Quote:
Originally posted by Jerry
Warren:
Wow! You Aussies sure do take things personally. My only criticism (if you can call it that; evidently you did)was your solution of invoking 9.01(c) when there are perfectly acceptable rulings which already cover that scenario.
Sorry you took offense at the "Third World" comment. It was meant as . . . "when abnormal situations occur (which are not covered in a rule book), THEN extraordinary solutions should used." I didn't mean to imply that the events cited in the thread were abnormal at all.
The "think it through" admonition was intended as a generality to all officials; not as a reply to your solution.
I've always respected your thoughtful considerations and remarks; but also feel that there are other points of views and alternative rulings that could be acceptable in given circumstances.
Jerry
|
Please don't judge all Aussies by me - for one thing the others don't have certain posters (not you Jerry) looking to criticize every word they write. I probably overreacted. My apologies for that.
I agree that there are other equally valid points of view in the circumstances. I'm not sure I'd agree that there are alternative rulings in THIS circumstance, but I am certainly prepared to admit that I might be 100% wrong about that.
Thank you for not escalating my overreaction into yet another flame war. It is most appreciated.
Cheers