PBUC , J/R, and Evans

[SanDiegoSteve]

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.

[briancurtin]

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?

[SanDiegoSteve]

Yes.

[SanDiegoSteve]

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.

[BigUmp56]

Originally posted by WhatWuzThatBlue

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.

WWTB, those comments were directed at your nonsense about the need to move farm equipment before a game, and you know it!

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".

Yes, and I will stand by those statements. There is no way an association should throw a rookie umpire onto a field solo. If they do, they're not much of an association. If they do this, they're not doing either the rookie, or the game any favors. They are accepting substandard conditions if they do.

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.

You're once again attempting to swith focus with these statements. The issue is not about useless veterans, it's about how those veterans became useless. Throwing rookies onto the field solo creates these so called useless veterans you're talking about. I'm not saying that all veterans who got their start working solo are useless. I'm saying that they had to pay a higher price while becoming a veteran without an experienced partner to help. I'll say it again, so please read it reeeaaalll slooowly WWTB. Roookie uuumpires neeeed ooon fiiieeellldd iiin sttrructiioon in ooorder tooo iimpprooovee. Did you get it this time WWTB? And, if being a long time union member with strong opinions on working conditions means I'm immature, then yes, you can call me immature. I'll consider it a compliment. Although I must say that your riding in to attempt to save the day for Pete and Kaliix is pretty much what defines immaturity to me.


I've also found that a rookie usually does things by the book and knows what he is supposed to do.

Another peach of a comment from the master of smoke and mirrors. How do you think a rookie can possibly know what to do without instruction? Do you think that they should just be given a rule book and tossed out there to fend for themselves? Now you're saying that a rookie umpire is better than a veteran in your eyes. Who gives these rookies a post game critique? The managers?


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?


Nice try WWTB, you know full well what my credentials are. You're just baiting me. I've been very open about the fact that last spring was my first year working NFHS games. That doesn't change the fact that I've worked American Legion summer games for at least 7 years now, or that I've been umpiring LL, Babe Ruth, and Mickey Mantle baseball for 15 years. Before that, I worked ASA softball for three years, so don't play that crap with me Windster. I do know what I'm talking about.

You are an internet umpire; a very bad one at that.

No, I'm a real living breathing honest to goodness decent umpire that enjoys exchanging ideas with other umpires from around the country. Is Carl an "internet umpire?" What about Tee or GarthB, or Pete Booth, or Rich Fronhesier?

You want to play by the rules of the other site but then claim to be above it all.

You keep bringing up that site. The only posts I've made on that disgusting site for months were posts admonishing Gary for maintaining such a putrescent site along with a link to a small message board I started. I did this in an attempt to draw individuals that were seeking answers away from such an embarassment to baseball officials. I did make a couple of posts on the basketball board to thank the guys for all the hard work they do. I'd just spent the day watching my 13 year old son play a tournament, and was impressed by the work that they do. Even that thread soon degraded to filth with someone using my first name to make a rude post.

You claim that I am condescending because you have an inferiority complex. Start practicing what you preach.

No, I don't need to claim anything. You are a rude condescending angry little man. I know I'm not alone in that assesment. I don't have an inferiority comlex WWTB. What I do have is strong dis-like for people with a superiority complex. You fit the bill 100%. You're the one who lords his writing skills over all of us peasants like you're the cock of the walk, when the fact is you're just the first part of that persona.(I'm sure you can figure that out as smart as you think you are!)


I can cite dozens of examples of your being a "disruptor", in the terms of the agreement page.

Well, WWTB, please proceed. I'd love to read those posts myself.


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.


This one has to be the stupidest thing you've ever said. Pictures of equipment are not copyrighted. You know this, but you still feel the need to say something disparaging no matter how petty it it. If the forum took exception to the pics I've posted in the past. They would have deleted them and told me not to do it again. Stop speaking as if you know what this forum want's. You don't.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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?


I was going to adress these supid comments, but I'll stay out of these guys battles. They can certainly handle a troll like you.

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

Pete,
You've now experienced the best they have to offer. BigUmp56 and SanDiegoSteve are one trick ponies. Where one stops.....

Now you're the one who needs a course in remedial reading. Steve and I have disagreed on many things in the past. We've done so while becoming good friends. We were able to do this because we have a good understanding of what respect is. It's alright to have a point of view opposite of someone else's. I don't need affirmation from him, and he doesn't need affirmation from me. That's what being an adult is about WWTB. Being able to disagree without taking things to the level of insults you shrowd people in.

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]

[WhatWuzThatBlue]

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...

[BigUmp56]

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


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.

[SanDiegoSteve]

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?

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally posted by SanDiegoSteve
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.

Okay, back to the topic, already.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by SanDiegoSteve
[/B]

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

You guys are doing fine.

Entertaining as hell.

McGriffs Redux, with the same players but different names.

Don't stop now......

[SanDiegoSteve]

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

To the

[WhatWuzThatBlue]

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.

[SanDiegoSteve]

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

Congratulations!!!

[BigUmp56]

Originally posted by WhatWuzThatBlue
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."

One at a time.

1) Knowingly false and/or defamatory-- Nope, not me.
2) Innacurate-- Nope, not me.
3) Abusive-- Nope, not me, but you got two birds with one stone when you questioned Steve's and my paternity.
4) Vulgar-- Nope.
5) Hateful-- Well, in your case...maybe...
6) Harassing-- Nope.
7) Obscene-- Nope again.
8) Profane-- Since you feel you're the only one who can decide what's profane, you tell me....
9) Sexually oriented-- Nope, but you did accuse me of having a blow up doll now didn't you. Whose on thin ice now?
10) Threatening-- Nope, I'd like to but I won't.
11) Invasive of a persons privacy...-- Nope. You don't have your e-mail available to anyone for obvious reasons.
12) Copyrighted material-- Again, posting a picture from an online equipment supplier is not a copyright infringement. They'd probably shake my hand for posting it.

I believe you have violated several of these tenets. As Papa C. would say, you are alarmingly close to being banned.

What you believe in your convoluted viewpoint has no bearing.

I believe that the fourth paragraph includes a bold clause about not tolerating personal attacks.

I've never attacked you personally Windy. I've only responded in kind to your attacks. That's called self defense. Which is my right to do when you attack me. Simlpy pointing out that you are an angry condescending little man is not an attack. It's a statement of fact.

One can only assume that Bob and Mick left their copies of the rules at home.

Nice trite comment about the boards moderators. Is this because they have not come to your rescue?

Sorry Windy, you'll need to do better!

Tim.

[Kaliix]

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...

Originally posted by BigUmp56
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.