The Official Forum - Revised: First, Osborne; Second, Christensen

The Official Forum (https://forum.officiating.com/)

- Baseball (https://forum.officiating.com/baseball/)

- - Revised: First, Osborne; Second, Christensen (https://forum.officiating.com/baseball/22644-revised-first-osborne-second-christensen.html)

Carl Childress

Fri Oct 14, 2005 06:46pm

Today, Officiating.com published Peter Osborne's take on the catch/no catch in game two of the Angels/Sox game.

Not one to be left out, Tee worked diligently overnight and produced his version of the play. You'll find it amusing and enlightening.

Question: Who was to blame for the screwed-up call? I suggest Tee's answer will surprise you.

Oh, we're publishing it on Monday. To do that, we had to move another column - one by Tee Alan, as it turned out.

Amendment:

At the request of Tee, we're going to make his column a free article. After all, it shows that Officiating.com can react immediately to controversy and current events. Try finding anything even close to that response in print media.

In keeping with Tee's article, on Monday we're making Peter's article also free: Anyone will be able to read those pieces.

Tim C

Sat Oct 15, 2005 08:15am

Well,

"Amendment:

At the request of Tee, we're going to make his column a free article. After all, it shows that Officiating.com can react immediately to controversy and current events. Try finding anything even close to that response in print media.

In keeping with Tee's article, on Monday we're making Peter's article also free: Anyone will be able to read those pieces."
-------------------------

Actually folks should thank my friend GarthB that germinated the idea.

mrm21711

Sat Oct 15, 2005 01:20pm

Re: Well,

Quote:

Originally posted by Tim C
"Amendment:

At the request of Tee, we're going to make his column a free article. After all, it shows that Officiating.com can react immediately to controversy and current events. Try finding anything even close to that response in print media.

In keeping with Tee's article, on Monday we're making Peter's article also free: Anyone will be able to read those pieces."
-------------------------

Actually folks should thank my friend GarthB that germinated the idea.

I could care less what any media people say, I care what Tee, Garth & other's opinions are....

SanDiegoSteve

Sat Oct 15, 2005 02:20pm

The Media

Who cares what articles are written by the media on this subject? Most of them are totally biased against umpires to start with, and to paraphrase Jocko, know nothing about umpiring, and very little about baseball for that matter. I would welcome any articles written by fellow officials, like Tee and Peter.

Edit for punctuation

briancurtin

Sat Oct 15, 2005 02:25pm

Quote:

Originally posted by Jim Mills
Officiating.com does react immediately to current events, but that doesn't make it anything special. That's o.k. There are literally thousands of media outlets--print, web, TV, radio--that do the same, and each thinks itself special, too.

yep, and all all of those thousands of media outlets have the experience peter and tee have. im sure ted koppel worked NCAA games and surely the local writers in my town newspaper have worked games at the MLB level.

jicecone

Sat Oct 15, 2005 03:52pm

I'm waiting for Entertainment Tonight to cover the story because they know something about everything and everyone. It has to be true for them to cover it. The best one will be when the "Inquirer" reports on the spaceship that was parked outside the stadium, that Eddings went home on. Of course McCarver and Buck came in on the same ship.

Rich	Sat Oct 15, 2005 09:16pm

Quote:

Originally posted by Jim Mills

Quote:

Originally posted by Carl Childress

Today, Officiating.com published Peter Osborne's take on the catch/no catch in game two of the Angels/Sox game...

...After all, (making Tee's article available for free) shows that Officiating.com can react immediately to controversy and current events. Try finding anything even close to that response in print media.

Let's see, Osborne's opinion piece about an October 12 event appeared on October 14. I read, with varying degrees of thoroughness, six Michigan newspapers on October 14. Each had at least one opinion piece on the same topic as did Osborne. Two were merely variations of a theme that appeared in columns on October 13. I'll wager the same result is apparent in nearly every state in America.

Officiating.com does react immediately to current events, but that doesn't make it anything special. That's o.k. There are literally thousands of media outlets--print, web, TV, radio--that do the same, and each thinks itself special, too.

I can hardly wait for the free articles; I always read them. They are like Time, National Review, Newsweek, and Mother Jones: They're sufficiently entertaining and informative that I read them at the public library whenever I'm there, but I never find them valuable enough to part with money for the right.

How many of those "writers" are umpires? Or is the opinion of a writer for the Detroit Free Press just as important or interesting as an NCAA D-I umpire?

Carl Childress

Sat Oct 15, 2005 10:54pm

Quote:

I inadvertently omitted a word, one that changes the meaning of my message. I meant to type: in magazine print media. Of course, I was referring to the other guys in Wisconsin.

It's obvious - and noteworthy - that the only international sports magazine capable of commenting the day of a sports event is Officiating.com.

GarthB

Mon Oct 17, 2005 12:02am

Quote:

Originally posted by Carl Childress
Today, Officiating.com published Peter Osborne's take on the catch/no catch in game two of the Angels/Sox game.

Not one to be left out, Tee worked diligently overnight and produced his version of the play. You'll find it amusing and enlightening.

