I thought it was "complete and discernable pause."

Whatever it was, I like Carl's new one better. It makes my job easier.
http://www.officialforum.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Tim.

Re: Fair enough WWTB
 

Hey BigDump, your apology is not accepted. Don't sit there and talk trash about any particular association when you can't possibly know what situations exist in the schools that will only pay for one umpire. Some of the schools were one or two votes from not having any sports. They cannot afford to pay for two umpires no matter what we do.

How exactly is a new umpire like myself (2 yrs) supposed to affect change in my association anyways? You think they are going to listen to the new guy anyway? Geeez!

Kaliix,

I would call you a name regarding your screen name as well, but it would probably just seem like a compliment to you.

You go ahead and keep working solo as a newbie umpire. Soon you'll understand why doing it is not such a good idea.

After you've been beaten like a rented mule for a while because you cannot possibly be in a position to make all the calls correctly, you'll change your tune.

I look at an association the same way I look at my union. It was not started out with the best conditions available to it's members, but with time and hard work, it enacted change for it's members through leverage. Control the workforce, control the conditions.

Sometimes a man has to stand up and fight for what he believes in.

As you grow more mature, you'll understand that one too.


Tim.

First of all Kaliix, you don't know Tim well enough to insult his screen name, so don't. It weakens your point right off the bat.

Second of all Tim, where you live, maybe you are in a position to exert leverage over the schools. Here in California, the California Interscholastic Federation (CIF) is the governing body, and what they say goes. If any association doesn't like the CIF's rulings, they can sit on it and rotate. Trying to tell the Section CIF what to do here in San Diego would result in our association losing the high school contract. There are plenty of other umpire groups here who would just love to do the high school ball, but our association has the exclusive contract, and we plan to keep it. If we told them that we would only work games with two umpires, they would laugh us out of the board room. You guys must have a monopoly on the umpiring there in South Bend. It's not like that in most areas.

Steve

One can only imagine which crevice these thoughts eked from. Just a few days ago, your pontificating drew the wrath of those who feel slighted by your comments about single man games. You alleged that rookies should never work alone, associations should demand at least two umpires for every game and those that don't have "no jewels". As you grow and mature, you'll understand how stupid these comments make you look. I've witnessed some awful two man games and even more ridiculous three man contests. Having a useless veteran out there will only make the rookie worse. I've also found that a rookie usually does things by the book and knows what he is supposed to do. Umpires like you think that they know it all because they have been at it for a few years. How many years have you been umpiring High School Varsity baseball? How many years have you been calling NCAA games?

You are an internet umpire; a very bad one at that. You want to play by the rules of the other site but then claim to be above it all. You claim that I am condescending because you have an inferiority complex. Start practicing what you preach. I can cite dozens of examples of your being a "disruptor", in the terms of the agreement page. You and SDS might also want to check the part about posting copyrighted pictures or works not owned by The Official Forum. This is not ebay.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

TAC,

You have sunk into the mire. Must I remind you that you have posted about challenging the veracity of an opinion rather than the grammar and spelling used? Maybe you could write a column about flip flopping when it suits your needs. I'm sure it won't require much editing.
-----------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Garth,
I read your earlier post and understand what you wrote. You are correct that you won't convince me to change my stance on VO. Your mockery of Pete was expected. He made a grammatical mistake and you jumped all over it. Check out what I wrote to TAC, it applies equally to you. You must be a legendary umpire in your parts. I would love to see the umpire who never makes mistakes at work. When is your next game?

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Pete,
You've now experienced the best they have to offer. BigUmp56 and SanDiegoSteve are one trick ponies. Where one stops, the other starts; it is often difficult to see where. TAC actually knows his stuff but he is somehow relegating himself to criticizing writing skills. It's a sad turn of events. Garth is Garth; I actually like seeing him take a stance and committing himself to the battle. He has had more than a few run ins with Carl and can hold his own. I'm not sure why he has jumped on the Grammar Police bandwagon either. Usually that is a last resort for those who can't debate and he can.

It was a mistake to divulge your career. Some of these guys are filled with contempt for anyone who has achieved more than themselves. I'm not a fan of attorneys but applaud anyone who teaches. I thank you for attempting to come to my aid, but I have found that guys like BigUmp56 and SanDiegoSteve would argue with God at the Pearly Gates. It makes little sense to try to make them better, since they already believe that they are more skilled than some of the MLB pros they see.

Finally, I have been umpiring High School and College ball for just over twenty eight years. I started calling balls and strikes for youth leagues while in high school and have added that on the total on occassion. Those were my mistake filled years, as I had no formal training back then. I apologize for the confusion, I wasn't aware I had a new stalker.

Who's reachin' out to capture the moment...
 

WWTB,

I don't know what pictures you are refering to, unless you mean the chest protector. Big deal. Oh, I'm real scared. Come get me. That's just weak, man.

This was another example of your flowery prose imitating good writing. I hadn't said anything insulting to you lately, so why did you decide to bag on me? You ARE condescending, I didn't just make that up. It wasn't meant as an insult, just telling it like it is.

Oh, I'm a one trick pony. You are so full of it. I started this thread with a serious question. It was answered a long time ago. I don't argue just to argue, as it is OBVIOUS that you do. I argue only when I feel I'm right, and someone else is wrong. I don't parrot what BigUmp says, in fact I just got through posting a disagreement with him. I even agreed with you in an argument he was having with you, remember? I like Tim personally, and we IM each other, but we often disagree on things. But the difference is, unlike you, we can argue points without stooping to slamming each other. You don't seem to be able to have a conversation without putting something or someone down.

I only wanted to clarify your experience when I asked you about it, since you had said you had 35 years. Surely, you can understand the curiosity, when you then said 25. Now it's 28. Is that your final answer?

Once again I will say, working college games doesn't make someone a great umpire. You keep telling us all about your college experience. I know many umpires who shouldn't work JV Hopscotch games, who get assigned Division 1. Like I said before, you are probably a GREAT umpire, but just because you work college ball doesn't automatically make you one.

is it just me, or can 90% of the posts in this thread be removed and have no effect on the thread's question/answer/topic?

Yes.

Back on topic
 

Just to try to salvage this thread, I will bring it back on topic.

Examle: The PBUC says you cannot overrun first base on a base on balls, without liability of being put out. They say, as does Jim Evans, that the runner is only protected up to the base. The rules don't say that. They make absolutely no distinction between a hit or a walk. The Knotty Problems book says you can overrun first on a base on balls. That used to be my source. I guess I can just throw that old piece of crap out now. So, my question is.....unless every umpire on the face of the earth has access to interpretations such as the PBUC, Evans' manual, J/R, BRD, etc., how are we to uniformly rule on situations such as these?

Answer: We're not.

Let me finish with this.

I now have 40 other umpires from around the country enjoying the board I started. I doubt that you even have 40 friends period, judging by the way you talk to people.

I've recieved numerous e-mails from individuals on this board telling me it's best just to ignore you WWTB, and hopefully you'll just go away. They see you for who you truly are. A troll with nothing better to do with his time than put others down as if you were the Lord of the internet.

Tim.

[Edited by BigUmp56 on Nov 20th, 2005 at 10:14 PM]

Yes, Brian, they are. But he's not arguing for the sake of arguing - neither were TAC, Garth or BigUmp56.

