|
PatF writes: Easy answer... Exactly Zero. Garth has made it quite clear that anyone opting for personal protection versus doing it the way the pros do, has no place on his, or any other assignors' fields.
Another fine example of rewording to make one's point. If you can't make your point without changing what one has said, you haven't thought it out very clearly.
What I actually said was: "There are ways of protecting oneself without projecting the image someone who came out of the stands to fill in."
And I said " Because no one who uses that stance will ever move up in the association beyond that level."
So your first statement is correct, zero. Why? Because here umpires who refuse to follow association mechanics do not get to work the competitive level of ball that will be necessary to work this tournament. And that was their choice.
However, I never said and never implied and never believed that an umpire has to forgo "personal protection." I believe it can be accomplished while taking a correct stance.
[Edited by GarthB on Jul 29th, 2003 at 04:51 PM]
__________________
GB
|