Jump to content

Remove these ads by becoming a Premium Member


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 01/05/2019 in all areas

  1. 1 point
    It’s the same exact thing. Just with his name on it
  2. 1 point
    It looks way close to the new Diamond CP that just came out a few months ago. Probably found the same maufacturer overseas. https://www.ump-attire.com/Baseball-Umpire-Equipment/Featured/New/DCP-PRO_Diamond-Pro-Umpire-Chest-Protector
  3. 1 point
    @Thunderheads lock this up too
  4. 1 point
    Just for you BT Let's give you a little more from uncle Joe. May 9, 1984, Braves at Mets, bottom of 4th inning with runners on base. Ball hit up the middle, Dale Murphy throws to the plate. 31 years young (after working 1981 NLCS as a 4th year full time veteran at the ripe old age of 28) and a 6 year full time veteran uncle Joe, calls the runner out at the plate. But wait a minute, what's going on over at the end of the dugout. The camera crew is showing some of the Mets instant replay of the play at the plate, and potentially causing a riot situation in the old days. That's enough of that, nip it, nip it, nip it, says uncle Joe and the cameramen are banished. And guess who is at third. That's right, the distinguished gentleman from another post, Jerry Crawford, along with the future HOF crew chief Doug (God) Harvey at first. And another umpire brought up before, Jerry's father Shag, showing how to get the batter in the box. And Bill Matlock was involved in this. Move ahead to 1980 and many do not remember the incident with Bill Matlock and Jerry. Matlock shoved his fielding glove into Jerry's face and got tossed. He was fined 5,000 and suspended for 15 days. He appealed, and the umpires said if the appeal was not upheld and the sentence reduced the umpires would toss Matlock from future games. "In 1980, in his most notorious incident in the majors, Madlock shoved his glove in the face of umpire Gerry Crawford, earning 15 days suspension and a $5,000 fine". And you will have to search far and wide for this last umpire back in the day when the 1 man crew was popular, as well as the High Strike.
  5. 1 point
    @Thunderheads sold Lock it up
  6. 1 point
    Wouldnt that be OutWest's number since they are the one that sold it?
  7. 1 point
    Same here - It's a fun ride, though, and I plan to keep doing it long after they're all on their own. Great, now I have to pull out my old, mostly-unused engineering degree.. This part makes perfect sense, and I doubt anybody can argue with this (well, maybe to the degree "many" vs "some") The goal of any mask is to dissipate energy to reduce the impact to your face. There are different ways this can happen, in order from the best to the worst. 1) Don't get hit. This sounds silly, but the truly best mask would be so close to your face it wouldn't get hit unless the ball was going to hit you. The bigger the mask, the more it gets hit. TM's are better than HSM's on this principle, with the low-profile ones being best. 2) Ball gets deflected, going at a slightly different angle than it started with - the smaller the angle of deflection, the less is absorbed by the mask, and subsequently, by your face. When it works, this method is best, because the ball dissipates its own kinetic energy. The best design for this would be a long, narrow angle wedge, except that would violate #1. Straight-on shorts really can't do this well, and we have to plan for that. HSM's tend to have less straight-on spots than TM's, so they would be better for this. 3) The energy gets transferred to the mask as the mask is knocked off. If your mask goes straight off the back of your head, the energy was not transferred to your face, and that's what we want. *Some* of that energy can go into spinning, but merely spinning a mask doesn't keep that energy from going back to your face. We can look at it in terms of XYZ coordinates, but faces aren't perfectly flat, and neither are masks, so that makes the math quite complicated, but any energy that is transferred toward "something besides your face" is a good thing. TM's can do this, HSM's can't. 4) The one we all dread - the one that's straight to the face, and the energy *will* go to your face in some way or another. Then it becomes a matter of pads (and in the case of F3, springs along with the pads), which will dissipate the energy over a greater surface area and a greater amount of time. In exactly the opposite as #1, we want more space and more padding when this happens. Create a mask that will instantly materialize 6" of a sofa cushion in front of your face, and you're perfect for this one. I've never used a HSM, but my understanding is that most of them are fairly bad in this area. TM's vary a LOT, and can even change with time as pads get worn out, and perform differently in heat or cold or wet. 5) The X-factor - balls coming from other fields, bouncing off backstops, bats breaking, or anything else coming from not-in-front-of-you. They're rare, but do happen on occasion. HSM's with the obvious advantage on these. -
  8. 1 point
    Who else is going to the academy starting on Sunday?
  9. 1 point
  10. 1 point
    @BT_Blue don’t do it!! Those are FUGLY, lol

  • Create New...