When a couple of us pointed out some problems with the logic used to discuss the baseball realted topic, they jump on the grammar/spelling/condescension train. Both BigUmp56 and SDS are using the "flowery prose" euphemism now. Hmmmmmmm? Learn to write better and then others may accuse you of talking above their head too. Should the pitcher have to slow down his fastball because you aren't capable of hitting it?

I choose not to use fourth grade words to convey adult topics. I'm sure they will say that is condescending, I say it isn't bragging if it is fact. I usually take time in constructing my thoughts. They are a measure of your intelligence and communication is fundamental to umpring. I speak the same way I write - in measured, certain terms. I prefer to tell the coach what he needs to know and get on with it. I don't criticize his errors or ostracize him because he can't speak as well. They apparently do.

Lastly, why would you talk about a chest protector photograph. I thought that BigUmp56 posted that photo. Hmmmmmm...

Yes, I was the one who posted the first chest protetor picture. It was a picture of the "UMPS" protector found at Honigs.

Steve posted a picture of the +POS protector. So, if it's copyright infringement, you can hire Pete and sue us!

Tim.

WWTB,

These aren't fourth grade words. That is ridiculous.

If you talk like you write, then you have your head up your dark spot. I have seen many glaring errors, not only in spelling, but in syntax as well. You are definitley not going to win any prizes for writing, and neither am I.

I mentioned the photograph because you said I was posting copywrited material, and for the life of me, I couldn't think of anything I may have posted of that nature. Please don't include me in your little warning statements. You have exactly zero authority to do so.

Like I said before, quit confusing Tim with me. We are two very different people, who differ in experience, as well as opinion. Sometimes we agree, and sometimes we don't. I promise not to confuse you with Pete in AZ.

No, WWTB, nobody here is jealous of the success of others. I said I was happy for Pete's law degree. I'm just not impressed by what people do, or what they have. Donald Trump impresses me not. Just like I don't expect anyone to be impressed with what I have done. I only wanted to provide some background relating to my experience when it was called into question.

Now, can we get back to talking baseball, and get off the personal attacks please?

Re: Back on topic
 

Okay, back to the topic, already.:D

Re: Re: Back on topic
 

Okay, back to the topic, already. [/B][/QUOTE]No, no, no....

You guys are doing fine.

Entertaining as hell.

McGriffs <i>Redux</i>, with the same players but different names.

Don't stop now...... :D

For the record, again....
 

I don't post at that site, but you are right about the direction in which this thread is headed.

To the http://media.theinsiders.com/Media/O...oiletflush.GIF

This is the sixth paragraph, in its entirety, from The Official Forum Rules.

"You agree, through your use of this service, that you will not use The Official Forum to post any material which is knowingly false and/or defammatory, inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, profane, sexually oriented, threatening, invasive of a person's privacy, or otherwise violative of any law. You agree not to post any copyrighted material unless the copyright is owned by you or The Official Forum."

I believe you have violated several of these tenets. As Papa C. would say, you are alarmingly close to being banned. I believe that the fourth paragraph includes a bold clause about not tolerating personal attacks. One can only assume that Bob and Mick left their copies of the rules at home.

WWTB
 

Wow, your posts encompass the entire sixth paragraph!!!!

Congratulations!!!

Sorry Windy, you'll need to do better!

Tim.

You still don't get it do you? So let's set the record straight. I never ever said that I thought it was a good idea to send a rookie umpire out by himself. And believe it or not, I understand why it isn't a good idea and I agree that in a perfect world, it wouldn't happen.

That though, has nothing to do with your insulting of my, or any other association, who has to work games with only one umpire.

I did not start this little debate about an association "having the jewels" to change the rules, you did. I gave you a chance to retract your statement and you didn't. Instead you went on to insult my association again. Hence you are officially BigDump for this discussion, since that is what you choose to do on my association.

You have absolutely no idea of the dynamics of my area. You don't know the economic climate of the region, the taxpayers associations that have continually cut school budgets and forced some sports to not be offered due to lack of funds. You don't know the belief by some ignorant folks that money shouldn't be "wasted" on sports, or that some schools have considered or implemented a pay for play policy. All of these factors make money incredibly tight. School districts don't have "extra money" just hanging around to pay the umpires when when we decide we want double fees for Frosh and JV games.

So get off your high horse and stop insulting associations that "don't have jewels" as you put it, to demand two umpires for every game. Some schools simply cannot pay and would flat out refuse such a request or would tell us to take a flying leap and use someone else to do their games.

While your utopian two man per game sentiment is nice, it does not work when viewed through the harsh economic reality of today. It has nothing to do with jewels...

No, I don't, I've accepted the terms and ignored the baiting by those who can't debate well. You will need to live by the agreement or lose your privleges. I'm not worried about my behavior, none of my posts have been edited or deleted since I returned.

You still are having a problem with the name thing, but I imagine that Brad, Mick or Bob can clear that up for you. Keep pressing, your coming apart at the seams. You are a disruptor and that is apparent to all.

Another example of your superior writing talent.

Thank you Kaliix, you have saved me time by hitting on every point that I was just about to.

I told Tim that I was going to crack back on him hard for his remarks concerning associations such as ours as having no jewels. As I previously posted, the CIF is a powerful body, and I am sure most other states have equally powerful federations that dictate how their games are to be officiated.

You have stolen all my thunder, Kaliix.

Tim, quit calling other associations jeweless for not doing it your way. I am sure no assignor will throw a rookie out without at least a little prior experience, or at least a little classroom and/or field clinic training.

Steve

Old WCB wrote:

<b>Garth,
I read your earlier post and understand what you wrote. You are correct that you won't convince me to change my stance on VO. Your mockery of Pete was expected. He made a grammatical mistake and you jumped all over it. Check out what I wrote to TAC, it applies equally to you. You must be a legendary umpire in your parts. I would love to see the umpire who never makes mistakes at work. When is your next game?</b>

You are making assumptions again. I never claimed to work perfectly. You are welcome to my next game, tomorrow evening 6:30 in Spokane Valley, Mens Adult Rec Basketball. I'll be the referee in two man mechanics.

Now, did I jump "Pete of AZ" for a glaring grammatical error? Yes, I did. But think for a moment. Have you seen me jump you for such an error? (Yes, you have made some.) Do you see me jump at every such error? "No", you'd say if you were being honest.

Here's an excellent example: when was the last time you saw me correct or point out an error in one of Jeff's posts? Can't name a time, can you? Why? Jeff is not pretending, or claiming, to be a college level educator.

I jumped at Pete's error only because he was making such a big deal about his education and his alleged occupation of teaching. It was like the old bowing alley, he set the five pin up; I just picked up the spare. Just as you like to go after Tee for his arrogance, I enjoy deflating the false pompousness of the allegedly over-educated.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------<b>

Pete,
You've now experienced the best they have to offer. BigUmp56 and SanDiegoSteve are one trick ponies. Where one stops, the other starts; it is often difficult to see where. TAC actually knows his stuff but he is somehow relegating himself to criticizing writing skills. It's a sad turn of events. Garth is Garth; I actually like seeing him take a stance and committing himself to the battle. He has had more than a few run ins with Carl and can hold his own. I'm not sure why he has jumped on the Grammar Police bandwagon either. Usually that is a last resort for those who can't debate and he can.</b>

Thanks for the compliment. I really take stands more often than people think. However, as I have aged, I do so less emotionally and endter into fewer arguments than I used to.

