1) We're talking about baseball, not college football.

2) I said "generally" not "in no instance". The only time I can think of that it might be used is fair/foul on a "home run" -- where the ball is dead either way.

RIF.

A couple of things I wanted to point out.

As a player, I do not like umpires who are not willing to put their best effort towards preparing for an officiating a game. We have had umpires talking about how my league should only have 7 inning games, and not go the full 9 innings. To that, I say hang up the umpiring uniform, because anyone who is looking to get off the ball diamond as quickly as possible has no business being involved in the game at all. As umpires we are getting paid to serve the players and coaches. Come to the ballpark keeping that in mind, and if you want to leave by the bottom of the 2nd inning, please go and don't come back again.

I have also had enough with some of the punks on here who pick on PWL, when he isn't even here to defend himself. I have never had a problem with him. To claim one poster (StevenTyler) to be another (PWL) just because they both possess integrity is ludicrous. I also have an idea of why so many people here dislike fitump- he cares about the game of baseball, isn't in it for the money, and probably never did a game with the intention of getting off the diamond as soon as possible.

As a reader, I do not like posters who are not willing to put their best effort forth when writing a sentence.

Maybe they're right.

You are making an assumption. They may be referring to the inability of the players to play at a quality level beyond seven innings.

No, we are getting paid to arbitrate the game. There is a difference.

I believe this may be the first time I agreed with you. It would indeed be ludicrous if that was the reason for the claim. But, it is not.

Originally Posted by fitump56
[
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=6 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD class=alt2 style="BORDER-RIGHT: 1px inset; BORDER-TOP: 1px inset; BORDER-LEFT: 1px inset; BORDER-BOTTOM: 1px inset">Originally Posted by bob jenkins
Review (of umpire's performance by a qualified reviewer or group): Yes.

Instant Review (in a panacea to "get the call right"): Generally no.

</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

In no instance would you support IR, none? Not even for a Reviewer who could be at the field performing both as your Reviewer and Play Reviewer? (think College Football)</I>

We are talking IR where the game is stopped and, possibly, a limited number of IRs are awarded each game. You know that, don't be disingenuos.

Then you need to think harder. I have listed several that make perfect sense, one would be a catch-no catch, 2 out, where the determination would be a catch and all Rs would not be allowed to advance.

It's about the money.

Only when I felt threatened.

I did put forth my best effort in writing a sentence. Even if I didn't, who cares it's only a sentence and not as big a deal as my ballgames. Maybe they are right, maybe this league should go seven innings, but it sure as hell is not up to the umpires to go to the league president and ask that games be shortened. Just don't umpire the games in my league cause I don't have any patience with people like that. And what is the difference between coming out to officiate a game, and coming out to serve the players and coaches? When I say serving the players and coaches, that means making the right calls, regardless of which team they go against. As for PWL, people ought to take their shots at him when he is present to defend himself.

Oh, my.

If they are right, why can't they make the suggestion? Does you league have rule the prohibits umpires from making suggestions?

Think about it, it will come to you.

They are.

As an umpire, I do not like players who think they can tell an umpire what to say or do. You sound more like a rat than an umpire. Pick one and stick with it and don't try to wear two hats. Perhaps the umpires took this position because the teams in your league really suck and you are all not as good as your egos perceive you to be.:eek:

For the record, PWL and Steven Tyler are in fact the same person. It's not guesswork, it's not hocus-pocus. It is just a fact. Deal with it. And I'm still trying desperately to find this so-called integrity that he allegedly possesses.:confused:

I have much more integrity than you.

I'll take my life over your much pathetic one any day.

What kind of man lets his wife support him?

Oh I know, that would be you.

A retired man married to a very wealthy woman.

And we both enjoy every minute, thank you.

Do they still teach English in Canada?

I'll bet you do. I've met her.

How've you been stranger? Check your email.

When I was drunk at 14.

THANKS! Nice pics, who is he?

Oh No, PWL is back?

Ouch. I had hoped that this wouldn't come up but, "Oh well". :p

Not like here in the RWB Good Old USA, right Brother!

(Aside) I afears ya' all said told you be in the Top Five Garthie Cub.

Imagine the power. :(