Selling the call, by NOT selling the call.

[mcrowder]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

He said F3 did not touch the bag. Or at the very least implied that and that I why I asked the question. I do not think that what he wanted to say, but it surely was not clear. If you want people to understand then you have to be clearer in your statement.

Originally Posted by Nickrego

I have a perfect view of F3 catching the ball, and tagging the outfield side of the bag, about a step before the runner touches the bag

Note there are no edits on Nick's post. Nick pretty clearly says he saw F3 tagging the outfield side of the bag. How, again, does this imply that F3 did not touch the bag? How is this "surely not clear". Seems crystal to me.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by mcrowder

Note there are no edits on Nick's post. Nick pretty clearly says he saw F3 tagging the outfield side of the bag. How, again, does this imply that F3 did not touch the bag? How is this "surely not clear". Seems crystal to me.

I am not saying he needs an edit. I am saying that his post from my point of view and even others is not clear. If he makes an edit that is his right to do so, but we did not see the play, he did. All we can do is go by what he gave us. It is not for the reader to guess what you mean. I have done this myself where I have been vague or not clear especially when I am in a hurry or I do not read over my post before hitting the button.

Peace

[mcrowder]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I am not saying he needs an edit. I am saying that his post from my point of view and even others is not clear. If he makes an edit that is his right to do so, but we did not see the play, he did. All we can do is go by what he gave us. It is not for the reader to guess what you mean. I have done this myself where I have been vague or not clear especially when I am in a hurry or I do not read over my post before hitting the button.

Peace

I'm not sure why you're not understanding what I'm saying. I'm saying that the OP has not been edited after your posts - it says exactly what it said in the first place.

He says, " I have a perfect view of F3 catching the ball, and tagging the outfield side of the bag, about a step before the runner touches the bag". You say "He said F3 did not touch the bag". It's right there in black and white. "I have a perfect view of F3... tagging the base." Crystal freakin' clear. How does his statement imply any sort of ambiguity at all. I understand that in the past people (you, myself included) have been vague. But this is as unvague as you can get. "I saw the sky - it was blue." vs "He says he couldn't see the sky and didn't know what color it was. He needs to be clearer regarding whether he saw the sky or not."

[JRutledge]

Once again he put "which they didn't" into parenthesis which I confused for him saying the player did not touch the bag. Of course that is not what he was really saying, but that is why I asked for clarification. Also he was not clear about who got to the ball and why and you had to claim it was a short ground ball (which he did not say BTW) so I was asking for clarification. You ask for clarification so you understand what the person is trying to say. Once again I did not see the play, Nick did. I was also not the only one with some questions to what “actually” happen.

Also I did not ask you for clarification, I asked Nick.

Peace

[mcrowder]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Also he was not clear about who got to the ball

How? He said F1 fielded the ball. He also said F1 threw to F3, who caught the ball and then tagged the outfield side of the bag. Still not seeing why this wasn't clear.

and you had to claim it was a short ground ball (which he did not say BTW) so I was asking for clarification.

You're right. He didn't say it. My bad. Every ball I've ever seen F1 field was a short ground ball. My apologies for assuming that ALL must be. I guess you could be right that maybe F1 fielded this in right field and flipped to F3 behind him. That makes sense. (Although I guess this could explain why Nick took the play from the foul side! ) I also apologize that I assumed that when Nick said F1 fielded the ball, that F1 actually fielded the ball. My bad. Just as horrible - my assumption that when he said F1 threw to F3, he meant that F1 threw to F3. Sorry bout that.

There was, at MOST, a mild degree of ambiguity regarding what he was saying the FANS saw. The play itself was exceedingly clear, and was only made muddy by you (and others) who decided to assume he didn't mean what he said, and then claimed that your assumption didn't make sense.

The play itself - grounder to the pitcher on the first base line, thrown to the first baseman, who clearly tagged the outfield part of the bag - was pretty much perfectly spelled out. Not sure how this play suddenly became a grounder to first base, who threw to pitcher, who then had to have broken an ankle skipping OVER first base to clearly tag the outfield side of the bag. Do we really think THAT scenario is clearer than what he actually typed?

[JRutledge]

Honestly, I think you are making a bigger deal out of this. I asked Nick for clarification and he has yet to clarify. It really is not that big of a deal, I just wanted to know what happen. If he does not clarify I will not lose a bit of sleep because I do not have an issue of when to sell a call or not.

For the record if you think everyone did not see something, what you do is based on how much credibility you have with the participants and they type of play. I will usually say "he got the bag" if that is an issue, but I would not call that selling the call either. I would say the very same thing like, "He got the tag" on a play where the tag might be in question.

Peace

[nickrego]

I still have pretty good wheels, so when I think being in Foul Territory will give me the best look, and keep me out of the play, that's where I go.

Remember, the best view of a play is from the stands, which are in just outside of Foul Territory.