Pulled Foot - A first

[rmstone]

Ok lets lay it out!!

Best Plan:

A BALANCE of "Getting it right" and "Trusting your partner"... where the line of balance is is up to you...

There, argument over Both are solid ideas, so I don't suggest going one way or another... use what best fits the situation...

[JRutledge]

I am in the middle.

I believe that you have to get the plays right that you can. But you also have to ultimately trust your partner. Getting it right has very little with asking for help in my opinion. If you take your time, get your timing, see the whole play, you will get the plays right.

Peace

[akalsey]

There's sense coming from both sides of this arguement. On one hand, the whole point behind an umpire being on the field is to make the call right. On the other hand, you've got to trust your partner to do their job right.

Everyone on this board has common sense (although some may disagree with that statement ). I think we've all been in situations where we made a questionable call that we knew wasn't the best call we could have made. If your partner was there and saw it, then get things right. But keep your head on straight and don't have a conference everytime the coach asks. If a coach keeps asking about a pitch location, you'll start to ignore him or toss him. Same thing if a coach starts coming out and arguing every call.

If the situation warrants it, take whatever steps are needed to get the call right. But don't run to your partner on every close force play to ask if they saw the fielder pull their foot.

[JRutledge]

Originally posted by akalsey
There's sense coming from both sides of this arguement. On one hand, the whole point behind an umpire being on the field is to make the call right. On the other hand, you've got to trust your partner to do their job right.

Everyone on this board has common sense (although some may disagree with that statement ). I think we've all been in situations where we made a questionable call that we knew wasn't the best call we could have made. If your partner was there and saw it, then get things right. But keep your head on straight and don't have a conference everytime the coach asks. If a coach keeps asking about a pitch location, you'll start to ignore him or toss him. Same thing if a coach starts coming out and arguing every call.

If the situation warrants it, take whatever steps are needed to get the call right. But don't run to your partner on every close force play to ask if they saw the fielder pull their foot.

[DG]

I have seen many times where one basketball official says ball out of bounds off blue, and partner comes running up and says ball out of bounds off white, and the ruling changes. It happens way more often that one ump overuling another.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by DG
I have seen many times where one basketball official says ball out of bounds off blue, and partner comes running up and says ball out of bounds off white, and the ruling changes. It happens way more often that one ump overuling another.

Wrong. There is a specific rule in basketball that will NOT allow one official to OVERULE another official. Ever! You can offer information or your opinion to another official, but it is completely up to the calling official as to whether or not he wants to change a call.

NFHS Rule 2-6- "No official has the authority to set aside or question decisions made by the other official(s) within the limits of their respective outlined duties". NCAA rules use similar language.

No overuling in basketball below the NBA level! And I don't have a clue whether they allow overuling at the NBA level either.

[WindyCityBlue]

Wow, you must have missed the NCAA tourney.

In the first round Texas Tech game, the ball was whistled out and awarded incorrectly. The crowd went crazy and one of the other officials hustled in and must have convinced him that it was deflected - the correct call. Knight looked perplexed but kept his cool since everyone there, except for the guy making the initial call, knew it was the right thing to do. If there is one coach that will jump all over a guy for usurping his authority, it's the General.

[JRutledge]

Originally posted by WindyCityBlue
Wow, you must have missed the NCAA tourney.

In the first round Texas Tech game, the ball was whistled out and awarded incorrectly. The crowd went crazy and one of the other officials hustled in and must have convinced him that it was deflected - the correct call. Knight looked perplexed but kept his cool since everyone there, except for the guy making the initial call, knew it was the right thing to do. If there is one coach that will jump all over a guy for usurping his authority, it's the General.

The calling official, changed the call. Unlike baseball, basketball officials coverage areas are constantly changing. The ball is in constant movement. There are times when a specific official does not see the entire play. I did not see exactly the play you discribe, but I am sure the out of bounds play that you discribe, was the non-calling official giving information. And in basketball, that is totally acceptable on mainly out of bound calls. You cannot do that on foul calls. You cannot tell your partner about a traveling violation. You can mainly do that on out of bounds plays. And even when that happens, it is rare. In baseball, I have nothing else to do but watch a particular base. There are only so many runners at one time. The ball determines what is going to happen, unlike basketball. If I cannot get an angle on a pulled foot, I am not taking my time to make most calls.

I also find it funny that now you want to tell basketball officials of their procedures and practices. See in basketball we have a locker room. If you pull that "get it right crap" on plays they see, you might not come out of that locker room with out an earfull.

