Register or Sign In to remove these ads
VolUmp

Pulled Foot/Swipe Tag

34 posts in this topic

12 hours ago, Specks said:

I know you teach philosophy but we're umpires, not rocket surgeons.

Rocket surgeons???  Now there's something ya don't hear every day ... or ever, actually ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Register or Sign In to remove these ads
11 hours ago, maven said:

Only a handful of English words have -gm- in them

As in a handful of Phlegm?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By asking before making any call, you are 100% putting the call on the PU. Perception is they are making the call not giving information.

If the ball beats the runner and you don't see a pulled foot.....out. If they want to question if the runner arrived before the ball they are coming to you.

90% of the time non-issue...5% not 100% but no one questions...2% we're not 100% but we're right and they question...2% we're wrong but no one questions...1% we're wrong and we change the call.

You want to go to your partner 10% of the time for a 1% (at most 3%) problem.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The use of the "gm" paradigm is an enigma in that it perpetuates the figment (or some may say dogma) that one's vocabulary might be fragmented by only trying to use such a combination of letters.

In an attempt to be nonjudgmental, it would be pragmatic to avoid this quagmire, lest one might find themselves admiring their own abilities, not unlike Pygmalion. I pray this creates no stigma nor sullies my reputation as workingman's wordsmith.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/21/2017 at 1:40 PM, maven said:

Though true in general, this apothegm doesn't work for rules such as spectator INT, where the umpire must place runners and rule outs based on what would have happened without the INT. Doesn't work for OBS either, whether the penalty specified by rule requires that we place the runner based on where he would have ended up without the OBS.

Or a ball that lodges in a player uniform. OBR.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/25/2017 at 5:39 AM, Kevin_K said:

The use of the "gm" paradigm is an enigma in that it perpetuates the figment (or some may say dogma) that one's vocabulary might be fragmented by only trying to use such a combination of letters.

In an attempt to be nonjudgmental, it would be pragmatic to avoid this quagmire, lest one might find themselves admiring their own abilities, not unlike Pygmalion. I pray this creates no stigma nor sullies my reputation as workingman's wordsmith.

Get out. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not bad. The words with -ment as a suffix don't count. Of the others, quagmire is a portmanteau word, and the others are all from Greek.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/21/2017 at 2:40 PM, maven said:

Though true in general, this apothegm doesn't work for rules such as spectator INT, where the umpire must place runners and rule outs based on what would have happened without the INT. Doesn't work for OBS either, whether the penalty specified by rule requires that we place the runner based on where he would have ended up without the OBS.

 

big brain.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Togm replygm togm thegm originalgm postgm:  Igm (asgm thegm plategm umpiregm) willgm workgm itgm thegm waygm yougm suggestgm workinggm thesegm playsgm ifgm yougm givegm megm yourgm gamegm feegm aftergm thegm gamegm.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now