WhatWasThatBlue

[Carl Childress]

WhatWasThatBlue:

This is likely my last message to you.

(1) I wrote "statute" because writers occasionally use something called synonyms.

(2) You spent several sentences explaining that states, like yours, could adopt their own rules because of local conditions. Old news: I had already offered the complete list of options.

(3) I made no attempt to "claim" I did not chastise Illinois for ignoring FED rules. You say Mr. Holman is responsible for that. If he is not fulfilling his duties as an NFHS committee member, he will have enough trouble on his own without any help from me.

(4) You've called me a fool and impugned BigUmp's paternity. You've already been thrown off this Board once. I suggest you are perilously close to repeating.

[WhatWuzThatBlue]

Questioning someone's paternity is no less amazing than you referring to me as Bubba or fag. I offered that their writing styles are eerily similar. I'm sorry if that offended your sensibilities. I was not aware that you you were bi-polar, since you offend your guests all of the time, usually on purpose. Brad should take time to note that I tried to act civil but you chose to drag this issue into the gutter. I merely pointed out that for someone of your stature, you should be more careful with who you offend. Anthony Holman is an individual of unquestionable integrity, yet you called him Anthony What's His Name, fully aware of his given name. That is exemplary conduct on your part. Are those the types of displays that have me perilously close to banishment?

Have you noticed that even J.Rutledge has avoided this dialogue because of what you allege? Several Illinois umpires enjoy this board and you questioned our interpretation of the rules. Bob Jenkins has not offered anything different than what I've said. Others have shown you that each state advises their own in a way best suited for individual needs. Like you said, I'll paraphrase for brevity, make the call that your boss wants you to make.

Again, you've chosen to ignore my questions? Since you like illustrative numbers:

1) Do you see a difference between you ignoring the correct call for what is expected and the verbal obstruction call at second? I choose to enforce the rules that are written in the book. The book makes no specific mention of this call! This is the same argument I made when you insisted that a runner missing home after a fence clearing home run is inconsequential.

2) Like I asked a few days ago, do you ignore the fence clearing home run when he misses first base?

3) You omitted some state adopted rules. I wasn't sure if that was because you didn't know or they didn't fit your theory. My guess is that your used to ignoring those that run contrary. I don't, learning makes life interesting.

4) When you employ the wrong word, it changes the meaning and limits the creedence afforded the author. If I say that the fist baseman allowed a passed ball, that would be incorrect. Words are terribly important within written media. Statute was an incorrect use of a synonym. Why not use "law"?

5) I suggest that you not address me in the future either. You have far more to lose than I. The paid readers will note that you find it acceptable to operate by a double standard. In case you didn't notice, I have made no personal attacks against anyone who hasn't launched the first volley. I even remained above it all when you started playing games. You've repeatedly challenged my integrity whilst I acted as a gentleman.

You've abandoned your A2D philosophy and made several fatal mistakes. I can arue with TAC, Peter, Bob P or any number of forum members and never have such problems. TAC and Bob even admitted as much and acted as I expected. Brad should take note of who is throwing stones.

I came to argue a contentious issue. Recognizing that we will not all agree is called maturity. Belittling others with flowery prose is not. I've had more than my share of opportunities to lob some one liners. I've attempted to take the high road and you felt compelled to return to the mire. There's an adage about old dogs... I learned some, can't you?

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally posted by WhatWuzThatBlue
In case you didn't notice, I have made no personal attacks against anyone who hasn't launched the first volley.

I am still searching for the volley I launched that made you accuse me of being someone that I am not, namely DaveInSoCal. I had merely chimed in with an illustration of a rule difference, and a correction of one of Carl's typos. Nowhere in the entire thread about the illegal play, did I personally insult you. In a separate thread, I ran some smack about your favorite baseball team, and that was just good natured ribbing!