<b>It was a mistake to divulge your career. Some of these guys are filled with contempt for anyone who has achieved more than themselves. I'm not a fan of attorneys but applaud anyone who teaches.</b>

I have no contempt for real attorneys, anyone with the ambition to get an education or those who excell in life. But it is so easy to claim something on the internet and get away with it. Here, watch: <i>I am an attorney.</i>

See how easy that was? Heck, and I even post my real ID, not some candy-a$$ anonymous pen name like "Pete in AZ" or well, you know.

Watch, I'll do it again: <i>"I'm a superior court judge."</i>

Wow. I'm good.

No, Petey will have to do better than terrible posts and unconvincing arguments to sell himself as an attorney and a "pre-law" teacher. BTW, most pre-law educators I know are professors or adjunct professors or instructors, not teachers, but they might do things differently in AZ.

Any way, thanks again for the kind words. I'm sorry for your misunderstandings. I hoped we've cleared things up.

To recap: No, I'm not perfect. You've made some incorrect assumptions. Pete still walks like a duck and my next game is tomorrow night. Bring some beer.

[Edited by GarthB on Nov 20th, 2005 at 10:57 PM]

I think the J/R is cool.

So is the BRD!

Actually, in defense of Pete (yes, I am nuts, thank you), he said he had a pre-law degree, and that he was a teacher. He never said he was an attorney, or that he taught pre-law.

But I'm Batman! Shhhhhh!!! Don't tell anyone!!!

Aw hell, sorry Garth, I just read his post again. He does claim to teach "pre-law." Sorry.

[Edited by SanDiegoSteve on Nov 20th, 2005 at 11:08 PM]

As does everyone, but that wasn't the subject of the thread. We're pretty much in agreement that all the manuals are useful tools, but they are not universally applied, so they remain "opinion only" at the amateur level. I want to know a way to make them mainstream, and affordable for everyone.

Per Petey in AZ:

<B>" I said that I didn't find his way of writing to be condescending because I teach and have a law degree. I am surrounded by people who try to impress each other all day. I teach pre-law and enjoy not having to hear and see I said that I didn't find his way of writing to be condescending because I teach and have a law degree. I am surrounded by people who try to impress each other all day. I teach pre-law and enjoy not having to hear and see preening attorneys before the bench."</b>

Granted, in the above he never outright claims to be an attorney. But he does say has a law degree and "teaches pre-law" because he prefers that to seeing and hearing preening attorneys before the bench, giving, at least, the illusion that he is an attorney.

But, in his favor, I guess he could have flunked the bar exam after getting a law degree and found some college somewhere that would hire him. Or, he could be lying. Who knows?

I can't resist entering a 9 page thread.

Read the last post of page 6 of this thread and Pete in AZ's earlier post on the same page. You'll see that he claims a law degree and that he teaches pre-law. I do agree that he hasn't directly claimed to be an attorney.

Yeah, Garth, I edited my post to reflect that. I went back and re-read his posts. My bad.

Until amateur umpiring becomes nationalized, which will never happen, they will not be universally applied.

But they are applied today by intelligent associations and leagues and are more than opinion. They are authoritative opinion and they carry weight with many BOD's, leagues and associations. I don't understand why you are fighting so hard.

You want MLB to come out and say, "The JEA is Gospel." Won't happen. We have to move on and use what is available. You have a choice to support yourself with the likes of the JEA or the opinion of Ernie down the street at Aunt Martha's Pie and Screen Door Company.

Re: Back on topic
 

Do you have a citation number from the PBUC Umpire Manual to support your assertion?
Thanks,
Dave Reed

Ummmmm Steve,

Pete did say he had a law degree and that he taught pre-law.

On to the association issue.

For those of you that work games in an asociation that will not assign at least a two man crew:

I now have a better understanding of where you're coming from. I still don't understand why you took my opinions so personal.

I said nothing insulting about your particular association, it's members or yourself. My comments were, and still are my opinion on what I feel is not a good policy.

If you feel it's a good policy then that's your right. I have the right to feel otherwise. Because I disagree with President Bush's policies, does not mean I'm insulting you when I say he's an idiot, does it?

None of you have said that you feel rookies working solo is a good policy. You've only said that's what your stuck with for various reasons. Have you ever considered discussing this with the officers of your association? You may find out they feel the way I do, but are simply unable to effect change.

Tim.

Re: Re: Back on topic
 

Dave,

This particular example is from the PBUC web site. I do not own the manual.

Tim,

If I worked for the Bush administration, I would take your remarks personally. If I were say, Dick Cheney, yeah, I'd be pissed at you. Most people identify with their particular organization. They often remain loyal to their association, even when others jump around to different ones. When you insult associations that assign solo games, you are insulting its members by proxy. Can you now see how that is taken personally?

Yes Tim, we all think one-man is not the ideal situation. And the leaders of our associations feel the same way, I'm sure. Who doesn't think two is better than one? Three's better than two, but we don't refuse to work games because the schools only want two, do we? We all found out that six is too many.:D

Steve

[Edited by SanDiegoSteve on Nov 22nd, 2005 at 09:33 AM]

Re: Re: Back on topic
 

I could not find in PBUC either. Item 109 in BRD says batter can not overrun in FED but can in NCAA or OBR if he returns immediatelly.

I would love for all associations to supply the manuals to each official at the first meeting of the season. Then, and only then, would all officials in the same association be able to call games in a consistent way. That is all. Mods, lock this sucker up.

Dave, here is the web page I got this, and other gems from. The poor man's PBUC.

http://home.earthlink.net/~sscutchen...UC/interps.htm

Steve:

You appear to be an adult, but you are sounding like a teenager.

First of all, never will ALL associations do anything the same way. Let's pretend we live in the real world. Affect that which you can. Work to get YOUR associations and the leagues YOU work with to understand the need for and the legitimacy of "Casebook type" materials. My association uses the JEA and the leagues which we work utilize it for any appeals or rulings.

You want the same? Work for it. Don't whine about it. It isn't very becoming of someone who is so good an umpire he was nicknamed Augie Donatelli. It resembles more a little league umpire who doesn't understand reality.

Then, move on so you don't become another "Poor Johnny One Note."

You'll be glad you did.

[Edited by GarthB on Nov 21st, 2005 at 12:06 AM]

I ain't snivelin'
 

Garth, Garth, Garth,

I'm not whining about anything. I brought up the subject because there are so many differing interpretations being used, and not everyone has access to the manuals. That's all.

I am perfectly willing to call the games the same way I always have. I don't have any problem with that. I originally asked a legitimate question: When will the manuals be incorporated in the rule books? I got my answer about 9 pages ago. It was answered by Ozzy. Ever since, the thread had gone on a variety of tangents. I recently attempted to steer it back into a discussion.

You have made a good suggestion. We should all talk to the powers that be, within our associations, to find a standard interpretation reference, and have everyone use it. I too, think all the reference manuals are just grand.

