|
|||
Quote:
One preaches authoritative opinion, official interpretation, rulebook, analogy, etc. The PBUC ruling appears disliked and not well understood. One has stated in the thread he would not apply this ruling to Fed. Does that not contradict a previous teaching of analogy? Why not use the PBUC ruling as an analogical source? I suppose because doing so would not support a desired position. Is that not selectively applying the logic? Let's face it, that is really no different than selectively applying the rules. The eUmperors appear to be selectively choosing only that which supports their position. At least that is how it appears to me. Well, the next time I read what is preached, I must ask myself am I reading what should be done, or am I reading only that which is presented in the manner the eUmperors choose? Am I really getting all the facts? I don't understand the inconsistency. I am not wrong for questioning it. Just my opinion, Steve Member EWS aka: (my eUmperor labels) Rat Neo-Romantic Neo-Know-Nothing Obscure Umpire from North Texas Blow Hard Die Hard Liar |
Bookmarks |
|
|