[JRutledge]

Originally posted by WhatWuzThatBlue

Have you noticed that even J.Rutledge has avoided this dialogue because of what you allege? Several Illinois umpires enjoy this board and you questioned our interpretation of the rules. Bob Jenkins has not offered anything different than what I've said. Others have shown you that each state advises their own in a way best suited for individual needs. Like you said, I'll paraphrase for brevity, make the call that your boss wants you to make.

Right now I am in the middle of something else. Questions of baseball games and rules are not my main focus right now.

Peace

[WhatWuzThatBlue]

San Diego Steve,

If you are not that mope, I apologize. I misread your intent as the same claptrap that we have witnessed before. Again, if that is not you, my humblest apologies. The style looked very familiar, that's all.


Jeff,
I only mentioned your name because you and I have not seen eye to eye before on many issues. I could just have easily mentioned JJ because he knows Anthony very well. For those who believe he is anything less than noble, they are mistaken. Illinois umpires are no better or worse than any other state. We have our share of excellence and embarassment, the same ladder climbed by all. I just thought it was funny that you, bobj, JJ, tjones and a couple others have kept mum about Anthony. You've met the man - is he Anthony Whatshisname, as Carl believes?

[WhatWuzThatBlue]

I just received an interesting email form someone who thinks that Carl knows not what he sayeth:

The very first page of the NFHS Rule Book thusly reads:

To maintain the sound traditions of this sport, encourage sportsmanship...

(pay attention to the end of the paragrpah here)

...Member associations of the NFHS independently make decisions regarding compliance with or modification of these playing rules for the student athletes in their respective states.


I knew I had seen it before, I don't claim to know this rule book well, so I appreciate the help from a friend.

I believe an apology is in order.

[Carl Childress]

Originally posted by WhatWuzThatBlue
I just received an interesting email form someone who thinks that Carl knows not what he sayeth:

The very first page of the NFHS Rule Book thusly reads:

To maintain the sound traditions of this sport, encourage sportsmanship...

(pay attention to the end of the paragrpah here)

...Member associations of the NFHS independently make decisions regarding compliance with or modification of these playing rules for the student athletes in their respective states.


I knew I had seen it before, I don't claim to know this rule book well, so I appreciate the help from a friend.

I believe an apology is in order.

This is a standard "don't blame us" notification. In its expanded form, it appeared this year for the first time.

The NFHS grants permission for states to modify the rules in certain explicitly stated areas, which I listed earlier. If that were not true, why would the book name rules that can be modified?

In 1984 the Texas state association (UIIL) refused to adopt the no-metal-spikes rule. We lost our admission slip to the annual rules meeting. We didn't get it back until the NFHS removed the ban on metal spikes in 1989. The message: If you modify in areas other than those permitted, you may suffer consequences.

But individual associations within a state do not have that right of modification, and state associations that do modify the rules circularize in writing all umpires in the state.

[WhatWuzThatBlue]

From Carl-
This is a standard "don't blame us" notification. In its expanded form, it appeared this year for the first time.

The NFHS grants permission for states to modify the rules in certain explicitly stated areas, which I listed earlier. If that were not true, why would the book name rules that can be modified?

In 1984 the Texas state association (UIIL) refused to adopt the no-metal-spikes rule. We lost our admission slip to the annual rules meeting. We didn't get it back until the NFHS removed the ban on metal spikes in 1989. The message: If you modify in areas other than those permitted, you may suffer consequences.

But individual associations within a state do not have that right of modification, and state associations that do modify the rules circularize in writing all umpires in the state.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

OMG, ROTFLMAO!!!

This is the pinnacle of recalcitrance. You asked for where the NFHS notifies states that they may modify the rules. I gave it to you and you throw up the smoke and mirrors again. Even Brad can see through this charade!

