About the 234 known OBR errors

[Tim C]

Troll!

[Larry1953]

Originally Posted by Tim C

Troll!

C'mon, how is that post "trolling"? J/R is apparently a respected rewrite/commentary to the rules. They contend that I can "amaze" all observers by making the call they suggested and that I can give a reason for the call. "Hey, Blue, that was a force play, what gives with allowing the run"? "Well, J/R says that is most likely the way they would call it in The Show". I imagine that explanation would go over big.

[MrUmpire]

Originally Posted by Tim C

Troll!

Perhaps "phony" is a better term. We've seen this M.O before....seemingly innocent questions from someone remotely related to baseball that evolves into more pointed and very specific questions accompanied by inane research which then turns into arguments with this novice who suddenly is an expert.

He's been here before.

[Larry1953]

Originally Posted by MrUmpire

Perhaps "phony" is a better term. We've seen this M.O before....seemingly innocent questions from someone remotely related to baseball that evolves into more pointed and very specific questions accompanied by inane research which then turns into arguments with this novice who suddenly is an expert.

He's been here before.

Ad hominem attacks such as calling someone a "troll" or a "phony" do not constitute a valid "argument".

[MrUmpire]

Originally Posted by Larry1953

Ad hominem attacks such as calling someone a "troll" or a "phony" do not constitute a valid "argument".

1. My comments are legitimate and relative...not "Ad hominem" in any regard.

2. I am not engaging in an argument, rather I was making a suggestion to Tim C.

3. I would never argue with you. I don't argue with trolls or phonies. They are always right.

[Steven Tyler]

Originally Posted by MrUmpire

1. My comments are legitimate and relative...not "Ad hominem" in any regard.

2. I am not engaging in an argument, rather I was making a suggestion to Tim C.

3. I would never argue with you. I don't argue with trolls or phonies. They are always right.

Define troll or phony since you always profess to know everything.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Steven Tyler

Define troll or phony since you always profess to know everything.

One who acts like Steven Tyler.

Oh yeah, that probably defines ad hominem, too.

[Steven Tyler]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

One who acts like Steven Tyler.

Oh yeah, that probably defines ad hominem, too.

OUCH!

FWIW. I'd rather be a troll or phony as I deem it several rungs above hypocrite. It's a rather boring read when most of the posts are of the cyberbulling, guttersniping variety. Placing blame at the feet of one person only encourages the privileged few to feel a sense of immunity.

I don't visit here very often since I'm now the primary caretaker for my elderly parents. I also recently donated a kidney to my younger sister so she can hopefully add a few more quality years to her life. Ad hominemly speaking, just your average day in the life of a phony troll.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Larry1953

Ad hominem attacks such as calling someone a "troll" or a "phony" do not constitute a valid "argument".

You're right, but that wasn't the intent. The intent was simply to point out his opinion of your presence here so others could evaluate and determine whether or not it was worth responding to your queries.

So, yeah, he isn't really giving you a valid "argument." Then again, he doesn't care to.

[Larry1953]

@nopachunts

I think what you are referring to as an "acquired base" when a runner slides past it and misses it applies only in the case of a runner attempting a steal and he is immediately attempting to return. In that case, the fielder has to tag the runner and not the bag (for a missed base appeal). However, in the J/R case, R1 was forced to 2B by the batted ground ball and he can be forced out at that base by either tagging him or the base before he touches the base. No runs can score when the third out is a force out. At least that is what the plain English of the rules say.