Threads about articles on the paid site

[David B]

Originally posted by Carl Childress

My opinion: Roland was as wrong as anyone could be when he suggested that the UIC should interfere with his partner's call at first. Several said he should wait until asked. I say the UIC has no business messing with that call ever, under any circumstance. You all know what I think about "get it right at all costs." ....

Blaine Gallant's piece appears on Monday. He rips Roland. But Blaine ain't a wannabe, having called several national tournaments in Canada.

Nothing wrong with allowing the writers to write what they want; however, as you stated above, the article by Roland was completely a "bad" move by an umpiring crew.

I read Blaine's article, and thanks goodness someone had time to write a rebuttal. And Blaine did a very good job.

The papers and magazines that I choose to read are full of articles that I don't read, or I don't agree with; however, in the context of being a site that is supposed to help officials, there needs to be and often times there is a view from the "other side."

Without, I could see a young umpire who might just take the "bad" advice and actually apply it to their game and end up in big trouble.

Thanks
David