I gave an example from the PBUC, just to illustrate how two authorative opinions differed on the same play.

Garth, please feel free to start a thread of your own. Let's talk about something more interesting. This one has gone on much longer than I ever imagined it would. I would gladly drop the subject at any point. I don't want to be another one-note Johnny.:D

Steve,
Thanks for the link. Just so you know, these ruling were made by Chris Jones of the PBUC. Subsequent to this particular ruling, Mike Fitzpatrick, who is the director of the PBUC, provided the contrary ruling that a B/R may overrun on a ball 4 passed ball or wild pitch. You can read about this in the BRD (article 109 in the 2004 edition.)
I don't have a copy of the JEA, but if it actually said that the B/R may not overrun on ball 4, I expect that Papa C would have included it in the BRD. According to Rich Ives, in a thread here from last July 27, the MLBUM also allows an overrun. And J/R allows the overrun.
So I'm inclined to believe that there is pretty good agreement among the various authorities regarding OBR-- except Chris Jones.

Of course, not all rule codes are the same: FED doesn't allow overruns, and NCAA explicity allows them by rule.
Dave

Were these your words? Let's not pretend they aren't, BigUmp56.

"No rookie umpire, or experienced umpire should have to worry about being able to quote rules to a manager. He shouldn't be on the diamond without an experienced partner. That's one of the reasons we allow conferences, so that we can put at least one more head into the mix to sort things out, away from the manager."

I'm glad you don't consider that offensive. It's just your opinion, right? "He shouldn't be on the diamond without an inexperienced partner." No, that's not offensive to thousands of umpires! Experienced umpires quote rules all of the time, they don't just call it and walk away. Most experienced umpires respect the game and tolerate the coaches. If you can't explain your call respectfully to a coach you are in worse shape than I imagined.



But, wait…there’s more!

The coup de grace is that you edited your post to remove the hate filled rhetoric and omit the part that derided groups for not having the jewels to demand two umpires. No one claims that working a game by himself is fun, easy or desirable. Your arrogance is disturbing. Back it up with a more than a few years of big diamond work then I’ll listen.

I don’t edit my posts for spelling or grammar mistakes. I try not to ridicule others for making typos unless they do it themselves. If I make a mistake, I don’t try to hide it. I noted the number of edited posts you and SDS make. You'll never get a Gold Glove with all of those errors.

You are developing a penchant for being a disruptor. Twisting the facts on multiple internet sites seems to be your dream. I can't imagine why.

Re: Re: Back on topic
 

It's not in the PBUC umpire's manual. It's in the MLBUM, 5.14 Note.

did you know that ron popeil has made something like $30 million, and the "but wait...theres more" line was completely unscripted and just stuck with him once the crowd kept repeating it? something like that.

sorry, had to add that.

These "interpretations" are unsigned. They are not published by PBUC nor sanctioned by it. They are from a very good amateur umpire in Galveston, I believe, name Steve Cutchen. (I know he's good because he has some of my stuff on his site.)

You can find official PUBC interpretations in their manual or the BRD. PBUC has no position on over-running first base on an award.

I joke, I joke, I kid, I kid, I am Triumph the puppet dog.
 

WWTB,

I try to make my posts presentable, and I don't like looking at my mistakes. I don't go back later and edit out things I have said. I may delete a post immediately after posting it, if I made it out of anger and felt it was to much, or made me look totally stupid (I know, I do that all the time). I sometimes edit my posts to add content that I thought of too late. But these are reasons why the edit feature exists. And using "your" instead of "you're" is not a typo, it is an example of very bad grammar. Come on WW, I'm just bustin' your chops, dude. Don't get mad! Just having some fun here. Laugh a little.:D

Garth,

I just got done reading some very interesting posts from this forum, circa March, 2003, in which you, Tee, and several other regulars discussed the very subject of this thread. The same questions were bantied about back then. "Which interpretation is right," "I don't agree with the PBUC interp," and that sort of thing. Very spirited discussions, indeed. I learned more from reading those posts, than from this exercise in futility. Search engines are great!

Steve

There goes my new gear
 

I guess the bottom line is I need to break down and buy all of the different manuals, since they can't be Limewired.:D

There goes my new chest protector and leg guards!

As you've seen, few will agree on any topic. Loyalties to fundamentals and manuals are engrained in our beings. I graduated from B/F a long time ago and relied on the BUD programs to get the job done. The guys I see from JEA are terrifically sound instructors and umpires. But they are robots married to his manual. Those that jump to the next level think that PBUC is the Holy Grail. Some groups have their own instruction manuals that are really sound. The bottom line is that with so many schools and so much money at stake, consolidation is an impossible task. Most of us are too set in our ways to abandon the things we know. Just look at how long it has taken for the high strike to be called by former American League umpires.

A habanero may be tasty to you, but it melts my mouth.

I love it! Ten pages of pure, 100%, unadultrated, steaming piles of BS! Please keep on - let's see if we can get to 20 pages! That may be a forum first!

:>)


The season's over and we are all bored!

Ozzy,
I couldn't agree more; this has become a time waster. Even when you quote him directly - the entire paragraph, too - he'll deny that he meant it. He knows the definition of jewels as well as he knows McGriffs. For someone who claims not to go there anymore, he certainly is familiar with it.

I tried to steer the conversation back to PBUC, J/R, JEA but he just won't let it go. So, I will.

His talent with a search engine is legendary. The disruptor may have the final word for this thread. If I were Steve, I'd close it before BigUmp56 tells us about the maturity of grown ups or why rookies should never umpire alone again. Something about inexperience and not knowing what to do in certain situations...hmmmmmmm???

Ozzy, TAC, Garth - you are welcome!

[I just want to see what the edit button does, here goes...]

[Edited by WhatWuzThatBlue on Nov 21st, 2005 at 06:51 AM]

And to think I was going to pull the plug on this thing about 7 pages ago!

WWTB,

I just wiped out my entire post to you by accident. Damn.
I don't feel like trying to remember the whole thing either. Well, if you saw it before I screwed it up by editing it, great. It's way too early here.

Re: I ain't snivelin'
 

For overrunning first:

The MLBUM says in 5.13:

<i>NOTE: The batter-runner is not prohibited from overrunning first base on a base on balls (i.e.,
the batter-runner may overrun first base on a base on balls and is not in jeopardy of being put out
provided he returns immediately to first base).</i>


The current, published version of the PBUC does not discuss the situation. The prior version also did not discuss the situation.


If you are going to reference the PBUC you can order the real thing from Plus Pos $15.95 or Gerry Davis Sports for $16.90.

The title of the article I referenced was "PBUC Interpretations." I really thought it was actually from that organization. Thank you for pointing this out, again.

Re: Re: I ain't snivelin'
 

Quote:

Originally posted by Rich Ives If you are going to reference the PBUC you can order the real thing from Plus Pos $15.95 or Gerry Davis Sports for $16.90.

Or, you can order one directly from the PBUC, and save a few bucks.


You can send a check or money order made out to:

PBUC for 18.95 which is 14.95 for the book and

4.00 for shipping and handling.

Or you can call them at: 800-785-8677 ext 1722

And order over the phone with a visa or master card.

