Minor league coach killed by line drive

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by fitump56

They make the players when they coach base. Young life loss is more tragic? Maybe. Any life loss is not?

Adults are allowed to wear helmets.

The difference isn't the "value" of the life; it's that adults are (generally) considered able to make their own choice while children need to be "forced" to protect themselves.

[johnnyg08]

I really don't see how this could happened...I've had screamers and I mean screamers hit at me and the ball has never come close (yes, probably lucky)...but I still don't understand how...except for some random fluke of a hop how an umpire other that PU should ever get hit by a batted ball. Sad, sad story about the Rockies coach...probably wasn't paying attention or something like that...what a tragedy!

[DG]

Originally Posted by johnnyg08

I really don't see how this could happened...I've had screamers and I mean screamers hit at me and the ball has never come close (yes, probably lucky)...but I still don't understand how...except for some random fluke of a hop how an umpire other that PU should ever get hit by a batted ball. Sad, sad story about the Rockies coach...probably wasn't paying attention or something like that...what a tragedy!

I agree. I expect he was not paying attention to the ball at the time. It's the only explanation for how a former major league player could get hit by a batted ball.

[fitump56]

Originally Posted by johnnyg08

I really don't see how this could happened...I've had screamers and I mean screamers hit at me and the ball has never come close (yes, probably lucky)...but I still don't understand how...except for some random fluke of a hop how an umpire other that PU should ever get hit by a batted ball.

Balls either grounded or aired can produce paths that will exceed reaction times. This is also a factor of # of games, I believe, having past my 1,000th.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Adults are allowed to wear helmets.

The difference isn't the "value" of the life; it's that adults are (generally) considered able to make their own choice while children need to be "forced" to protect themselves.

Bob, I've always recognized you as a paradigm of interpretive charity: you always seem to impute the best possible interpretation on the posters in the forum.

You must be approaching your limit with some of these clowns, huh? It's too bad that moderators can't use the ignore list and still do their jobs!

[mcrowder]

This is really sad. I had classes with Scott at UT, and I know they were close.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by mbyron

Bob, I've always recognized you as a paradigm of interpretive charity:

I'm sure the word you were looking for was "paragon", not paradigm.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

I'm sure the word you were looking for was "paragon", not paradigm.

I think I'm OK with 'paradigm', though you might be a paragon as well.

Originally Posted by dictionary

paradigm: an example serving as a model; pattern.

[fitump56]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Adults are allowed to wear helmets.

The difference isn't the "value" of the life; it's that adults are (generally) considered able to make their own choice while children need to be "forced" to protect themselves.

I agree. The ultimate test whether adults will be required to wear helmets will be liability.

Insurance dictates.