The Official Forum

The Official Forum (https://forum.officiating.com/)
-   Baseball (https://forum.officiating.com/baseball/)
-   -   Strikeout not credited? (https://forum.officiating.com/baseball/23250-strikeout-not-credited.html)

GarthB Sun Nov 20, 2005 12:47pm

Re: Dear Pete,
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Tim C


(Note: Pete remember I "welcomed" you to joining the pompous club that included "yrs trly").

Thanks for playing,

Tee

[Edited by Tim C on Nov 20th, 2005 at 11:26 AM]

Tee:

Careful. You may have inadvertantly misinterpreted denseness for pompousness. At times they can appear quite similar but upon closer inspection one usually includes the positive element of correctness while the other, cluelessness.

WhatWuzThatBlue Sun Nov 20, 2005 08:04pm

Is "careful" a sentence in any language?

I felt you would appreciate the fact that you made a grammatical blunder, after all you have embraced the need to point out others' foibles. TAC did the same, those are charming character flaws. Pete's attempt to make you think twice was better served by the adage about glass houses.

As far as the topic is concerned, I've rarely concerned myself with scorekeeping rules. I understand Rich's point and TAC's counter, but see no reason to worry about stats. If a coach asks me if the ball is a hit or error, I politely tell him that if the kid is one hit away from his performance bonus, give him the hit.

Jurassic Referee Sun Nov 20, 2005 08:21pm

Re: Re: Re: Hmm,
 
Quote:

Originally posted by GarthB
[/B]
<i>"The most useless thing for an aspriring law student to study is pre-law. One should earn a degree in an actual discipline that will assist him in understanding his world. He will get all the law he needs in law school."

Antonin Scalia</i>

[/B][/QUOTE]<i>"The first thing we do, lets kill all the lawyers".</i>

<b>Skakespeare</b>

GarthB Sun Nov 20, 2005 10:08pm

Quote:

Originally posted by WhatWuzThatBlue
Is "careful" a sentence in any language?

I felt you would appreciate the fact that you made a grammatical blunder, after all you have embraced the need to point out others' foibles. TAC did the same, those are charming character flaws. Pete's attempt to make you think twice was better served by the adage about glass houses.


Actually, it is a grammatically and literary correct manner in which to write an admonishment. Sometimes it is puncutated with an exclamation point; but the use of a period is also correct. While I do not write flawlessly and do make my share of mistakes, this isn't one of them.

For an answer to your charge of pointing out the errors of others, (I am not in the habit of paying attention to foibles; a slight error on your part) you would need to read my post in the thread in which you accuse of me of that and more.

Good evening. (Not a sentence either, but acceptable.)

briancurtin Sun Nov 20, 2005 11:30pm

Quote:

Originally posted by WhatWuzThatBlue
If a coach asks me if the ball is a hit or error, I politely tell him that if the kid is one hit away from his performance bonus, give him the hit.
id probably politely tell him that i dont give a sh!t whatsoever.

WhatWuzThatBlue Mon Nov 21, 2005 06:50am

Yes, but he'd be smiling while walking away from my comment. He'd scratch his head and think about it while that joke grenade gets ready to detonate. I like to baffle them sometimes. Coaches are easy targets.

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

Coach: Hi, how are you?
Umpire George Carlin: I'm not unwell, thank you.

greymule Mon Nov 21, 2005 11:53am

<i>Careful</i> and <i>good evening</i> are elliptical expressions meaning <i>you be careful</i> and <i>may you have a good evening.</i> Even <i>goodbye,</i> in its full-sentence form, is <i>may God be with ye.</i> But when our elementary school teachers told us to write in complete sentences, they wanted to see all the words on the paper.

Keep in mind that many of the rules we learned in elementary school (don't start a sentence with <i>and</i> or <i>but</i> or <i>because;</i> don't end a clause with a preposition) may have been appropriate for kids, but they don't apply to someone more skilled at writing. I remember the first day of school in 1973, when an eighth-grader of mine wrote about the television program he liked least: "<i>Honeymooners.</i> Same thing every wheek [<i>sic</i>]. Plus it stinks. And he does." That kid needs rules, whether they are fully accurate or not.

Oddly, a few years later a large state university adjudged that kid sufficiently scholastically competent to attend their institution (must have been my good teaching). Then the kid surprised them by turning out to be a terrific defensive tackle and a key to their top-ten ranking.

