Quote:
|
Originally Posted by DG
3 man is 50% better coverage than 2 man, and significantly easier than 2 man.
|
IF done properly, rarely it is. Easier, sure is, which as I have posted is one of the main reasons they have 3 man, older umps need the "easier" but who are we supposedly serving here, the umps or the sport?
Why not 4 man or 6 man then? Is a few bucks here and there in a sport that rakes in hundreds of thousands of consequence? Not in the least.
3 man, I stiffly contend, is a joke that serves umpires not the game.
Sun Jul 15, 2007, 11:22pm
Similar Threads
Hybrid Mode