Their mailing address is: PBUC, P. O. Box A,

St. Petersburg, FL 33731.


Tim.

One down, the rest to go
 

Thanks for the info Tim. This manual seems reasonably priced. The others however are a bit pricey for me right now. I really am saving up for new gear.

From where can I get the MLBUM? And I read something about the Jim Evans book being hard to locate, is that true?

I know where to find the others, Carl's and J/R's, but I would have to take out a loan.

Re: One down, the rest to go
 

Carl's is $31 including shipping. J/R is $38 including shipping. One game fee would almost do it, two certainly would.

Re: Re: One down, the rest to go
 

You are right DG, that would certainly take care of it. The remarks I make are often tongue-in-cheek. This was just a comment about the need for so many manuals. I'm sure owning these manuals won't break me, but they are a bit pricey.

All of a sudden, I'm hungry for Carl's Jr. I wonder why?......

Re: Re: Re: One down, the rest to go
 

If interested in Carl's I would suggest wait till the new one comes out in 2006, for the latest and greatest. I assume a new edition will come out early in the year. He generally updates annually.

...so what's better, a mask or a helmet? :D

LMan,

Always room on the umpire.org board for that one, in fact, new posts await...http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/pimp.gif

Re: One down, the rest to go
 

Tell Santa what you want and maybe you will be surprised.

Sorry about the "cool" references. I thought something lighter was appropriate at that time.

I think we all agree the rule books are mere skeletons that, like any regulations, try to address what most often occurs in a game, and, again, like any group of laws, take an "act of congress" to change. Fed. and NCAA are their own governing bodies and don't have a player's union to contend with. Their changes are added almost at will.

I think all these (J/R, BRD, etc.) books are reference materials that are very useful in training the brain to think beyond what is wriiten the the rule books...policy manuals, if you will. They have helped me try to figure out why a rule was written and how each "authority" came up with his interpretation. The knowledge gained from these books, AND sites like these, will be part of my backbone when I need to invoke 9.01c or any of her sister references.

Agreed, no coach is going to buy "cuz Rick Roder says so",
but all our knowledge from these respected umpire school text writers and accomplished authors (all umpires, as well) is great ammo to bring into your protest meeting. Lastly, why diss (I'm so street) the massive amounts of research that went into all of these references.

We may not agree with every "authoritative opinion" (CC's term) but I'm not putting my credentials up against their's.


D

I find it odd that some threads get closed on a drop of a hat, and this one was allowed to survive for 11+ pages. Strange days indeed, most peculiar mama.

Instant karmas gonna get you
Gonna knock you right on your head

And we all shine on.

The same west coaster was involved in both...hmmmmmmm?

No loss regarding the Earl Woods repeat...it had nothing to do with baseball and this is not a parenting seminar...who cares?

Nor is it a poetry festival, but it resembles one at times. The articles that well-intentioned Tim posted, were only intended to make people think. I repeat, nothing better has been posted on the board lately. If you don't like the subject of a particular thread, then just skip over it, and don't respond. Don't always feel obligated to post something, just because you don't like a topic. In fact, just unplug your computer right now!

Hahahaha
 

"I repeat, nothing better has been posted on the board lately."

Steve somewhere you have become "the defender of all."

That's too bad.

You come to this site late . . . other people here have much more believability by simply their number of posts, YET, you seem to want to "change" the board to fit your opinion.

People that disagree with you always get comments (kinda like the way I react) from you. Then you argue and argue.

The article Tim posted (across all sites of internet umpires) was a total waste. There are hundreds of articles dealing with patricide and such. The article did not do anthing for the advancement of umpiring. Nothing.

Tim has attempted to take this site where his comfort lies . . . he is a Little League umpire and wants this to be yet another Little League site. Not only that he opened his own site (great reactions from Gary Mcgriff taking BigUmp to the woodshed) so why can't he keep his stuff there.

And you fit his needs.

You claim 3,000 games (how many of those are actually "unpaid baby sitting" i.e. Little League) but you post like a guy that works 10 year olds.

All I ask, rather than continue to criticize, is recognize that guys like WCB and yrs trly just feel that the best way to any answer is a straight line and we do not care if we hurt someones feelings.

This site would be much better if a few people left to never return. (I know, I know . . . you can think of two guys right now.)

HOWEVER, it is a free site and anyone can post whatever they want -- they just better be ready to accept what happens AFTER that post.

Quite crying in your beer and step to the plate.

Tee

Re: Hahahaha
 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Tim C
"

The article Tim posted (across all sites of internet umpires) was a total waste. There are hundreds of articles dealing with patricide and such. The article did not do anthing for the advancement of umpiring. Nothing.

How many of those articles dealing with patricide relate directly to baseball Tee? Was this article any less interesting than the thread that turned into a Cubs ~vs~ White Sox thread? I could care less if it interested you or if you thought it was a waste,Tee. I told you before after you sent me another one of your insulting profane e-mails that I don't umpire, or post on umpiring forums to please you. That would be impossible, as you don't ever appear to be pleased with anyone other than yourself. It was of interest to some, including myself. To me, that's all that matters. Also, you are incorrect when you say I posted this article "across all sites of internet umpires." I posted it here, on rec, sports, and my board. Three sites certainly doesn't comprise all of them now does it. Not all umpires that post on internet forums post on, or read multiple boards. You should know this, you post and read post's from several boards. Again, if you don't like it, pass it by. No one is holding your feet to the fire. Problem is, you can't do it, can you. You need to feel good about yourself by putting down others. That's a shame. At times, you can be extremely helpful, then other times you can be the biggset *** on the net.

Tim has attempted to take this site where his comfort lies . . . he is a Little League umpire and wants this to be yet another Little League site.

Here we go again with the Little League bashing. What's your problem with LL? You need to tell me again so I understand why you feel a baseball organization with nearly 200,000 umpires is a bad organization for umpires. Is it because they suggest we do it for free? Is it from a bad experience with the organization personally? The LL regions all hold at least two, one week long umpiring camps each season. They bring in umpires with all levels of experience to instruct in the camp. They pour over rules, mechanics, situations, etc. at the camp. How many other youth organization do that fot their umpires? You need to let me know just what exactly a "Little League" site is. I thought this was an umpiring site without regard to organizational affiliation.


Not only that he opened his own site (great reactions from Gary Mcgriff taking BigUmp to the woodshed) so why can't he keep his stuff there.


How did Gary McGriff take me to the woodshed Tee? It was less than ten days after I started posting a link to my board that he cleaned out the entire basball board and started attatching IP addresses on post's. He made a post on my board asking me to stop spamming his board. I told him I would as long as he changed things. I took *him* to task for allowing such crap to take place on his board. It would appear that it was me who took Gary to the woodshed.

The board I have was started as a reaction to a couple of things. The crap going on at the McGriffs site was just part of it. The other, and probably the most significant reason was some of the nasty posts made by.... well, by you Tee.
I made a post on the ABUA board about your sense of humor. Do you remember that one Tee? After I made the post, I recieved 8 PM's from people applauding me for the post. They all were sick and tired of being bullied by you for not "measuring up." I decide then that I would start another board where we can get along and learn to agree to disagree.
The board is new, and really it is not designed all that good. It's simply a community message board using Google servers. There are 49 umpires registered to date on the board. I take that back, 48 umpires and one Rich Ives.
If and when the board becomes more popular and we get more umpires posting, I may start posting all of the threads I start there. Until then, you'll have to live with me posting in *your* back yard. I won't be bullied by you Tee. You can send me all the nastly childish little profane e-mails you want. You can jump up and down and stop your feet like a child if you want. It won't change a thing. It will only continue to show how childish you are.


