View Single Post
  #31 (permalink)  
Old Wed Oct 30, 2013, 10:14am
Manny A Manny A is offline
Stirrer of the Pot
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Lowcountry, SC
Posts: 2,380
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluehair View Post
Why does your "temper" reason for a no-collision rule have to compete for importance with the injury prevention reason for a no-collision rule. These reasons don't conflict. Unless you deny that an injury prevention reason exists (deny a testosterone-filled teenager could seriously injure another), then to say that your temper reason is more significant than the injury prevention reason is just silly.
I never said these two were mutually exclusive. Of course there is concern over injuries.

But I personally feel (and this is just me) that preventing confrontations was foremost on the minds of those who wrote the FPSR and other rules geared to minimize contact. I've seen these kids when they play tournaments for their Little League Seniors and Bigs teams after the high school season is over, and they realize there is no FPSR. They take full advantage of playing like the pros do, and inevitably there's taunting, pushing, shoving, etc. It happens almost every season.
__________________
"Let's face it. Umpiring is not an easy or happy way to make a living. In the abuse they suffer, and the pay they get for it, you see an imbalance that can only be explained by their need to stay close to a game they can't resist." -- Bob Uecker
Reply With Quote