It is not a boilerplate or standard disclaimer. How could it be standard when you admitted that it's very existence is new? Good Lord, you just can't admit it. When did I ever (or for that matter anyone else) insinuate that individual groups are permitted to change the rules. I gave numerous examples of rules that are ignored by school conferences, umpire groups and leagues, but I never encouraged it. These things occur everywhere - even the Lone Star state. A few years ago, Fed tried to ban throwing the ball around after a strikeout. Illinois said that they would not enforce it. Enough other states barked and it went away. Maybe that will happen with other controversial plays. One can only pray that Anthony and Bob are reading this.

Again, you twist the facts to suit your ego. The sentence reads: "Member associations of the NFHS independently may make decisions regarding compliance with or modification of these playing rules for the student-athletes in their respective states." Where does it say anything about your suspect list of rules? Those items in the back of the book are specifically mentioned, so that states can choose to adopt them en masse or without much forethought. The next paragraph further promotes state association amendment and modification for special needs.

Admit it, if Idaho wanted to disallow the DH, they could do it. They would face no ramifications. You bring up a pre-TASO story and expect us to just say, "Yep, the great and mighty Carl has spoken, it must be true." C'mon out from behind the curtain, the smoke is clouding your judgement. 1984???

Everyone here can read the 2005 statement. Remember, you've said that if it's written in the book, it must be important. Page one, in an emphasis box...that looks pretty substantial to me. I want thank a very popoular rules interpreter (no, not from Illinois) for emailing me about this. Apparently he actually read the book.

Again, an apology is in order. You were wrong and accused me of misspeaking. You are perilously close to losing face.

[Edited by WhatWuzThatBlue on Oct 30th, 2005 at 09:20 AM]

[JRutledge]

Windy,

I was not offended at all that you brought me up. I just find it funny that my name comes up and I am so far away from a baseball game, I really do not care what our state does for baseball in October/November.

Now off to my basketball scrimmage.

Peace

[JJ]

Anthony Holman from the Illinois High School Association is a wonderful man, smart enough to surround himself with people who give him valid information regarding umpiring and the rules of the game. He gets a lot of input regarding interpretations before implementing decisions. Some of that input comes from the NFHS rules folks, some from Eliott Hopkins, some from Illinois interpreters, and some from umpires nationwide whom he has come to know as valuable resources. NONE of his decisions on specific interpretations are arrived at lightly. I do not know if he reads this board, and I do not know if he knows or is in contact with anyone ON this board (other than myself). But don't anyone sell him, the Illinois High School Association, or Illinois umpires short.

JJ

PS I'm not taking sides on this discussion - just stating some first-hand knowledge of a fine man.

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally posted by WhatWuzThatBlue
San Diego Steve,

If you are not that mope, I apologize. I misread your intent as the same claptrap that we have witnessed before. Again, if that is not you, my humblest apologies. The style looked very familiar, that's all.

Thanks for the backhanded apology. "If I am not that mope"? I said I wasn't, so why would you say "if"? From what I understand, Dave is no mope, but is a fine official. What reason do you have to besmirch his name, or mine?

So my writing is claptrap. Gee, I wasn't looking for a Pulitzer Prize, but my writing is usually right on point, without a lot of flowery sentiment. What particular statements of mine do you take issue with, and we can deal with them one at a time?

Your apology seemed to be sandwiched around not so subtle insults, and as such seems less than genuine.

[WhatWuzThatBlue]

Since (is that a more acceptable choice?) you are not that mope, I've apologized here and in the Cubbies thread.

I've seen the same arguments, passion and characteristics in other dialogues. Since (again) you say that he is another, I will accept that.

Claptrap refers to ramblings brought about to win acceptance. It is often viewed negatively, but no always so. Politicians use it when they need endorsements, salesmen employ it to close deals. The ability to do it well is a badge of honor in some circles.


Did anyone else read that sentence to mean: "Hey states, you can only change the things we've already said you could."? I didn't think so.



Thank you, JJ. As I've written, Anthony makes his decisions based on what he knows, sees and hears. There would be no need for indiviual associations if they weren't permitted to run things as they see fit.