All I ask, rather than continue to criticize, is recognize that guys like WCB and yrs trly just feel that the best way to any answer is a straight line and we do not care if we hurt someones feelings.

You need to follow your own advice, Tee. You are the single most critical umpire on the internet. Bar none! You don't answer anything anymore without a snide comment. I started a thread about signs beteween umpires, and you jumped right on with the I looked it up, and we've discussed this blah, blah , blah..... How in the hell was I suposed to know it's been discussed here in the past? The search function is disabled. Even if the search function was enabled, there are some who would still feel this was a good discussion who would otherwise not be looking for it in the archives anyway.

Of course you don't care if you hurt someones feelings. There is no accountibilty for your comments when they're made on line. You wouldn't talk to people like this face to face, or at least you wouldn't talk to me face to face like that. I'd wear you out if you did.

This site would be much better if a few people left to never return. (I know, I know . . . you can think of two guys right now.)


Hmmmmm.... Let me guess!

HOWEVER, it is a free site and anyone can post whatever they want -- they just better be ready to accept what happens AFTER that post.

It works both ways, Tee. Some of us can accept the fact that they're wrong at times, and admitt it. Others ego's are way to big to allow that to ever happen.


Tim.

Waa, waa, waa
 

Edited because some people aren't worth the effort.

Tee

[Edited by Tim C on Dec 2nd, 2005 at 11:15 AM]

Go look on the ABUA board again, Tee. It's not the same article.


If you weren't so self involved you'd have read it and know that you once again have your facts wrong.

Tim.

<b> He (Gary McGriff) made a post on my board asking me to stop spamming his board. I told him I would as long as he changed things.</b>

Let me understand this. Gary made, from what I read, a polite request that you quit advertising another board on his board. Seems to be a reasonable request.

But, you say you agreed to do so only if he met certain conditions of your making?

Amazing. Truly effin' amazing.

Re: Hahahaha
 

Nobody crying here, bossman.

You may answer straight line, but Windy does not. You quit defending him.

Tim has every right to post whatever he wants. I know you have disgust for all Little League umpires, and you designed this site for 90ft. umpires, but lighten up, Mr. Anal. There is plenty of room for everyone here. This is by far the best forum for discussion out there, but it won't be if you exclude people based on the level that they work. As I have said ad nauseum, the level you work is not necessarily indicative of your ability. I know D1 guys who should not be working JV high school ball.

Some of your posts are no great shakes either, buddy. Sometimes your posts are infantile and pathetic, especially when doing nothing more than bashing others.

No, my 3,000+ games only include a small amount of Little League, mostly in my first year of umpiring. I was considered a very good umpire almost from day one, and was working varsity high school regularly from my second year on. I also worked many Legion games, Palomino games, and Adult baseball. The only reason I don't do college ball is because our association fumbled away the contract the season before I was to get a look. I have never worked an unpaid game in my baseball career, other than the pre-season scrimmages we are required to work. My volume of games is high because I worked nearly year round, averaging 175 to 200 games per year, for the first 17 years. I have slowed down a bit due to some health problems. You say I post like I work 10 year olds. What the hell does that even mean? I think my posts are usually either A)well thought out, B)an attempt at humor, or C)standing up for what I believe in, including coming to someone's defense when I feel they have been unfairly maligned. I have no idea why that relates to working 10 year old's ball games, but I guess in your little world, taking a stand equates to working on a 60ft. diamond.

I don't pick the fights around here. I don't as you say, argue and argue. I will speak my mind, and stand up for myself when challenged (which is constantly, but only by several individuals), or talked down to in any way. Like now for example. You talk to me like your the big bad voodoo daddy around here, and the rest of us (who have respect for other people's opinions) are just peons. You are the king, and we are but your subjects. Heaven forbid we dare to disagree with anything you have to say.

Is this what you meant by stepping up to the plate? You send any pitch my way, and see if I don't knock it out of the park!

Re: Re: Hahahaha
 

Did it ever occur to you that the reason some people don't post/read other forums is because of the content of those forums?

The things guys like you post on other forums chase people away. If people here wanted to know about what the latest bad parent story is, they would to to your Google forum. You fail to see that each forum is different, and that certain types of posts should only be made on certain forums.

Yes, Mr. Benham, that's exactly what happened. I have no regrets at all about doing what I did. I had sent Mr. McGriff numerous e-mails asking him to at least take a look at what was going on between umpires on the board. It was a disgrace to anyone who calls himself/herself an umpire. He only responded by telling me he had no intention of changing thing's. This was and still is a public forum were talking about. Anyone, including my children could read the board.

There were rules questions posted by some individuals who were obviously looking for help. For the most part, all they read after their post was hate filled rhetoric and profane filth of all kinds. To me, that was unacceptable. I felt they deserved to have their questions answered or discuss any baseball related issue without fear of the nonsense that was going on being showered on them. I certainly couldn't point them to this site to have their question answered, now could I. Some of you would have jumped all over them for posting questions you felt were beneath you. I'm not trying to sugar coat thing's on my board, but at the same time, I'm not going to allow any of the crap that was taking place on that board to occur. On this board, we can disagree with one another one day, and then agree on another while still being civil. There, unless things were changed, that was never going to happen.

I've not even covered all the homophobic or race related hatred spewed out on his forum. It must have finally gotten his attention when I began to pull some of the regular decent posters away from the site by posting my link. He decided to acquiesce and change things. I'll do it again in a heart beat if it returns to the way it was. We deserve better than that as officials.


Tim.

Wow. You really believe Gary changed his board because of your infantile threat.

And you believe you have the right to advertise your board on competitor's boards.

What color is the sky in your world?

Re: Re: Re: Hahahaha
 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by LDUB
[QUOTE]Originally posted by BigUmp56

Did it ever occur to you that the reason some people don't post/read other forums is because of the content of those forums?

No, Luke I didn't until I posted a link to the article a few days ago. I thought it might spark a discussion between some of us. As umpires, we've all seen OTT parents and coaches. As the baseball season is in hibernation right now, there's not much else to discuss. Personally, I enjoy hearing some of the war stories you guys tell. This article was intended to create some of those type discussions.

The things guys like you post on other forums chase people away.

How in the heck is a post about an OTT parent supposed to drive anyone away, Luke. If they don't like it, they don't have to even click on the link and open it up. All they need to do is click on that little "go" button at the bottom of the page and move on to the next thread.


If people here wanted to know about what the latest bad parent story is, they would to to your Google forum.

This was not just a common bad parent story, Luke. Did you even bother to read it or are you just trying to pile on because you think it's the best thing for you to do?


You fail to see that each forum is different, and that certain types of posts should only be made on certain forums.


