Eager Partner?

[Skahtboi]

Originally Posted by celebur

OK, here's the question you 'posed' (both of them):



That seems like a pair of rhetorical questions designed to hyperbolize the other poster's statement. In other words, it was a strawman, and that is what I was focusing on. That you phrased it as a question is irrelvant. And if I misread it, then I apologize. But after rereading it, I still take it the same way.




No, you didn't come right out and definitively state your position on whether or not you agree with this particular signal. But you did jump all over those who deigned to say that they didn't like it.




No, the other umpire-to-umpire signals that you used for your hyperbolic comparison were the ones for the IFR. Those are used when there is a lull in the action; thus they can reasonably be expected to be seen and understood. The signal in question here is touching one's ear during the play. These are completely different situations, and the IFR signals really are NOT exactly what is being discussed.

One can agree with the IFR signals and not agree with the ear touching and still be consistent. Because they're, you know, different. Completely.

Note, however, that I do not criticize someone who uses that ear signal. As you say, it's an approved mechanic (at least for NCAA). I just don't happen to see value in it, especially when one's eyes are better used to follow the play rather than your partner.

Apparently you are still missing the intent of my posts. Yet, I can think of nothing else to make you understand. You are obviously committed to the belief that I was jumping "all over those who deigned to say they didn't like it." I have "jumped all over" no one, and that statement on your part is the only hyperbole I see in this discussion. I was merely supporting, originally, the stance of kcg NC2Ablu who made mention that the signal, which for the record I am not a fan of, is a legitimate signal as far as NCAA mechanics go. Wade had said he didn't need any secret signals, so I was informing him, in my way, that this is in fact not a "secret signal," but an approved mechanic so far as the NCAA goes. This is "proper" umpire to umpire communication.

Now insofar as your statement, "Note, however, that I do not criticize someone who uses that ear signal. As you say, it's an approved mechanic (at least for NCAA)," the following would seem to be contradictory:

Originally Posted by celebur

Or how about:

U1: Partner, everything by the book.
U2: (touches ear).

[celebur]

Originally Posted by Skahtboi

Apparently you are still missing the intent of my posts. Yet, I can think of nothing else to make you understand.

Actually, you just did it (see below).

Originally Posted by Skahtboi

You are obviously committed to the belief that I was jumping "all over those who deigned to say they didn't like it." I have "jumped all over" no one, and that statement on your part is the only hyperbole I see in this discussion. I was merely supporting, originally, the stance of kcg NC2Ablu who made mention that the signal, which for the record I am not a fan of, is a legitimate signal as far as NCAA mechanics go. Wade had said he didn't need any secret signals, so I was informing him, in my way, that this is in fact not a "secret signal," but an approved mechanic so far as the NCAA goes. This is "proper" umpire to umpire communication.

My apologies for both missing your point and making you explain it (and also my thanks that you did explain it).

Originally Posted by Skahtboi

Now insofar as your statement, "Note, however, that I do not criticize someone who uses that ear signal. As you say, it's an approved mechanic (at least for NCAA)," the following would seem to be contradictory:

That was levity. Nothing more.

[Skahtboi]

Originally Posted by celebur

Actually, you just did it (see below).



My apologies for both missing your point and making you explain it (and also my thanks that you did explain it).



That was levity. Nothing more.

So are we done with this now?? Whew!