Pulled foot mechanic and timing

Blaine Gallant

Jim:

I am still waiting for the slanderous statements I made toward you.

I really don't appreciate the insinuation. I am a prick on the field, but I don't get involved in this horse$hit.

Blaine

Blaine Gallant

Classy. Really classy.

Brad:

Get this idiot and smack him. We don't need that $hit on this board.

Blaine

Warren Willson

Originally posted by Jim Porter
The truth is, your only concern was that I not be baited, so as not to make this board an unpleasant experience for you. Poor you. You didn't say anything about what was said or defend me at all. Your only concern was that you were back on the boards and you didn't want a flame thread to occur. I'm supposed to be thankful for that? Don't make me puke. Then to turn around and try to make it seem like you were defending me? Pah-leez. With friends like you, who needs Osborne?

... as compared with ...

Originally posted by Jim Porter
Please, stop making allowances for me. I don't treat people badly. I've never called anyone mentally unbalanced, and I've never made comments about what Aussies do with sheep. Now that's treating people badly. There's truth in the things I say, so it sometimes upsets people. Too bad.

"The truth is", Jim, that you wouldn't KNOW the truth if it jumped up and bit you in the a$$. You probably won't see the absolute hypocrisy evidenced by these two statements from the same post. I'm sure others will. I'm done with you. As you said, "with friends like you..."

jicecone

brian43

Of all the insults, slanderess remarks, fabricated stories and outright garbage that has appeared in this thread, none of it, is as low as your reply.

If you are truly are an official, which I find hard to believe, you should be banned.

Don't ever come to Pittsburgh, to try an officiate.

Jim Porter

You probably won't see the absolute hypocrisy

I'll tell you what hypocrisy I do see. I see you doing the exact same thing as me - defending yourself, stating your side as you see it, and making snide little sarcastic remarks in the process. But for me, it's mental instability, or treating someone badly. For you, it's what?

The same thing goes for Benham and Osborne. They are two rather sarcastic people, they say fairly nasty things to people, they've been known to name-call and insult, yet they point at me like I'm some sort of pariah. You're all looking in a mirror, and it's not my fault you don't like what you see.

Jim Porter

Originally posted by Blaine Gallant
Jim:

I am still waiting for the slanderous statements I made toward you.

I really don't appreciate the insinuation. I am a prick on the field, but I don't get involved in this horse$hit.

Blaine

Oddly enough, I'm quite successful at actually not being a prick on the field, still gaining the respect of my peers, and doing my job very professionally. You might try that. It's better for the heart.

Oh, and I never said you made slanderous statements. I said I wouldn't forget what you said to me. It was via e-mail. Surely, you haven't forgotten already.

Blaine Gallant

Yeah, I have forgotten.

Obviously it was a much bigger deal to you.

BTW, thanks for sharing private e-mails with the internet community, although I have no idea what you are talking about.

Blaine Gallant

I agree. This guy should be removed.

Brad, are you listening?

Warren Willson

Originally posted by Jim Porter
...blah, blah, blah ...

You seem to forget that the possessor of a "truth", any "truth" whether perceived or absolute, has an obligation to use that "truth" wisely.

Some time ago your behaviour, in this forum and others, was absolutely and undeniably unbalanced. That was the view of everyone who observed that behaviour except yourself. I refrained from saying so then, either publicly or privately, because I believed that to do so would have been hurtful to you. I encouraged others to remain silent, too. You were ill then, and you needed support not condemnation. Should I have spoken the "truth" to you then, or should I have remained silent?

By your own admission you are not ill now, so there is no excuse for your treatment of others. Jim, it is my view that you use the "truth", at least as you perceive it, like a switchblade to lay open the belly of your "enemies" - whether real and imagined. That is "treating people badly".

"How sharper than a serpent's tooth it is to have a thankless..."

This is the last I will have to say to you on the subject.

brian43

Originally posted by jicecone
brian43

Of all the insults, slanderess remarks, fabricated stories and outright garbage that has appeared in this thread, none of it, is as low as your reply.

If you are truly are an official, which I find hard to believe, you should be banned.

Don't ever come to Pittsburgh, to try an officiate.

whatever, ban me, this thread is useless because its all a bunch of people arguing. just get on with life and continue posting and stop BS'ing. i think the question was answered already, shouldnt this be closed?

yes i am an umpire, why is it hard to believe? i've come from many other message boards (not related to officiating but they are boards none the less) and threads like this would be closed in a second because of the useless arguing and getting so far off topic its unbelieveable. discuss that garbage somewhere else rather than running up your post count to show off.

why would i move from chicago to pittsburg to umpire? i do just fine here, even though you dont believe i'm an umpire because i posted a picture you might not like.

oh, and i wouldnt "try an officiate", i might "try to officiate" or "try and officiate."

ban me if you like, i just don't see why but whoever might ban me has the power and i wont dispute that. i took my picture down so no one would cry anymore but do what you must to try and regain control.

