|
Tue Aug 06, 2002, 02:33pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
__________________
Jim Porter 
|
|
Tue Aug 06, 2002, 02:38pm
|
|||
|
|||
I was going to walk away from this understanding that we must agree to disagree, then you did something out of your usual character. You purposely slanted a resource to deceive others. You should truly be ashamed. If you have to rely on deception to convince others of your view point, you have slipped, Jim. You are not the Porter of the past. Shame on you.
"J/R does not say a balk cannot be called during a dead ball. Their book agrees with me." Bullsh!t. There is no reference in the book to calling a balk during a deadball at all. There is no agreement with you. You have lied. "JEA does not say a balk cannot be called during a dead ball. His book agrees with me. Again, there is no reference, no agreement. You have sunk to a new low, Jim. Wait, I get it. The real Jim Porter has been kidnapped. Someone less honest, someone with less integrity, someone who doesn't value Jim's reputation for honest disagreement is using his computer. What a dastardly act. You will pay for this whoever you are! And don't try to follow me, stranger. I will wait for the real Jim Porter to return before I add to this thread again. [Edited by GarthB on Aug 6th, 2002 at 02:48 PM]
|
|
Tue Aug 06, 2002, 02:40pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Until it happens to you, it only happens to idiot umpires. Now, it's never happened to me, but I at least know that it potentially can. I don't require the pitcher to show me the ball in his glove before I put it into play. The very nature of the offense is for the offense to be sneaky. They can fool the umpire. It's not that difficult. And it does not make the umpire an idiot.
__________________
Jim Porter
|
|
Tue Aug 06, 2002, 02:52pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
I did not lie. I simply used the IDENTICAL reasoning that you have used. If it's a new low, it's one you sank to first. Those sources support neither side because it is not addressed in any of them. You knew that when you asked me for those citations. But you badgered one poster here by saying, "There is no history to call a balk during a deadball. There is no ruling to call a balk during a deadball. There is no rule to call a balk during a deadball There is no practice, outside of Little League, to call a balk during a deadball." Those were just some of your remarks. But there's one chilling similarity with my remarks - they both claim the sources support us. But they don't support me, and they don't support you. They are not addressed. Nowhere is there a rule that says a balk cannot be called during a dead ball. And, as I have said, there is equally no rule that supports calling a balk during a dead ball. You were the first to claim, "There is no rule that," And you did it repeatedly. Now, I say, "There is no rule that," and suddenly I am the scum of the Earth. Must be tough to look in a mirror. Pot/kettle/black
__________________
Jim Porter
|
|
Tue Aug 06, 2002, 03:03pm
|
|||
|
|||
Re: hehehe
Originally posted by Tim C
Boy am I glad I'm outta this one! TEE missed you in this one. BTW do we now ask F1 to show us the ball as we would do on a play at the bases? It's amazing that this thread even got into the debate mode to begin with. Now we can have one of those old commericials is it "live" or "dead" Pete Booth
__________________
Peter M. Booth
|
|
Tue Aug 06, 2002, 03:04pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Dear Stranger:
I never said said "J/R agrees with me." I never said "JEA agrees with me" I never lied. I said there is no support for calling a balk during a deadball. The real Jim Porter would know the difference. The real Jim porter would not lie and then excuse it because he no one can find a direct source. I don't know how hard it would be to look in that mirror. I don't own one like that. Be as glib as you like. You have lied and it is in black and white for the world to see. Unless, of course, you decide to edit or delete it. I wouldn't expect that, but then I never expected you to lie either. Wait til Jim find out what you've done under his name.
|
|
Tue Aug 06, 2002, 03:05pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
I'm not going to continue with this discussion. It's obvious my arguments have caused hard feelings. I rule on this situation separately because the casebook comment addresses it separately.
However, certain specifics should be borne in mind: The intent to deceive is identical whether the ball is live or dead. That's it in a nutshell. Feel free to call what you believe is right. I know I will. [Edited by Jim Porter on Aug 6th, 2002 at 03:10 PM]
__________________
Jim Porter
|
|
Tue Aug 06, 2002, 03:18pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Dear Garth,
You have called me a liar roughly 8 times in this one thread. I implied you were a liar once about two years ago and you threw a big hissy fit, took your ball, and went home. It took months for me to make it out of your killfile, remember? It might be helpful if you could recall how you felt when I implied you were lying and you felt that you had not lied. I strongly feel I have not lied. I said, quite clearly, that those sources do not say that a balk cannot be called during a dead ball. That's not a lie. They don't say that. I see that as support for my position that a balk CAN be called while play is dead. You feel the opposite. That's called a disagreement. And grownups are supposed to be able to have them without calling one another names.