Peace

[His High Holiness]

Originally posted by GarthB
One problem with "slippery slope" arguments like the one you make is that they are often, as in this case, based on ridiculous exaggerations of a point that was never intended to be that encompassing. My logics professor referred to it as arguments of the absurd that poeple fall back on when they either can't make their own point within realistic bounds or have no substantiating data.

Instead of altering others' points, address them as made, either pro or con, doesn't matter. Just don't feel so free to put words in others' mouths. Unless of course you're auditioning for a writing gig at officiating.com

Garth;

When I saw the umpire from Illinois' post, I almost wrote a short treastise on "argument absurdium." Then I realized that it would be lost on someone with only a sixth grade comprehension level. I understood exactly what you were writing about and I am sure that most others that can read did also. All but the one that you were trying to communicate with, however.

I take exception to your implication that the umpire from Illinois could write for officating.com. Carl is very low on inventory at the moment (Carl: I am working on a piece this weekend which I should have to you by Tuesday), but I doubt that he is so desperate as to sign up the umpire from Illinois. But I could be wrong.

That leads me to an interesting bet that I would like to make with you and it has a bonus for Rut:

Garth: I will pay you my next article fee ($35) if Rut can become a writer for officiating.com. I figure it this way. Rut has written about 3600 posts, most of them lengthy, lets say an average of 400 words. An officiating.com article should be 800-1000 words which gets the author $35.

At that rate, Rut has written the equivalent of 1800 articles over the that last 4 years or so. At $35 per article, that's $63,000 in unrealized income that he could have made as an officiating.com writer. According to him, he is a master with valuable information for us all. If he doesn't want to write about baseball, he could dazzle us with basketball or football instead.

Now Garth, you are convinced that Rut is officiating.com writer's material. You make references to this regularly. Therefore, you should be a shoe-in to win the $35 from me.

OTOH, if Carl turns Rut down as a full time writer, then you have to sign up as an officiating.com subscriber. We will define success as a full time writer when Rut publishes his 10th article. (I am already up to 100 articles and my writing ability is much less prolific than the great Rut.)

OK, Rut, your reputation is on the line here. You are already spending many hours a day on this and other boards. By my calcualtions, you turn out the euquivalent of ten articles a week here and at McGriffs. If you posted less here and put your brilliance to work on paid pieces, you could have money in your pocket with no extra time invested. And you could prove to the world that you are a brilliant writer and your critics are full of horse manure.

This is your opportunity, Rut. Become a writer for officiating.com. Garth washed out. Rich Fronheiser ran out of ideas and washed out. Warren Willson washed out. The great Rut has the opportunity to succeed when others have failed. From your writings, I know that you will never run out of ideas.

Peter

[JRutledge]

Originally posted by His High Holiness
Garth;

When I saw the umpire from Illinois' post, I almost wrote a short treastise on "argument absurdium." Then I realized that it would be lost on someone with only a sixth grade comprehension level. I understood exactly what you were writing about and I am sure that most others that can read did also. All but the one that you were trying to communicate with, however.

You know Peter, I guess TH has a 6th grade understanding as well. Because he said the exact same thing but much shorter. Because a player has an opinion, does not mean they are to be listened to about officiating issues. I also guess the Hawk coach is having problems with my point of view as well, considering that he agreed with a post directed at Garth.

Originally posted by His High Holiness
OK, Rut, your reputation is on the line here. You are already spending many hours a day on this and other boards. By my calcualtions, you turn out the euquivalent of ten articles a week here and at McGriffs. If you posted less here and put your brilliance to work on paid pieces, you could have money in your pocket with no extra time invested. And you could prove to the world that you are a brilliant writer and your critics are full of horse manure.

So my reputation is on the line, because some ball-headed, viagra using fool thinks I need a discussion board to validate my opinions? I realize you live a a much smaller area than I do, but I think you need to get a grip on reality.

Originally posted by His High Holiness
This is your opportunity, Rut. Become a writer for officiating.com. Garth washed out. Rich Fronheiser ran out of ideas and washed out. Warren Willson washed out. The great Rut has the opportunity to succeed when others have failed. From your writings, I know that you will never run out of ideas.

No Peter. Just like Rich found out, I like my independence. I like the fact that I can say what I say and if I offend someone, I do not have to answer to anyone. Unlike Windy, I do not come here to represent an organization. I come here to represent myself.

But please do not try to convince everyone here that Garth's point of view is so widely accepted and what I had to say was so out there. I realize that you think I am not a very well respected umpire here (like that means a hill of beans in the real world). But in the sport I work the most, I get along here very well. If I were to become a writer here, it surely would not be in baseball. I only spend 3 months out of the year even working a baseball game. I have not done a baseball game since June 3rd, which was my Regional Championship game. I have not missed it one bit and have worked about 40 basketball games and counting in the month of June alone.