Question: Who was to blame for the screwed-up call? I suggest Tee's answer will surprise you.

Oh, we're publishing it on Monday. To do that, we had to move another column - one by Tee Alan, as it turned out.

Amendment:

At the request of Tee, we're going to make his column a free article. After all, it shows that Officiating.com can react immediately to controversy and current events. Try finding anything even close to that response in print media.

In keeping with Tee's article, on Monday we're making Peter's article also free: Anyone will be able to read those pieces.

Good effort, Carl. I see from some posts that it's still true that no good deed goes unpunished. Too bad.

You know that I have expressed an opinion not always flattering of the paid site. It has always been based on the content and the professional manner, or lack thereof, in which I perceived that it has been presented.

But at the same time, I've always applauded when the site has moved in a positive direction. I applaud you again,now.

Carl Childress

Mon Oct 17, 2005 12:44am

Quote:

Originally posted by GarthB

Quote:

Originally posted by Carl Childress
Today, Officiating.com published Peter Osborne's take on the catch/no catch in game two of the Angels/Sox game.

Not one to be left out, Tee worked diligently overnight and produced his version of the play. You'll find it amusing and enlightening.

Question: Who was to blame for the screwed-up call? I suggest Tee's answer will surprise you.

Oh, we're publishing it on Monday. To do that, we had to move another column - one by Tee Alan, as it turned out.

Amendment:

At the request of Tee, we're going to make his column a free article. After all, it shows that Officiating.com can react immediately to controversy and current events. Try finding anything even close to that response in print media.

In keeping with Tee's article, on Monday we're making Peter's article also free: Anyone will be able to read those pieces.

Good effort, Carl. I see from some posts that it's still true that no good deed goes unpunished. Too bad.

You know that I have expressed an opinion not always flattering of the paid site. It has always been based on the content and the professional manner, or lack thereof, in which I perceived that it has been presented.

But at the same time, I've always applauded when the site has moved in a positive direction. I applaud you again,now.

From Casablanca, Warner Brothers, 1942:

Victor Laszlo to Rick Blaine: "Welcome back to the fight!"

Carl Childress

Mon Oct 17, 2005 10:54pm

Quote:

Originally posted by Jim Mills

Quote:

Originally posted by Carl Childress

I inadvertently omitted a word, one that changes the meaning of my message. I meant to type: in magazine print media. Of course, I was referring to the other guys in Wisconsin.

It's obvious - and noteworthy - that the only international sports magazine capable of commenting the day of a sports event is Officiating.com.

From The Wizard of Oz, MGM, 1939:

The Doorman to Scarecrow: "Well, bust my buttons! Why didn't you say that in the first place? That's a horse of a different color!"

I love TOF. Whenever I start to think the world might be a rational, logical place, I can come here for a reality check. To wit:

CC: "What makes us great is, we can do 'A', and no one else can. I dare you to try to prove otherwise!"

JM: "Easier done than said; many others also do 'A'."

Typical OF rejoinder: "Oh, YEAH? Who cares if they can do 'A'; they can't do 'B'!"

Sorry, Tee: It is worth a little effort for a little man.

As any intelligent reader of this site knows - and even you - our media competition is Referee magazine. Everybody who read my remarks - even you - knew what I meant.

[Edited by Carl Childress on Oct 18th, 2005 at 12:47 AM]

piaa_ump

Tue Oct 18, 2005 09:41am

my 2 cents

Although I am not a high tech user......I am on the computer/internet for my job all day 6-7 days a week. I travel for my job and recently returned from Europe from a 10 day trip (saw Cuba beat the Netherlands 3-1)

I'm off to Japan for 10 days next month ( too late for the Hanshin Tigers games though)...I can not get my information in print form. If I have to wait for my mail to catch up with me or me to be home, its old news......

Its why I am a subscriber. I do not always like or get some of the writings..but on the whole I am very satisfied.....I can find something of value in every article. I do not care what "non umpires" write about officiating... If you havent been with us out there on the diamond.... well, you get it...

Carl Childress

Tue Oct 18, 2005 10:04am

Re: my 2 cents

Quote:

Originally posted by piaa_ump
Although I am not a high tech user......I am on the computer/internet for my job all day 6-7 days a week. I travel for my job and recently returned from Europe from a 10 day trip (saw Cuba beat the Netherlands 3-1)

I'm off to Japan for 10 days next month ( too late for the Hanshin Tigers games though)...I can not get my information in print form. If I have to wait for my mail to catch up with me or me to be home, its old news......

Its why I am a subscriber. I do not always like or get some of the writings..but on the whole I am very satisfied.....I can find something of value in every article. I do not care what "non umpires" write about officiating... If you havent been with us out there on the diamond.... well, you get it...

Thanks for the kind words. Email me at [email protected].

RPatrino

Tue Oct 18, 2005 11:29am

Am I Missing Something?

What is Mills talking about? I don't get it.

Ahhhh. Does he mean he's going to start working from "B" instead of "A"?

Bob P.

LMan	Tue Oct 18, 2005 11:42am

"You think you can call that from 'B'? Well, I can call it from 'C'!!" :)

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:59pm.

Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1