How about you?

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by SanDiegoSteve
WWTB, I'm sure that "eduator" was a typo, and a funny one at that, but I have been misspelling a word, and so have you. It really looks wierd, but it is "judgment" not "judgement". Since you are a stickler for proper grammar, I figured you would appreciate the correction.

Somehow, "wierd" looks weird too.

[SanDiegoSteve]

Jeez, I need a remedial spelling class. I knew I should have used the word "strange" instead!

[RPatrino]

So, we start by talking about idle banter amoungst the boys, and we end up back to the "back/go" conundrum?

When will the madness end??


BP

[JRutledge]

Originally posted by WhatWuzThatBlue
If you are really spending all of that time searching other boards, I suggest you come to my house next week for the college games. You can explain your newsletter hypothesis to the gang. We have about a dozen guys and a collective two hundred years of experience. Some of these guys work the Mizzou Valley, Gateway, MAC, Big Ten and Big East. A couple of state and American Legion championships and a host of Minor League action are also accounted for in this room. Oh, they paid for their pro school so they earned the right to dismiss bad mechanics and rule interpretations.

Since when did the Gateway become a college baseball conference?

Peace

[WhatWuzThatBlue]

I wrote "work", Jeff. Pay attention or you'll get left behind again. I usually use the word umpire (go back and check) if I'm only talking about baseball. Sometimes I forget and use a more casual word, but I am one of the most precise writers you'll come across here.

You actually know one of the guys that was here. He did some basketball and umpires baseball in a couple of those conferences. Most of the guys live in the Chicago suburbs or southern Wisconsin, but one is from near the Quad Cities. That might help you figure out who is who. One of those attending is a state interpreter. But, you probably figured that out already.


Bob,

Why is it that we can't argue like gentlemen? I posed a question that was simple. You and a couple others agreed that saying "Go" means little. I then asked why "Back" is radically different to some umpires. It is not about beating a dead horse, it is about making people think. As I've said all along, call it however you see fit, but think about it first. Debate and dialogue are amazing things. Communication is the single biggest skill a rookie umpire must possess. We have seen the NFHS make changes to poorly constructed rules because of such outcries. Maybe this is my Waterloo, but most of us agree that verbal obstruction is a horse**** call and hate making it. That said, I only ask for the same respect I gave you. Disagree all you want, but don't belittle.

With that said, I think I've made my point. You can't say that a fielder can tell a runner to go but not go back. It makes no sense and you look bad.

[Edited by WhatWuzThatBlue on Nov 7th, 2005 at 04:11 AM]

[ozzy6900]

YAWWWWWWNNNNNNNNNNNNN!!!!

Hey Windy, roll over and stop snoring!

[WhatWuzThatBlue]

Ozzy, is that you? That protection order forbids you from getting anywhere near my house anymore. Return the clothes you took or it's back to the playpen for you.

[BigUmp56]

I have no idea what happened to my post!

Tim.

[Edited by BigUmp56 on Nov 7th, 2005 at 07:55 AM]

[BigUmp56]

Originally posted by WhatWuzThatBlue
(1) Sometimes I forget and use a more casual word, but I am one of the most precise writers you'll come across here.


(2) Maybe this is my Waterloo, but most of us agree that verbal obstruction is a horse**** call and hate making it. That said, I only ask for the same respect I gave you. Disagree all you want, but don't belittle.

(3) With that said, I think I've made my point. You can't say that a fielder can tell a runner to go but not go back. It makes no sense and you look bad.

[Edited by WhatWuzThatBlue on Nov 7th, 2005 at 04:11 AM]

Windbag,

I've numbered your rather demostrative comments that I take exception to so that I can address them in an orderly manner.


(1) Yes, Windbag you are a precise writer. Precisely arrogant and condesceding to those whose opinions differ from yours in all of your responses.

I wonder how often you dislocate your shoulder while patting your self on the back as you lord your writing skills over the rest of us peasants.

(2) Please tell me who *most* of us are that agree with you.
There has not been one umpire on this board that has agreed with you Windy, not one! If your referring to your troll pals on Mac's, then maybe you have a point. Then again, you are in the right company with those idiots.

You say that *most* of us agree that the call of verbal obstruction is a horse$h!i call and hate making it.

By including yourself in the *most of us* group, you now by your own admission have said that you have called it and just don't agree with having to call it. Tell us all again just how *precise* your writing ability is.

(3) You say you've made your point. Just who do you think you've made your point to? The only point you've made here is that you will not be swayed by reason. Look closely at these posts on this subject, then click on our profiles. You'll see that umpires from California to the East Coast, and umpires from the Midwest to Texas all seem to be in a agreement. *YOU* are the lone stand out on this, and you still feel everyone else is wrong for calling it.

I don't recall anyone telling you that you were wrong for not calling it. It's all about judgement and you can most certainly call your games as best you see fit. Why do you
keep telling us were wrong for calling it? Obviously were not just going out a limb in our associations and making this stuff up. We are calling the games the way we are instructed to.

