|
Mon Apr 29, 2002, 11:12am
|
|||
|
|||
|
Yes, by definition a balk, "is an illegal act by a pitcher with a runner or runners o
I didn't understand why straddling the rubber was not a balk until I read the above statement. It perfectly describes an invalid conclusion that cannot be proven by the mathematical laws of syllogism or detachment. I know I am about to be ridiculed by the following explanation, but I'll do it anyway.
According to the consensus of this board: 1) A balk is an illegal act. 2) Straddling the rubber is an illegal act. 3) Straddling the rubber is a balk. Not true! Look at it this way, but instead of balk, use "bear", instead of straddling the rubber, use "swan", & instead of illegal act, use "animal": 1) A bear is an animal. 2) A swan is an animal. 3) A swan is a bear. You see?
__________________
"Not all heroes have time to pose for sculptors...some still have papers to grade." 
|
| Bookmarks |
|
|
Threaded Mode