So Peter (which fits you perfectly), you seemed to be obsessed with this board and McGriffs. You cannot even write an article without referencing the internet. Some of us have a life outside of this place. Even Windy gets out of the house from time to time. When are you going to smell the fresh air? Because if you are worried about someone's reputation here, you really need to get out more often.

Peace

[WindyCityBlue]

He just couldn't help himself...my post was directed directly to another member. It specifically addressed a point that he made and found error with it. Rut then jumps in without seeing how deep it is.

The calling official, changed the call.

Wow, just like baseball, when your partner confers with you and says that the ball hit the foul pole or that the fielder was off the bag on a force play.

Unlike baseball, basketball officials coverage areas are constantly changing. The ball is in constant movement.
Hmmm...in baseball, the ball remains still? There are no other worries (interference, obstruction, missed bases, bobbled catches)?

There are times when a specific official does not see the entire play.
Yes, like in the baseball discussion we have had here.

I did not see exactly the play you discribe, but I am sure the out of bounds play that you discribe, was the non-calling official giving information.
Okay, kind of like a pulled foot, fould ball off the batter's foot, foul pole call, etc.

And in basketball, that is totally acceptable on mainly out of bound calls. You cannot do that on foul calls. You cannot tell your partner about a traveling violation. You can mainly do that on out of bounds plays.

Okay, your point is...? I don't believe that I ever said that EVERY CALL can and should be over ruled. I said that if your partner comes to you and says that he saw something different, you should do the right thing and correct the call. He has put himself in a position to help, not big league you.

In baseball, I have nothing else to do but watch a particular base. There are only so many runners at one time. The ball determines what is going to happen, unlike basketball. If I cannot get an angle on a pulled foot, I am not taking my time to make most calls.
Six guys - the best of the best - in the NLCS at Wrigley last year. 12 eyes and no one sees the ball caught by Kenny Lofton. As I recall, each guy only has one responsibility and not much else was happening. But you're probably more talented, that is why you don't need help.

I also find it funny that now you want to tell basketball officials of their procedures and practices.

I didn't say anything of the sort. I pointed out a play in direct response to a statement saying that such doesn't happen. No mechanics or techniques discussed. Or did you miss that, too?

See in basketball we have a locker room. If you pull that "get it right crap" on plays they see, you might not come out of that locker room with out an earfull.
Uh oh, you mean you guys might yell at me for critiquing my partner's performance??? That's awfully thin skinned of you cagers. I like having my partners discuss the job we did, usually over a beer. We get better that way. Too bad, you don't want people to pick at your game.

[His High Holiness]

Originally posted by JRutledge
[
No Peter. Just like Rich found out, I like my independence. I like the fact that I can say what I say and if I offend someone, I do not have to answer to anyone.
Peace

Rut;

Carl gives his writers complete independence. He doesn't care that I regularly tick off the readership. The more controversy the better and believe me, there are a lot of people that get ticked off at what I write. I have the undying hatred of Little Leaguers and t-ballers.

The only thing that I can't do is call Carl an a$$hole, even if he is.

This argument won't wash, Rut. You cannot use as an excuse that you will lose your independence. It just isn't true. I am living proof of that. Four years ago, there was no one on the Internet that Carl hated more than me. I am sure that anyone who has been around that long will bear me out.

He still hired me because I had something useful to say and was entertaining in the process. He will hire you if you have something useful to say in a language that bears a resemblance to English. Many of us writers lack professional journalism skills; he hires us anyway and edits out our worst mistakes.

So, Rut, it's time to put up. I know you won't shut up. The major posters at officiating.com have all taken a stab at writing an article or two for the site. Only the trolls with no names or the total newbies with nothing to say, sit on the sidelines.

It's time for to step up to the plate and take your turn at bat. You are doing the work by writing tons of stuff, why not get paid for it.

Unless of course, you are worried about rejection and being exposed as a fraud.

Naw, not the great Rut.

Peter

[His High Holiness]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by JRutledge

You know Peter, I guess TH has a 6th grade understanding as well. Because he said the exact same thing but much shorter. Because a player has an opinion, does not mean they are to be listened to about officiating issues. I also guess the Hawk coach is having problems with my point of view as well, considering that he agreed with a post directed at Garth.


Peace

Who is TH? I don't see any post by someone named TH. Are you making stuff up again?

Who is the Hawk coach? I don't see anyone posting to this thread called "Hawk Coach." Are you making stuff up again?