We've beaten this to death for three months. Lets just A2D, and move on.

Tim.

[Bob Lyle]

Originally posted by WhatWuzThatBlue

At one time, Rosa Parks was the only person who said "No." to the masses. Being defiant isn't always a bad thing.

If you are really spending all of that time searching other boards, I suggest you come to my house next week for the college games.

Windy,

So now you're Rosa Parks. Do you think that you'll get a Medal of Freedom?

Thanks for the invite. I'd love to come to your house next week. Click on my email button and send me your address and phone number. I'll be there as I'm within a couple hour drive.

Bob

[RPatrino]

I guess my point was missed. I didn't intend to be argumentative, nor did I intend to continue to contribute any longer to this argument.

It reminds me of my Grandpa and Grandma. My grandma always asked Grandpa if the pasta was done. Regardless of his answer, she would say he was wrong. His reply, " if you knew the answer, why did you ask me?"

BP

[WhatWuzThatBlue]

Bob,
You are one of the only people I actually enjoy seeing post here. I know you didn't intend to extend the conversation and that is fine by me. It seems that the same few people respond and they have neither the experience nor verbal acuity to handle these verbal sparring sessions. I rather enjoy Garth and TAC chiming in, but they often let this get personal and that is a shame. Bob Lyle is not worth words.

When I said that I made my point it was simple. It is preposterous to think that an infielder is within his rights to tell a runner to run, but cannot tell him to go back to the base. Therein lies the conundrum; I have to explain it in simple terms because there are those members who see my name and shake with contempt. They don't care if I say the sky is blue and God is good. The world has encountered these beings before and Darwin has shown that they usually eliminate themselves before much harm is done to the gene pool. Too often they are so obsessed with proving me wrong that they fail to see that I may be agreeing with their view. They view my tone as condescending, but embrace Carl's diatribe as mother's milk. I find that utterly (yes, pun intended) hysterical.

There are a few umpires here that I respect. Sal, JJ, HHH, Bob Jenkins and a couple of Illinois boys that I won't mention because they'll think I'm kissing up. I actually am kind of fond of J.Rutledge because he wears his heart on his sleeve. I may disagree with some of his sentiments, but I respect the fact that he is usually sincere. I didn't notice any of those mentioned agreeing or disagreeing with the interpretations I have proposed. They are around to be certain; we've seen their names pop up every so often. Why is it that none of them have taken a stand against what I proposed? Maybe it's because we call it the same way. I have had my share of scuffles with a couple of them. They are not too shy to disagree. Hmmmm...

The only thing I can say to BigUmp56, is that you are guilty of the thing you accuse me of doing. You posted about verbal obstruction a few months ago on another board. It was ugly, as a few people took it beyond the realm of civility. You then posted it here and received a handful of responses. A little while later, you went back to the other site and did it again. I don't believe for a second that you are currently not participating in that madness over there. You can deny it all you want, but few people write like you and that is not a compliment. There, that wasn't too condescending, it was very direct. If you failed to appreciate the irony in the plays I suggested, that is not surprising either. Calling Verbal Obstruction is reserved for very serious infractions. I don't rely on decade old newsletters to support them. Do you even have a copy of that newsletter, BigUmp56? No, you weren't even umpiring high school ball back then. But enough already, you'll never appreciate the message.

In the end, we all have to make the calls we can live with. I have not personally encountered one official that would call the Verbal Obstruction as discussed here. I run with a pretty talented group of officials (multiple sports) and none think that this is a sensible rule. Most are glad that they don't umpire high school baseball. The others are glad that Illinois expects the officials to only enforce rules forund in the Rule and Case Books. So, call it however you want. I'm pretty certain that the coaches know what to expect when the see you in the parking lot. Mine know that I will hustle, call them according to the book and work together with my crew to get them all right. I keep getting asked back, so I must be doing something right.

As Garth said, good luck next season. It'll be here before you know it.

[JRutledge]

Originally posted by WhatWuzThatBlue
I wrote "work", Jeff. Pay attention or you'll get left behind again. I usually use the word umpire (go back and check) if I'm only talking about baseball. Sometimes I forget and use a more casual word, but I am one of the most precise writers you'll come across here.

You actually know one of the guys that was here. He did some basketball and umpires baseball in a couple of those conferences. Most of the guys live in the Chicago suburbs or southern Wisconsin, but one is from near the Quad Cities. That might help you figure out who is who. One of those attending is a state interpreter. But, you probably figured that out already.

I did not ask you how well you write. I asked you since when did the Gateway conference have baseball? If you misspoke that is OK to just say that. Or you could say that one of the people worked football in the Gateway. I do not need a life history and where everyone is from or you telling me I know someone there personally. I just was asking a question.

Sorry I asked.

[ozzy6900]

Originally posted by WhatWuzThatBlue
Ozzy, is that you? That protection order forbids you from getting anywhere near my house anymore. Return the clothes you took or it's back to the playpen for you.