Jim Porter

Originally posted by Blaine Gallant
Yeah, I have forgotten.

Obviously it was a much bigger deal to you.

BTW, thanks for sharing private e-mails with the internet community, although I have no idea what you are talking about.

I got a particularly vicious e-mail from you. I have a hard time believing you don't remember considering it was pretty nasty in nature. I haven't shared it with anyone. I've only shared my disappointment at having received it.

[Edited by Jim Porter on Jul 26th, 2003 at 10:34 PM]

Jim Porter

Originally posted by Warren Willson
This is the last I will have to say to you on the subject.

I have a hard time believing that I can maintain my sanity in all other phases of my life with the only exception being internet message boards for umpires.

[Edited by Jim Porter on Jul 26th, 2003 at 10:46 PM]

Jim Porter

Originally posted by brian43
this thread is useless because its all a bunch of people arguing. just get on with life and continue posting and stop BS'ing.

Move along, then. Nothing to see here.

His High Holiness

Originally posted by Jim Porter

I have a hard time believing that I can maintain my sanity in all other phases of my life with the only exception being internet message boards for umpires.

Jim;

Thanks for the memories and superb entertainment. It was just like old times reading this thread. The Jim Porter that I know and love was up to his old form. No change here that I can see.

Some obersvations:

1. You argued long and hard with Warren about balance and unbalanced BS. The balance that you need to concern yourself with is REBALANCE, as in "see your shrink about a rebalance in your meds."

2. If the Internet message boards are the only place in your life that you can not maintain your sanity, then why are you here? Only a masochist would continually and deliberately place himself in harm's way when there are so many other things to do with your life. Masochism may be another subject that you want to take up with your shrink, which leads to point 3.

3. You say that you have a hard time believing that the Internet is the only place where you have these problems. Well I have a problem in believing that is true. You have clearly demonstrated that you are not in contact with reality when you stated in this thread that you had not flamed anyone in two years. After you were proved wrong, you proceeded to get into a monster pi$$ing contest with all manner of posters. If it wasn't a flame war, I don't know what is.

4. I don't believe that you "lied" about any of this for a lie presupposes that the author knows that the statement that he is making is untrue. I believe that your illness has progressed to such a state that you can no longer tell reality from fiction. Hence your statement, that the Internet is the only place where this sort of thing happens, is highly suspect. I strongly believe that this problem carries over to other aspects of your life. Just like your statement about peace on the Internet for two years being fiction, you are unaware of the chaos in your life.

Get back to your psychiatrist. He could probably write a disertation on your illness. I doubt it would be as entertaining as watching the real thing in action, however.

Thanks again for the laughs,

Peter

GarthB

Originally posted by brian43

OBR 9.02 (c) comment, second paragraph:

"Appeals on a half swing may be made only on the call of a ball and when asked to appeal, the home plate umpire MUST refer to a base umpire for his judgment on the halfswing."

sorry, didnt realize you were talking OBR rules. im wrong on that then.

What rules were you thinking about that make appealing a check swing upon request optionable?

Rich

Both FED rules and LL rules give the home plate umpire the option of denying the request.

Rich

brian43

Originally posted by Rich Fronheiser
Both FED rules and LL rules give the home plate umpire the option of denying the request.

Rich

thanks rich. being a LL umpire mainly (also do 14-16 traveling), that is why i said you do not have to appeal on check swings by request if you feel you made the right call. if its questionable theres no shame in asking for help but its not mandatory.

GarthB

Both FED rules and LL rules give the home plate umpire the option of denying the request.

Since I have never worked LL, I am ignorant of their rules. That's why I asked. I was curious.

In FED, I was blinded by our association's long time policy of treating it like OBR. We never refuse a request to appeal a check swing. Just isn't any advantage in it.

Jim Porter

Originally posted by His High Holiness
Jim;

Thanks for the... [snip]

Wow. Talk about mental imbalance. I'll send you my doctor's card, Peter, I think you need him more than me.

Johnnyweekends

Originally posted by Jim Porter

Originally posted by Johnnyweekends
Last time I checked, forgiving also means forgetting as well.

Then you better check again. The dictionary you used had a defect.

Jim,
I wasn't working from a dictionary when I made that statement. It just seemed to me that you were stating that you would not "forget" anyone who has wronged you in the past and that, to me anyway, means that you would bomb them in return, should they bomb you.
jw

« Previous Page Next Page »