Why do you feel they all need to be so different? Are you suggesting that you would support some type of segregation on these boards? We all do the same thing, Luke. We're umpires. We may not all do it the same way, but we all still umpire. That gives us a common bond, doesn't it?

Tim.

<font size = +3><b>GOTTERDAMMERUNG</b></font>

http://www.feebleminds-gifs.com/donderwolk.gif

McGriffs <i>Redux</i>

Wow. You really believe Gary changed his board because of your infantile threat.

Well you tell me, Garth why do you suppose he changed things?

I've been sending him e-mails for almost a year now asking him to change things. I started posting a link to my board after every rude post for only two days. After those two days, on Nov. 16th, he made a post on my board asking me to stop. I replied to him on the same day. Within 5 days, he cleaned the board out and started attatching IP addresses. I don't think it was just a coincidence that he suddenly made the change. If you were to go there, you'll also see that the baseball board is the only board to start adding the IP addresses.

Was it an infantile threat? No way! I tried to reason with Gary for a long time about this. All of my correspondence was done in a professional and gentlemenly manner.

And you believe you have the right to advertise your board on competitor's boards.

Competing for what? The betterment of officiating baseball? I'm not making any money on my board. The only thing I'm gaining is some good friends.

What color is the sky in your world?

Apparently no where near as black as the sky in your world.

Tim.

Re: Waa, waa, waa
 

Did you edit this before or after you sent me the e-mail this morning apologizing? I must have been worth the effort for you to send that e-mail, Tee.

Tim.

Yeah, it was all you. I mean Gary has never deleted anything before. Good job threatning him by posting links to your forum.

I can't believe that you seriously believe that Gary would change everything around just because you wanted him to. I haven't read anything this dumb in a long time.

You're right, Luke. The same week I had it out with Gary, all the stars lined up and it all just happened due to fate.

It was the old "action, reaction" thing. Believe what you want, I know why he made the changes.

Tim.

Ha Ha your damn self
 

Quote:

Originally posted by BigUmp56 Why do you feel they all need to be so different? Are you suggesting that you would support some type of segregation on these boards? We all do the same thing, Luke. We're umpires. We may not all do it the same way, but we all still umpire. That gives us a common bond, doesn't it? Tim.

Yes Tim, that is exactly what is being suggested. This site was set up to cater to the snobbish "college ball" crowd, not for the "small ball", or "eager to learn and share" crowd. God forbid we post anything that does not resemble a Pulitzer Prize winning article, or even mention games which are played on diamonds whose bases are less than 90 feet apart (even though the number of officials who work small ball far outnumber college umpires.)

Tim, what you fail to recognize is that the ranks of college ball umpires are often comprised of anal retentive, stuck up, insecure individuals who have a false sense of superiority over the rest of us (and don't try to crack back and deny this, fellas. It is the gospel truth). They are very exclusionary, as it is similar to a private club. When you dare to try to put yourself on an equal footing with them, they feel the need to insult and degrade you. It's alright, it's just their nature. They can't help it, as Ma Richards said about G.H.W. Bush.

As Tee stepped on his johnson by saying, they would like it if some of us would just go away. Careful what you wish for.

http://media.theinsiders.com/Media/O...29031_rant.GIF

Quote MCROWDER from thread closed post.

"This is stupid. There is no better word for it. I feel like I've walked into the chat rooms of a bunch of 11 year olds on AOL in the early 90s.

GROW UP.

For me - this place no longer holds any interest."


Well said Mcrowder.

SDS and BU56

You guys are getting old. Say what you are going to say and let the thread go...geez...droning on and on and on and on and on....How many threads do you guys have the last post...yet you don't argue...Whatever.

Oh yeah, I also work some LL, have posted about it here and elsewhere, and Tee and the other "college crowd" don't say a word...of course I don't drone on and on and on and on.

Back to lurking...maybe...

Deal with it
 

TBBlue,

Go start your own thread if you don't like mine. If you hadn't chimed in with your opinion just now, this post of mine would not have been necessary. But I'll be damned if I'm gonna take any crap off of anybody, starting with you. If you don't like what I have to say, take a freaking hike.

In the past 100 days. I have 5 and you have 5. What's your point? I've never said I didn't argue or that I wouldn't argue. If you can show me one post where I started an arguement, I'll rethink things.

In my personal opinion, if one hold's himself as any kind of a man, he is not going to be afraid to speak his mind and respond in kind, in a debate.

Tim.

As the number of my posts attest, I lurk far more than I post. Today, I cannot contain myself.

BigUmp, you may be big, but it's obvious you are not a big ump. You are no doubt a very small ump to match your very small mind.

Excuse me. I thought I was in the bipolar support chat room. My bad.

Re: Ha Ha your damn self
 

The Forum exists for everybody. Everybody is free to post. Everybody is free to complain about other people's posts.

It's called freedom.

You think?

Who cares how often Tee Alan gripes about little league baseball? Who cares how often Windy misrepresents to make a point?

You've often denigrated the paid site. If you were a member, you could have read my article yesterday on this subject.

If someone is wishing you would go away, by all means do so if that rings your bell.

Otherwise, stick around.

We're not McGriff's, and we don't discourage hot debate as long as it doesn't get obscene. Bob and mick take care of that. Our webmaster has never had to erase an entire season of posts.

The next time you insult me for having a valid opinion, could you at least do it with some substance. My 12 year old son can do better than that. If you disaree with things I've said, you need to speak your mind. Just throwing out a vague insult accomplishes nothing. If you're just looking to garner favor with the "big dogs", then maybe you have accomplished your goal for the day.

Tim.

Re: Re: Ha Ha your damn self
 

Carl, when did I do this? I can't recall saying one bad thing about the paid site. I wish I were made of money so I could join, but right now the money is tight.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Hahahaha
 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by BigUmp56

Quote:

Originally posted by LDUB Did it ever occur to you that the reason some people don't post/read other forums is because of the content of those forums?

You are saying you never thought certain people don't post on McGriff's board because of all the fighting? You never noticed that eteamz was the LL crowd? You never noticed the NFHS forum is for NF rules?

Some people don't like want to put up with everything that goes on at McGriff's, so they don't post there. Some people don't want to put up with all the crap at eteamz so they don't post there. People don't know NF rules because their state used the OBR don't post on the NF forum.

If you didn't realize that each forum is different, then how do you decide in which forum to start a thread? Ohh that's right, you just post the thread in every forum you know of.

No one wants to waste their time reading about stuff they don't care about. 60ft LL questions are not interesting to almost all people on this forum. I am sure people who work only 60ft LL don't want to read NF & NCAA questions.

As TBBlue has said, no one has a problem with him working LL. TBBlue even posts on a private forum along with many of the people from this and other forums who do not like you, and nothing has ever been said to him. If he has a question about LL, then he knows the best place for that is eteamz. When he posts here he doesn't bring a LL mentality. He is just another poster.

And no, everyone does not have a common bond. Many little league umpires are also coaches. They are half rat, half umpire, and that shows through if you watch they way they conduct themselves. Also, many LL umpires are happy working a very low level of baseball and have no aspirations to get better and move up to higher level games.