Furthermore, I don't see anyone agreeing with you. I do see a post by YOU claiming that someone is agreeing with you but there is doubt as to whether he was refering to Garth's post.

You are 0-3, Rut. Some batters have bad days and go 0-3. Try tomorrow.

[JRutledge]

Originally posted by His High Holiness
Rut;

Carl gives his writers complete independence. He doesn't care that I regularly tick off the readership. The more controversy the better and believe me, there are a lot of people that get ticked off at what I write. I have the undying hatred of Little Leaguers and t-ballers.

So.

Originally posted by His High Holiness
The only thing that I can't do is call Carl an a$$hole, even if he is.

You just did.

Originally posted by His High Holiness
This argument won't wash, Rut. You cannot use as an excuse that you will lose your independence. It just isn't true. I am living proof of that. Four years ago, there was no one on the Internet that Carl hated more than me. I am sure that anyone who has been around that long will bear me out.

So.

Originally posted by His High Holiness
He still hired me because I had something useful to say and was entertaining in the process. He will hire you if you have something useful to say in a language that bears a resemblance to English. Many of us writers lack professional journalism skills; he hires us anyway and edits out our worst mistakes.

Whatever you say.

Originally posted by His High Holiness
So, Rut, it's time to put up. I know you won't shut up. The major posters at officiating.com have all taken a stab at writing an article or two for the site. Only the trolls with no names or the total newbies with nothing to say, sit on the sidelines

They have? JR has? Tony has? There was a list of the Top 10 Posters at one time on this board. I believe all of them were primarily Basketball Officials. I think none of them except maybe Bob J. wrote for this site. And Bob only did that on the Baseball Board. I would not want to write about baseball umpiring, not with my lack of interest during most of the year. I am a month away from my first Football Meetings and I have enough to do there as a Board Member.

Originally posted by His High Holiness
It's time for to step up to the plate and take your turn at bat. You are doing the work by writing tons of stuff, why not get paid for it.

I do not need any money. Maybe you do, but I have better ways to make my money.

Originally posted by His High Holiness
Unless of course, you are worried about rejection and being exposed as a fraud.

I sit on at least one board in each of my sports. I am the Vice President of one of my Basketball Boards. I am the Treasurer of my Football Board (elected twice). I was just elected on my Baseball Board (I was nominated without being asked). And I sat as the Vice President of that very same baseball board for two years. I also will represent another association (Which I am a member in football and basketball) as a delegate to the IHSA Convention in about two weeks. If I was a fraud, I would never have been given the responsiblity to make decisions that I have to make. I would never have been voted in these positions and I would have been asked to speak at all the major clinics (all 3 sports I might add) that are put on in my area. I only say this because if I was a complete fraud, I would never have been given these opportunities ever. And I have worked playoffs in all my sports. So if I am a fraud, I am really fooling a lot of people. Espeically considering that many of these people that have voted for me or asked me to get involved, have seen me work on the field. Or they assign me to work games for them as well. I would rather become a writer on Referee Magazine or the NF Quarterly, where people literally across the country really read and follow the information in those articles. I have never heard anyone outside of this board talk about your article. But I have had several conversations about what was said in the other publications. But then again, that might mean that you are not as important as you think you are.

Peace

[His High Holiness]

Originally posted by JRutledge

So my reputation is on the line, because some ball-headed, viagra using fool thinks I need a discussion board to validate my opinions? I realize you live a a much smaller area than I do, but I think you need to get a grip on reality.


Peace

Rut;

You are the first to get offended when someone uses your race to criticize you, as you have a right to be. The color of your skin is not something that you can do anything about unless you want to go the Michael Jackson route which is a bid weird. It is not relevant to any discussion about the correctness of umpire opinions.

Likewise, my baldness is not something that I can do anything about and your reference to it is bigoted and inappropriate. My potency or lack thereof is also nothing that I can do anything about and your reference to it is bigoted and inappropriate.

On the other hand, your failure to master the English language is your fault and a rightful source of criticism on our part.

Likewise, your failure to master proper forms of debate is entirely your own and we have a right to criticize it. You arguments based on my disabilites or absurd analogies are no more relevant than arguments based on the color of your skin.

Now I wonder only one thing. Are the above simply stated paragraphs, simple enough for you brain to understand? Or are you as stupid as the KKK bigots that bedeviled your forefathers?

Oh Rut, one more lie that you told. It's one that you have repeated often. You wrote:

"I realize you live a a much smaller area than I do, but I think you need to get a grip on reality."

I umpire from the North Carolina border to the Mason Dixon Line. This area encompasses 15 million people.

How many people live in Northern Illinois where you umpire? Who needs to get a grip on reality now?

Peter