Re: Hehehehe,
 

Kaliix intoned:

"STOP F$*#$NG RESPONDING TO THE QUESTION/THREAD."

Now we see the articulate ones are chiming in . . .

Actually I have come back to add to this message because what Kaliix writes really bothers me.

What Kaliix has suggested is what is wrong with umpire websites and, in a sense, America.

If we do not respond to a post such as this by our silence we are allowing something wrong (in our opinion) to go forward.

Kaliix, we are actually the ones that "do get it!" We are the ones that make sure that a second side of an issue is reported, that a second opinion is offered and that correctness, as we see it, reaches umpires.

Tee

Please note Kaliix that I did offer the correct ruling on this TWP.

Re: Mmmmmm,
 

The proper spelling is "mast<b>u</b>rbation".

Consider that a slap on the hand. :D

Tee, Fwiw, in our football and basketball training meetings, we deliberately avoid TWP's. Mainly, we avoid them because we found that if we discussed some oddball play that really never happens, we always had a coupla guys that would make sure they'd find the same call that we were discussing in one of their games, no matter how big of a stretch the call might actually be. Did you ever find the same phenomenon with some of your baseball umps?

Just wondering.

Re: Mmmmmm,
 

Tee,

So what's wrong with masturbation? Or are you too old and fat to do that? :D

Bob

Re: Yep,
 

Tim,
First to your little "articulate" job. I would venture to say that if you look at my posting history, I am one of the more articulate writers here. Using one expletive to make a point does not make me inarticulate. I was trying to get your attention because....

While you may have answered the question, you made (wasted) five posts before answering it. In the post you did answer the question in, your long and rambling post probably served to confuse the young inexperienced umpire more than help him, as you took 45 lines and 446 words to explain what could have been explained like this,

You Tim and everyone who agrees with you are the ones that don't get it. Any one of you could have made one post that answered the question and stated that the TWP's are a waste of time.

Instead, you made 12 posts on this thread alone and the others who agree with you made 15 more posts. All that does is serve to keep this thread on the top of the board, initially giving it credibility and piquing the interest of those umpires who you don't want to read this post in the first place.

In total, everyone who thought this was a stupid post to ever discuss in the first place managed to post 27 times in this thread. For people who didn't think this post warranted discussion and didn't want to confuse younger umpires with it's content, you did a very good job posting to the thread, highlighting it to everyone on the board and making sure that most people who post to this board read the thread.

Good job! You managed to do exactly what you stated you didn't want to do.

(shaking head in disbelief)

Hehehehehe,
 

Kaliix writes:

"I would venture to say that if you look at my posting history, I am one of the more articulate writers here."

And modest too . . .

Kaliix writes:

" . . .you made (wasted) five posts . . ."

God, I love reviews!

Kaliix writes:

"You Tim and everyone who agrees with you are the ones that don't get it."

Well, there were some pretty good guys in the thread that simply disagree with you . . .

It is nice to know that someone has finally passed me on the ego meter.

Tee

Tim,
I only answered your criticism of my being articulate. I am, for the most part, modest. I am, however, honest enough to know my abilities and being able to write well is one of them.

My statement of you wasting posts was only made to point out to you that you are, as you put it,
wasting bandwidth. It was not intended as a review.

As far as having "some pretty good guys in the thread that simply disagree with you" I say the following. All you pretty good guys agree that discussing TWP's is a waste of "time, intellect and bandwidth" yet you still continue to make posts to this thread. (The count being up to 28 at this point). You doing exactly what you stated you didn't want to do, which is waste "time, intellect and bandwidth". By your continued response to this thread, you continue to keep it at the top of the board, make it a hot topic, and also ensure that even more people will read the thread and perhaps become confused because we are discussing TWP's.

You are doing everything that you previously stated you didn't want to do. Congratulations, you still don't get...

(shaking head and chuckling)

TWP Forum
 

Obviously there are at least two camps with differing viewpoints concerning the relative merits(or lack thereof) of posting TWPs. Why not create a forum specifically for these off-the-wall plays? That way anyone who opens those threads knows beforehand their contents; those who don't want to contemplate TWPs, or the permutations which may arise from them, will know to avoid that forum.

That's a good idea. But, I'm afraid, those who don't want to see them would still post that they don't want to see them. They just can't help themselves.

Re: TWP Forum
 

I don't know if perhaps I was included in this group(for TWPs), but for the record, I am not arguing for one side or the other. I am just pointing out the folly of continuing to post in this thread. :)

This thread is beginning to make me miss the
days of the two windy city boys arguing.........

Under no circumstance can the pitch result in a "batted ball."

If we allow a "batted ball" then we might as well ask this:

What if, while the pitch is halfway to the plate, the batter *throws* his bat at the pitch, making contact with the ball a good 30-feet in front of the plate, and the bat actually *hits* the ball?

These type of travesties of the game cannot be permitted and I think there is a good case for 9.01(c) to be invoked.

I think under all circumstances I would rule a "no pitch", kill the play, and admonish the batter to cease further similar activity or be subjected to an ejection.

I know there are those who believe that there is hardly ever a practical application of 9.01(c). But, in this case, I don't see what rule you would apply without making a foolish ruling by trying to tenuously adhere to some marginally-applicable rule.

And, by the way, I agree with Rich - I think TWP's can often provide a useful academic exericise that can frequently result in a deeper understanding of the rules.

Actually, the initial poster of this TWP obviously gave some thought into it by purposely interjecting some elements that hit upon some critical elements of the rules that would normally apply - albeit in a very bizarre scanerio.

If an umpire continually dismisses such silliness with a shrug of the shoulder and rationalizes, "That will *never* happen", there will come a time when something bizarre actually WILL happen in one of his games - and he'll be one of those "deer in the headlight" umpires.

David Emerling
Memphis, TN

Amen, Brother David.

Elitist fools...
 

I have been away from this site for a while because of increased work schedule and family responsibilities. When I came back today, I found this garbage! While I agree that the situation that started this thread is ridiculous, the response coming from supposed mature people that have been here in the past helping others that are just learning is even more ridiculous.

The way you guys put down others from other websites and those that don't do the same level of ball as you is immature and insulting. No wonder there is a shortage of officials...who needs this crap from fellow umpires when we have to deal with it from spectators, coaches and players. This should be one place that an umpire feels good about coming to for information, instruction, training, and yes, even an absurd play here and there to improve the problem solving aspect of umpiring.

Tim C., I used to have a great deal of respect for you. However, after reading the filth that has spewed forth from your keyboard on this thread, you have lost my confidence completely.

It's not likely that we will be partners. However, should the opportunity arise, I will turn it down. You, sir, are a disgrace.

Umpires that are new, learning, and becoming better need the help and assistance of experienced umpires, not their disdain and insults.

Good day.

Ok Class, todays lesson is on:

C O N T R A D I C T I O N

Pay attention here!! Johnnie.

"The way you guys put down others from other websites and those that don't do the same level of ball as you is immature and insulting. No wonder there is a shortage of officials...who needs this crap from fellow umpires when we have to deal with it from spectators, coaches and players. This should be one place that an umpire feels good about coming to for information, instruction, training, and yes, even an absurd play here and there to improve the problem solving aspect of umpiring."

"It's not likely that we will be partners. However, should the opportunity arise, I will turn it down. You, sir, are a disgrace."

Miss Brown, Miss Brown, "Can I please be excused to go to the bathroom, I think I am sick to my stomach."

Yes you can Johnnie.

Amen,ji,amen.Apparently the pot DOES call the
kettle black......