From another board

[shagpal]

I am not suggesting anything, I am curious about your admission.

you wrote that you urged coaches to protest your partners (the "other" guys). this has nothing to do with allowing a coach the inherent right to question by protest. you are saying you would rather be vindicated and openly prove the other guy wrong on field by inviting protest than to wait and do so privately with the other guy in postgame.

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Read the sentences in the order presented. The latter sentence is not related to the previous.

If I urge a coach to protest, it is to stop the incessant arguing over something I know to be correct. Are you suggesting the you just continue the argument and give weight to an inaccurate, and in some cases incorrect manner of presenting, specific ruling because you don't want to embarrass another umpire?