Ball Four, in the dirt

[David Emerling]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Since either action is completed before BR reaches first, and since no furhter action happens until after that, the savings would be negligible.

That's true. I'm speaking, in general - not just ball four in the dirt.

[RPatrino]

Realistic, do you even umpire?

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by David Emerling

That's true. I'm speaking, in general - not just ball four in the dirt.

I don't think the amount of time it takes to exchange baseballs with the catcher for an entire game adds up to more than a minute or two, so even in general it's a weak argument to use time savings as a benefit for not changing baseballs.

[Ump153]

Originally Posted by Kevin Finnerty

Apparently, reading comprehension is not a strong suit of yours, as you drive home once again with your condescending remarks on this thread. The irony is that while showing poor comprehension, you're downing this guy for his comprehension.

A new high.

Apparently, comprehending humor is not your strong suit.

Absolutley incredible.

If you are so unable to comprehend what is being said, instead of atttempting, in vain, to interpret what others intend, just bypass the posts that offend you. Everyone will be happier.

[Kevin Finnerty]

Originally Posted by Ump153

Absolutley incredible.

Would you like to make another try at that one?

[David Emerling]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

I don't think the amount of time it takes to exchange baseballs with the catcher for an entire game adds up to more than a minute or two, so even in general it's a weak argument to use time savings as a benefit for not changing baseballs.

That's true.

This thread took a turn I hadn't intended. I was simply pointing out how spring-loaded they are to change baseballs at the MLB level and that it has become so routine that there does not seem to be any concern that this swapping occurs when the ball should remain live. Those reasons have been discussed and they make sense. This obsession with pristine baseballs has not always existed, even during an era when money was certainly not the issue.

And then, when a pitcher casually gets rid of a ball that has touched the ground he is promptly penalized. Was the runner advancing? Why not take the same ho-hum attitude with that occurrence?

Really just an observation more than a criticism.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Ump153

Absolutley incredible.

If you are so unable to comprehend what is being said, instead of atttempting, in vain, to interpret what others intend, just bypass the posts that offend you. Everyone will be happier.

Originally Posted by Kevin Finnerty

Would you like to make another try at that one?

Exhibits A and B as to why it's easier just to delete posts and why, imo, that was the instruction I was given by the site owner.

Ump153 (and others): Please don't be so quick to search for little faults in what others say. If you think an answer is wrong, just answer the original post with what you think is the correct answer.

Kevin (and others): Please don't be so quick to assume that every disagreement is a personal attack and to respond in kind. Although you think you know what you said, it might be that what they read is not what you meant (or however that saying goes).

[Tim C]

"So you are saying that your son is a cheater, nice! And please don't say that if the umpire doesn't catch it, then it's legal cause it's not.

"Let him throw one with alot of action with a cut ball(even if he didn't do it) and if someone catches him, he should be ejected because he is cheating. I wouldn't be so proud of a cheating rat."

Pretentious, gutless and incorrect. All in one post.

Hip, hip . . . well done.

Ties for the dumbest post on the internet.

Never have worked a game, huh?