__________________
Jim Porter
|
|
Tue Aug 06, 2002, 03:37pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
The stranger claims:
"I strongly feel I have not lied. I said, quite clearly, that those sources do not say that a balk cannot be called during a dead ball. That's not a lie." This is getting as good as trying to figure out what the meaning word "is", is. Now I know you're not Jim Porter. How about this: "J/R does not say a balk cannot be called during a dead ball. Their book agrees with me." In fact, J/R does not address the issue. To state that they agree with you would be accurate only if you didn't address the issue. Instead you have stated that "their book agrees with you. That, stranger, is a lie. "JEA does not say a balk cannot be called during a dead ball. His book agrees with me. Oops, there's another one. So, you don't feel you have lied. I'm sorry. Perhaps I mistated the facts. You merely misrepresented something to the point where what you said is simply not true. I care less that you insist on calling balks during a deadball. I care less that have decided to go against years of baseball practice. I care less that you disagree with me or the anyone on this. I am deeply disappointed that you have lied to attempt to buttress your position and offended that you now attempt to make light of it and blame it on others. Be a man, stranger, admit your mistake and move on with life. The real Jim Porter would.
|
|
Tue Aug 06, 2002, 03:44pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
It takes a play, correct? Jim, can the defense "put out" a runner without a play? I don't think that's possible. Jim, please describe for me how the defense can retire an offensive player without a play (or a catch)? (Note: an appeal is a play, however, it's not considered a play for the sake of multiple appeals). Jim, a balk is a play (despite what you think). J/R states:
(2) tag or tag try of a base, (3) throw to another fielder in a try to put out a runner, (4) rundown, or (5) balk. [my emphasis] Can "a play" be made with a dead ball? I say, "No!" J/R agrees and states:
Jim, if the defense cannot putout a runner during a dead ball because they cannot make "a play" on him. A balk is "a play" so it cannot occur during a dead ball. Can any other of the listed "plays" occur during a dead ball? No!! Can a dead ball be made live if not held by a pitcher on the rubber? I say, "NO!" J/R agrees and states:
(b) the pitcher has the ball in-contact [my emphasis] ("In-contact" refers to a pitcher who possesses a live ball and has stepped onto the pitching rubber for the purpose of taking the windup or stretch position. Jim, I hope this helps you. Sometimes understanding the rules means correlating the different concepts of the rules that are separately written. Correlating the rules shows that a balk cannot occur during a dead ball. Just my opinion, Freix [Edited by Bfair on Aug 6th, 2002 at 03:50 PM]
|
|
Tue Aug 06, 2002, 04:06pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
I know I said I wouldn't, but I feel I need to address Garth's post because I think I see some progress.
Garth, in this thread you have claimed to have the, "rule book," "rule and practice," as well as "history," on your side. What rule? What practice? What history? Citations please. You don't have any of those to support you. You only have your conception of those. I've been taught differently. I even have material from the old Bill Kinnamon's school with this exact situation and a balk as the answer. Our UIC uses his old materials from that school to create our board's test. What I have been taught of practice, history, custom, tradition, and rule is that this particular balk is handled differently in that it can and should be called even if the ball is dead. It is inherently deceptive, and it is a balk. And it seems like good, common sense to me. And neither of us have anything considered current and authoritative to back up our opinions.
__________________
Jim Porter
|
|
Tue Aug 06, 2002, 04:16pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Can "a play" be made with a dead ball? I say, "No!" That does not address the fact of whether or not a pitcher who is intending to deceive by straddling the rubber without the ball should be called for a balk when the ball is dead. It addresses whether or not the runner can be put out by the defense. In fact, with stunning irony, exceptions are listed as to when a runner can be declared out by the umpire while the ball is dead. Just like I'm saying this is an exception to when the umpire can call a balk while the ball is dead. Nice try, Steve. We went over this thoroughly years ago, long before you came onto the scene. It just ain't addressed anywhere. Someone's going to have to ask the ump at WUA and MLB.com about this specific hidden ball trick situation and see what they say.
__________________
Jim Porter
|
|
Tue Aug 06, 2002, 04:33pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Where does deceiving the umpire come in during the original post. An ALERT ump knows where the ball is, and WILL NOT put the ball in play. "No football official advances unless he masters dead-ball officiating." You never worked with some of the referees I have. And besides, ONLY the ref administers penalties. Bob
|
|
Tue Aug 06, 2002, 04:42pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Stranger:
I have no problem with either of us agreeing that the rule book does not say that it CAN happen or that it CANNOT happen. However, unlike you, since it does not say it CAN happen, I believe it CANNOT. Where we have differed is here: I have not cited two works and claimed that they agreed with me when they, in fact, did not. That would not be the truth. You, on the other hand, have made such a statement. In fact, neither source agrees with you. Both sources are silent on the issue. History, tradition, practice? They come from where they always come from, the past. I don't believe you can cite an example of an ML umpire, during an ML game, calling a balk during a deadball. I have Kinnamons handouts and "bible". Please let me know the page number of where he says a balk may be called during a dead ball. I'll be more than happy to check it out. You say you have been taught differently. What does that matter? I know of some umpires who were taught that the hands are part of the bat. That doesn't make them right on that issue either, Again, you can call this any way you want in your world. That doesn't offend me. When you resort to deception and otherwise stating that which is not true, I am deeply disappointed. And neither of us have anything considered current and authoritative to back up our opinions. In writing, that is. True enough, and one of us didn't have to lie about it.
|
|
Tue Aug 06, 2002, 05:17pm
|
|||
|
|||
Wow....
And my wife thinks baseball is boring....
|
 |
| Bookmarks |
|
|
Linear Mode