I never stole the damn clothes, that was the guy from the other board! Now pipe down so I can get some sleep! :>)

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally posted by WhatWuzThatBlue
Bob,
You are one of the only people I actually enjoy seeing post here. I know you didn't intend to extend the conversation and that is fine by me. It seems that the same few people respond and they have neither the experience nor verbal acuity to handle these verbal sparring sessions. I rather enjoy Garth and TAC chiming in, but they often let this get personal and that is a shame. Bob Lyle is not worth words.

When I said that I made my point it was simple. It is preposterous to think that an infielder is within his rights to tell a runner to run, but cannot tell him to go back to the base. Therein lies the conundrum; I have to explain it in simple terms because there are those members who see my name and shake with contempt. They don't care if I say the sky is blue and God is good. The world has encountered these beings before and Darwin has shown that they usually eliminate themselves before much harm is done to the gene pool. Too often they are so obsessed with proving me wrong that they fail to see that I may be agreeing with their view. They view my tone as condescending, but embrace Carl's diatribe as mother's milk. I find that utterly (yes, pun intended) hysterical.

There are a few umpires here that I respect. Sal, JJ, HHH, Bob Jenkins and a couple of Illinois boys that I won't mention because they'll think I'm kissing up. I actually am kind of fond of J.Rutledge because he wears his heart on his sleeve. I may disagree with some of his sentiments, but I respect the fact that he is usually sincere. I didn't notice any of those mentioned agreeing or disagreeing with the interpretations I have proposed. They are around to be certain; we've seen their names pop up every so often. Why is it that none of them have taken a stand against what I proposed? Maybe it's because we call it the same way. I have had my share of scuffles with a couple of them. They are not too shy to disagree. Hmmmm...

The only thing I can say to BigUmp56, is that you are guilty of the thing you accuse me of doing. You posted about verbal obstruction a few months ago on another board. It was ugly, as a few people took it beyond the realm of civility. You then posted it here and received a handful of responses. A little while later, you went back to the other site and did it again. I don't believe for a second that you are currently not participating in that madness over there. You can deny it all you want, but few people write like you and that is not a compliment. There, that wasn't too condescending, it was very direct. If you failed to appreciate the irony in the plays I suggested, that is not surprising either. Calling Verbal Obstruction is reserved for very serious infractions. I don't rely on decade old newsletters to support them. Do you even have a copy of that newsletter, BigUmp56? No, you weren't even umpiring high school ball back then. But enough already, you'll never appreciate the message.

In the end, we all have to make the calls we can live with. I have not personally encountered one official that would call the Verbal Obstruction as discussed here. I run with a pretty talented group of officials (multiple sports) and none think that this is a sensible rule. Most are glad that they don't umpire high school baseball. The others are glad that Illinois expects the officials to only enforce rules forund in the Rule and Case Books. So, call it however you want. I'm pretty certain that the coaches know what to expect when the see you in the parking lot. Mine know that I will hustle, call them according to the book and work together with my crew to get them all right.

Oh, this is so rich. To quote Garth, HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH AHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHA.

You seem to think you are the only one who has experience, and the rest of us are just ignorant hillbillies that just fell off the turnip truck. The reason you didn't get the responses you were looking for, is that people see right through you. If we disagree with you, you call us stupid. If we don't verbalize our thoughts a certain way, you tell us we can't spar with you, that we're not experienced enough. You started this thread with a nice, flowery story about you and your buds hanging out watching football. This naturally led to a discussion about chatter, blah, blah, blah. You asked a question about F3 saying "go, go" to the runner. Then, when you got a few opinions, you sprang out of your hiding place, and said "AH-HA!!!, I tricked you all!!! I really wanted to keep the 'back, back' argument going." Then you get mad at the people who point out the fact that you are playing that "one-note samba" again.

Bob Lyle is not worth words? That's just downright rude. What a thing to say about someone. Do you think he would agree?

Going with the Darwin card? That's just downright lame.

While I disagree with much of what Carl Childress has said over the years, have you had a column in a major officiating magazine for over 20 years?

There are only a few umpires you respect on this forum? Do you even realize how many people you insult when you spew this garbage?

BigUmp56 is a great guy, who enjoys the opportunity afforded on these forums, to discuss baseball, and baseball umpiring. Someone has been posting using his name over on McGriff's board, since that ridiculous site let's you use any name you want, or no name at all! They take his prior posts, and re-paste them, to make him look bad, so they can talk s*** about him. And as far as his writing style goes, what business is it of yours? Nobody here is trying to impress you.

Lastly, so you hang around big-shot umpires. We all know big-shot umpires. My association has 3 current MLB umpires. So what? I have 20 years experience, BigUmp 56 has 15. Lots of folks that disagree with you have years and years of experience. While some of your buddies are glad they don't work high school, many of us are glad we don't work NCAA, with the idiotic rule book they use.

Respect goes both ways. You as much as said that you don't respect very many umpires on this forum. I am sure you're
one helluva umpire, but you shouldn't hold that over everyone's head. It isn't pretty. Until you give everyone here the respect they all deserve, you will get little respect in return.