Quote:
Originally Posted by JRutledge
I am not putting them together. Actually I think they are rather different, but one has a clear interpretation and the other does not have a clear interpretation. What is similar is that you and others took a stance on one thing and suggested there was no such wiggle room, but in this situation there is wiggle room.
|
And that's exactly why one situation does not prove the other, as you tried to imply.
There's one heckuva big difference between me...or anyone... taking an individual stance on how a rule should be called versus the stance taken by the majority of officials in an area. And as I said, the general consensus so far seems to be that profanity audible in the stands should be "T"d up. You seem to be the voice in the wilderness opposing that. The situation detailed in this thread is different, and it seems the majority of respondants recognize that as such and think that it should be handled differently.
As I said, apples and oranges.