h a l f b a k e r y"My only concern is that it wouldn't work, which I see as a problem."
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
After very crucial close calls just hook up the ump, then let
his own associates use the results in their decision to back
him or not. No fuss, no muss. You say its too much
trouble? What could be more important than calling a fair
game. What's that, the results aren't ironclad? Neither
is
an ump's judgement. If he is sure of his call, let him prove
it.
[link]
|
| |
Ump: "You're out!"
Player: "No I'm not!"
Ump: "You are OUT!"
Player: "Let's see if you're lying! I bet you think I'm really safe." |
|
| |
I don't see how this would work.
It is the job of the referee or umpire to trust his or her immediate judgement, and not to second guess their decisions. |
|
| |
Umpires maybe but most referees have to run around a lot to keep up with the action of their sport and would thus already have an elevated heart-rate. Would you want everybody to stop the action for 5 minutes just so that the ref can get a breather? And in any case, this would only really work if the umpire was intentionally lying. |
|
| |