Today--no, he's not a TV critic--he plays slow pitch softball and blasts the ball over the fence at will.

Now, <i>let he who is without sin cast the first stone,</i> <b>that's</b> bad grammar.

mcrowder Mon Nov 21, 2005 11:54am

This forum has become a waste of time. We get maybe 1 intelligent original post in 10 now, and even those get hijacked into stupidity.

(Note to Rich - I can't remember EVER wondering whether a player had just stolen a base or not. All I care about are - can he advance or not, and is he liable to be put out while doing so, and was he safe or out. Don't care what the team-mom-turned-reluctant-scorekeeper writes down.)

Thanks, rats, for turning us into McGriffs and Eteamz. Go away now.

Bob Lyle Mon Nov 21, 2005 01:07pm

Quote:

Originally posted by mcrowder


Thanks, rats, for turning us into McGriffs and Eteamz. Go away now.

Careful! :D Check out McGriff's. Gary is a censor. He's cleaned house. He threw the baby out with the bath water.

briancurtin Mon Nov 21, 2005 01:12pm

Quote:

Originally posted by mcrowder
This forum has become a waste of time. We get maybe 1 intelligent original post in 10 now, and even those get hijacked into stupidity.
i definitely agree (note: it is clearly hypocritical for me to talk about a lack of intelligent posts, as my last bunch posts probably could have stayed in my head. ill call those 'exhibit A')

its nothing but bickering back and forth between moe, larry, and curly for the most part, but it rubs off on everyone (look at exhibit A). normally these threads should not be going 9 pages. cut out 7.5 of those pages, any random assortment of them, and its probably a partly decent thread.

mbyron Mon Nov 21, 2005 01:51pm

Quote:

Originally posted by Bob Lyle

Careful! :D Check out McGriff's. Gary is a censor. He's cleaned house. He threw the baby out with the bath water.

Ah. That explains it. More like rats & a sinking ship, etc.

SanDiegoSteve Mon Nov 21, 2005 02:20pm

Quote:

Originally posted by briancurtin


its nothing but bickering back and forth between moe, larry, and curly for the most part, but it rubs off on everyone (look at exhibit A).

Hey Moe, look....noyses!!!WooWooWoo!!

Rich Ives Mon Nov 21, 2005 04:07pm

Quote:

Originally posted by mcrowder
This forum has become a waste of time. We get maybe 1 intelligent original post in 10 now, and even those get hijacked into stupidity.

(Note to Rich - I can't remember EVER wondering whether a player had just stolen a base or not. All I care about are - can he advance or not, and is he liable to be put out while doing so, and was he safe or out. Don't care what the team-mom-turned-reluctant-scorekeeper writes down.)

Thanks, rats, for turning us into McGriffs and Eteamz. Go away now.


But there a number of rules that have consequences depending on whether or not a runner is attempting to steal.

Rich Ives Mon Nov 21, 2005 06:06pm

With all due respect Tee,


If a scorer improperly notifies a team of a BOOT, how would you address a protest based on that? I realize that the actual play becomes a "cat out of the bag" item but the protest reason is to get the scorer into silent mode. For that you need some reference so you can address the issue with the scorer. For that you need 10.01(b)(5).


How do you administer 7.04(d) without knowing what a steal is? At the levels you work, it's something that everyone knows already and it won't be an issue. Problem is, there are significantly more games played at lower levels where people don't understand, so a definition is needed.

I am well aware of your disdain for the lower levels of the game, but that does not mean that those involved don't need guidance from those that do understand.

Carl Childress Mon Nov 21, 2005 11:56pm

Quote:

Originally posted by WhatWuzThatBlue
Is "careful" a sentence in any language?

I felt you would appreciate the fact that you made a grammatical blunder, after all you have embraced the need to point out others' foibles.

Talk about ignorance. (Now <i>that's</i> a fragment.)

But "Careful" is an excellent imperative sentence. In such locutions, the subject is understood to be the person addressed:

"Careful!
"Watch out!"
"Sing!"
"Talk!"

There are other, one-word sentences that have an implied subject <i>and</i> verb:

"No!"
"Yes!"
"Maybe!"

Garth is not a friend of mine, as everyone knows. And he makes a few mistakes in his posts because of his eagerness and passion. But "Careful" is no mistake.

He's also teaching an honors Humanities class. Yesterday, they began work on 15th-century Italian art, architecture, music, painting, and sculpture.

What did you do yesterday?


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:15am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1