Pulled foot mechanic and timing

[Warren Willson]

Originally posted by Bfair
From JEA Rule 9.02(a) [the rule you choose to reference] :

Customs and Usage: One of the most distinguishing features of the game of Baseball is its proliferation of arguments. Through the years, umpires have taken a more lenient position than that promulgated by the league officials of the 19th century.

Unlike football which has the "unsportsmanlike conduct" penalty, basketball which has the "technical" foul, or hockey which provides the "penalty box", Baseball has no intermediate penalty to control misconduct toward its officials. The more serious penalty of "ejection" is the only control the Baseball umpire is provided by rule. Therefore, it has become necessary for the umpire to tolerate limited objections to his decisions and to allow discussion on controversial plays.{WW's underlines}

Welcome to the 21st century, Warren---if you care to join most of the other officials who have left the 19th century. Today's officials accept discussions and appeals. It has been proven that an official's decision is not final until the official says it is final.

I have underlined the operative words, from JEA, in your own quote above. None of those words equates with your often used and abused "appeals" in relation to judgement decisions. Final means exactly what it says. Once a judgement decision has been made it may not legally be altered, even by the official who made that decision.

I, too, am happy to hear "limited objections" and to entertain reasonable "discussion on controversial plays". That doesn't mean that I will accede to ANY demand to "get help" on a judgement call OR change that call AFTER such "limited objections" and "discussions" have been heard. To do so would be ILLEGAL.

Of course, we umpires frequently do things that are ILLEGAL according to the letter of the rules in the name of historical interpretation, traditional practice or GAME MANAGEMENT. That has been my position all along. You have continued to ignore that position purely because you have long had an issue with Carl Childress, the author of that "infamous List of Five" as you call it, and because I dared to challenge the contemporary value of your precious 19th Century General Instructions to Umpires. Another case of the Freix pot calling the kettle "black". Please do us all a favor and get over your long held personal prejudices and for pity's sake GROW UP, both as an official and as a poster to this forum!

BTW, I am still waiting for your apology for those earlier stupid, gratuitous and disgusting personal remarks implying I might have sexual proclivities toward animals! I'll have nothing further to say to you on any subject before then! Of couse I'm NOT holding my breath!

Have a nice day.

[Edited by Warren Willson on Jul 17th, 2003 at 10:35 AM]