but my opinion should not persuade others in any manner, so I will leave it at that for this board.
__________________
The bat issue in softball is as much about liability, insurance and litigation as it is about competition, inflated egos and softball.
|