Re: Re: Hahahaha
 

yes there is training, is it good training though?

i worked LL when i was younger and 2 years ago worked the senior league state tournament for a friend (15-16 yr olds if i remember correctly), had the plate for the championship game. after that game, two of the other three umpires noticed my "weird stance" (GD) and recommended i use a different stance. they proceeded to show me sort of a heel-toe-like stance but much more than heel toe spacing and with your butt down lower than it should be. they mentioned that this was like something i'd be taught if i went to the williamsport school or something (one of them had been to this school), and i should begin to use something like that stance (never planned to go there previously, never will). i dont remember what was said but my stance was picked on for quite a few aspects, whereas ive been evaluated using GD, and its done correctly.

dont the LL schools also teach all 3 base umpires to pivot on the inside on like routine ground balls to the outfield? thats not correct, i understand, but theres quite a few things you see in the LLWS that make absolutely no sense.

All,

BigUmp may be onto something. He does not appear to know much about umpiring but he does appear to understand the mecurial Gary McGriff.

I have been reading McGriff's on an off since 1998. I believe that it started back in 1996 so I have most of the history under my belt. I do not view it much anymore but generally take a gander about once every week or two for laughs. I do not look at any of the boards much any more either as most will note that my participation has dropped off to once a week or so. It is Friday, however. :D (Long running joke for new posters which someone else can explain.)

I am getting ahead of myself. First, Gary McGriff must be put in perspective. This is a man who operates a long standing public nuisance. The fact that it is free to us is no excuse. Gary implies that he does not make a profit on the board but it is run something like a business. He has ads and links to profit making sites and theoretically it could be a proifit making enterprise. An examination of his tax returns regarding this matter would be interesting.

Imagine for a moment that a bank that operates above board. No money is embezzled. All deposits are paid on time. Interest is at competitive rates. Yet it looks the other way as drug money and other illegal activities occur under its nose. Only when the government continually harrasses it with enforcement actions does it try to clean up its act, and then only reluctantly.

Imagine a bar where the owner pays all his taxes and observes all zoning laws but where the police have to go every night to break up a fight because the owner does not police his own establishment. Imagine a swimming pool with clean water and nice facilities but no fence around it to keep little kids from entering and drowning.

All of these activities are public nuisances. McGriffs is a public nuisance. Gary has been warned over and over about what is going on over on that site. I have not posted there in well over a year, yet my name and moniker keep showing up in the author line of numerous posts. Dozens of other posters have been victims of having their names dragged through the mud over there with no recourse other than to deny it by entering the cesspool. Many vicitms may not be aware that their name is attached to some homophobic or racist post.

Like the bank making money from thugs, or the bar making money from fighting drunks, Gary chooses to do nothing. Legally, he has become a willing participant in this long running obscenity. Rational pleas to his better side fall on deaf ears.

On thing gets to Gary, however. I have noticed that if a poster makes a continued pointed attack, Gary is finally moved to act. Over the years, various trolls have attempted to overwelm the board with continuous posts that are out of line. Gary starts with deletions and is forced to monitor his own cesspool on a daily or even hourly basis in order to keep the trolls at bay. This takes enormous amounts of his time and he then grudgingly makes changes, sort of like the barkeeper who finally gets the message when his bar is torn up by the police and drunks fighting. Let's look at some history (which is by no means complete):

1. The first time I ever remember Gary taking action was with the Satan poster. This poster and his minions was the first that I remember Gary engaging in censorship. Finally someone had gone over the top.

2. The buttsnuffler vs Peterkisser wars. Gary monitored the board on a daily basis to clean it up for if he did not, the garbage overwelmed the site. What I find amusing about this period was that although the conflict was carried out in Carl's and my names, we made few of the posts.

3. Automated links to porn sites. The continually posting of automated links to porn sites forced Gary to abandoned his old style thread system. He could not keep up with the computer postings that were overwelming his site. He had been begged for years to abandon his thread system, but like a stubborn mule, he would not. A coordinated attack forced his hand.

4. Rut vs. Windy vs Observer of the Obvious et al. These posters laid waste to the wasteland that was McGiffs. Gary finally instituted IP numbers to clean it up. This incident, more than any other, exposed the hypocrisy of Gary McGriff. With IP numbers, the problem was reduced by 90%. However, most people, including Windy, stopped posting. Perhaps Gary could not stand to see the big hole in his site so he did away with IP numbers and the problems returned. My hypothesis is that Gary needs traffic to fund his site and the traffic was reduced too much by his posting of IP numbers.

5. BigUmp's stealth attack along with continued troll postings is the latest in a long line of nuisances to Gary. By continually posting a link to his site, BigUmp forced Gary to clean things ump. Gary has gone back to IP numbers. Gary now has nothing on his baseball site so do not expect that to last. He needs the traffic.

BigUmps analysis is entirely consistent with the way that Gary operates. Only when someone makes a total nuisance of themselves does Gary act. Requests, pleas, innocent victims -- none of that works with Gary. Making yourself a nuisance to Gary is the only thing that spurns him to action. BigUmps link in every thread was that nuisance.

Gary has no more moral right to operate a public nuisance than a porn site has a right to send spam using the cover that since you once bought a scenic calendar from them, you are an existing customer. Gary may be legally in the right to operate his nuisance, but legally, BigUmp can make a bigger nuisance of himself to get Gary's attention. Nothing else seems to work with Gary.

Peter

[Edited by His High Holiness on Dec 2nd, 2005 at 04:14 PM]

Re: Re: Hahahaha
 

Yup, I buy it. If true, this post will not be answered by SDS.

Big, if you check the last 100 days again, (where do you find the time?) you will find maybe one or two posts in the last two and a half months by me...hmmm I wonder what the coincidental factors to that are? Also, my posts weren't answered for one of two reasons. I bored everybody to tears, or nobody had anything else to add or contradict. I side to the first one, but whatever.

Have fun guys.

Ah, Peter, Peter, Peter. I can read a calendar. It's Friday. Nice, try though.

One can see even you almost gagged while trying to keep a straight face.

No, sorry. I know Gary. It wasn't a silly extortion attempt that caused him to change his site, yet again.

BigUmp would get up at 4:00 in the morning, complain it was dark, then take credit for the sun coming up.

Look, Carl made a great point; this site allows the flow of free thought as it pertains to baseball, umpiring, communicating or educating.

It does not matter whether you have a new book to sell, paid site to advertise or clinic to publicize, you are free to lie and distort to suit your needs. My guess is that some gingko biloba may be in order. As I told Bob Lyle, the Official Forum Rules are there for a reason. Unless of course, you are the King and Bob, Mick and Brad don't want to tell you that you have no clothes on.

What were they saying about Gary's hypocrisy? Oh yeah, he just doesn't understand how he's alienating the people who support his site. Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

It might be time to lock down another thread before this one goes the way of the others.

Imagine there's no heaven,
It's easy if you try.
No hell below us,
Above us, only sky.
Imagine all the people,
Living for today.

Imagine there's no countries,
It isn't hard to do.
Nothing to kill or die for,
And no religion too.
Imagine all the people,
Living life in peace, you-ooo...

You may say that I'm a dreamer,
oh but I'm not the only one.
I hope someday you will join us,
And the world will be as one.

- J. Lennon

[Edited by SanDiegoSteve on Dec 2nd, 2005 at 08:37 PM]