Been there, done that. Both ways. Bob is exactly correct here.

Seen the ball clearly go off of Batter, I take two steps in, wait for partner to react and kill the play. You kill it quick, loudly and confidently and never, not once, has it been questioned.

Also, did not clearly see the ball hit the batter and neither did PU but you immeadiately have a dancing batter in front of you. Use some judgement man. Only seen Derek Jeter last year fake getting hit by the ball and he makes a living trying to get on base. Your average ballplayer is not going to jump around like a kangaroo unless he gets hit. And yes, I have even seen batters get hit and take off for first, theres an easy out on a dumb ball player.

In a perfect game if you have to go to your partner 2-3 times during the game, your going to take crap. There is no carte blanc method that works perfectly. Just look at MLB. There is a fine line between knowing when to act like an arrogant arse and when to act like a well groomed team. If you both work to get your own calls right and communicate only when necessary your going to look like the latter. There is no black and whte answer here.

Just remember though, when you, or your partner screw up, you both look bad.

http://forum.officiating.com/750056-post55.html Now get it right Rut.:rolleyes:

Refusing to tell your partner he was wrong on a play call that can be corrected, and should be corrected, when you know he is most assuredly is. It is a lie and fraud by omission.http://forum.officiating.com/750056-post55.html
Balls and strikes are not play calls, did you not know that?

Okie dokie...then, how about enlightening us poor uneducated folk with YOUR list of those calls that can be corrected without invitation by one's partner.

You must not remember this post.

BTW, this was post #10 if you want to dispute my comments. ;)

Peace

Psa ii
 

Apparently, my first PSA was a little too "opaque" for some of you. Quite a few of whom should just "know better", if I may say so.

So, I'll just try to "net it out".

Simply, a troll is one who participates in a "discussion forum" for the sole purpose of fomenting argument for his self-gratification.

Some trolls demonstrate some "knowledge" of the subject, and use it to both establish some minimal level of credibility and provoke argument, by making statements he knows will be considered "outrageous" - and, so, sure to provoke argument.

The argument inevitably proves as pointless as it is contentious.

Trolls are a form of "pollution" of a board. It is up to the participants to "clean it up".

When a troll does not receive the "attention" he craves, he gets bored and leaves. Any response to or discussion of a troll only encourages and gratifies him.

Please, do not feed the trolls.

Give a hoot, don't pollute!

That is all.

JM

You're right, of course, UmpJM. It's just that it was kind of nostalgic to have InterestedUmp, Deej, Fitump56 and the rest of the gang back with us again.

Fortunately there's enough room for STB on the ignore list along with his other nom de plumes.

Hey Frick, say hello to Frack for me.

Buh Bye.

MrUmpire,

Personally, I feel more nostalgic for drumbumb, gruberted, and, yes, even cc6.

At least they were entertaining.

JM

I didn't quote you when I made my post. I was just offering a generic opinion to the thread and the OP.

But, if the shoe fits, ...

And, FWIW, your strident repeating of your absolute position is wearing thin. You could save a lot of time by just changing you sig to "If you see something other than what your partner called, jsut go in and get it right, always" and post it once a day.

Hmm, I wonder if the user name "Johnny One-Note" is taken?

Which isn't what I said. http://forum.officiating.com/750056-post55.html so there's no use putting it in a sig, is there. Folks are going to twist posts as they see fit. ;)

And to think, after all these years I have attributed the phrase "I never said what I said" to Yogi Berra.