From: davem@uvmark.uucp (Dave Meeks)
Subject: Re: Boston Bias
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 92 17:41:52 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Vmark Software, Inc.

In article <1992Jul22.182025.21485@cbnewsk.cb.att.com> lor@cbnewsk.cb.att.com (edward.lor) writes:
>In article <1992Jul21.140213.42221@uvmark.uucp> davem@uvmark.uucp (Dave Meeks) writes:
>>So, according to you, a home job is ROBBERY???  A home job, the way I look
>>at it, are calls that COULD go either way, but go the way of the home team.
>Oh, so home job is THE WAY YOU LOOK AT IT? That's another evidence of
>re-definition.

Good ol' ed...  can't read for sh*t...  A home job is basically the same
as a bogus call.  A bogus call is not necessarily the wrong call, just 
considered wrong by you(or I, or anyone else) .  All the things we looked 
at have been examples of "bogus" calls.  The Ehlo foul on Lewis was a bogus 
call, according to myself and many others.  You may think it was the correct 
call.  Thus, it wasn't a bogus call to you.  It goes the other way with the 
Bird 3ptr.  You think it was bogus, I think it was the correct call.  Both 
can be used as examples of "home jobs", etc... though doing so does not 
imply belief of it being bogus.  I guess you consider the Lewis incident as
a bogus call, since you included it in the list of bogus calls against the
Celtics, right???   That's it.. Hey Nate.. Ed believes that Ehlo mercilessly
hacked Lewis and it cost the Celtics the championship.  He also believes the
phantom goal-tend called against McHale to be bogus as well.  
>
>That's not how it's seen in the dictionary.

Oh??? "home job" is defined in your dictionary???  Which edition was that???
Job has many definitions, and it isn't just the one you wish to attribute
to it.
>
>>Let me clarify.  If the ref has to make a JUDGEMENT call, such as ruling on
>>a goaltending call, or foul, or such, on a player (such as MJ), or on a 
>>team, and the ruling goes in their favor, it is possible it could be what
>>can be described as a "home job", in my view.  
>Then tell me in WHAT situations in the game that the refs do not have to 
>make a judgement. For Christ's sake, the refs are employed to make judgements
>on the court. So the implmentation of the rules are all human judgement. 

Basically, you are right.  Some examples of what are not really "judgement" 
calls would be things like not awarding the 1-1 situation when the team is 
over the limit... Letting a player continue to play when he has fouled out..
Calling a foul on player A, but then giving player Bs number to the side, etc..
In other sports, the infamous Colorado situation was not a "judgement" call,
but an error.  Or, in baseball, when the count or # outs is inconsistent
(it still amazes me that this happens with as many people who supposedly 
know what they are doing.)...

>>Didn't use sarcasm to wimp out of anything.  I used sarcasm because it was
>>the appropriate response to your moronic logic.  You decided to make it 
>>some kind of conclusive statement, when it wasn't.
>Well, if you want to question my moronic logic, the appropiate statement
>is "even if A, then ~B", where A is "the list of bad calls", B is 
>"conclusive".

So, you are ADMITTING you logic to be moronic, right???  Based on the way
in which you like to argue, you just admitted you have been using moronic
logic...

>
>>No, I think, as do others, that I have "gotten around" the "admissions" 
>>pretty well.  
>Yep, who are the others? nate? Nate doesn't even know what we are arguing
>about, like "you didn't admit bogus ..."

Well, how about Bis, Jim Mann, the UMASS guy, etc...

>How did you lie? You didn't tell THE WHOLE TRUTH. You only accused me of cut
>and paste, you didn't mention the full quotes in the initial accusation.

Because it wasn't part of the accusation.  I didn't accuse you of always 
hacking the messages, just that you had been doing it.  If you get accused
of speeding, the officer doesn't care whether you had actually driven at the
correct speed at some point before.
-- 
David T. Meeks                    ||" We are jigsaw pieces, aligned on the 
VMark Software, Inc.              ||  perimeter edge, 
uvmark!davem@merk.com             ||  interlocked through a missing piece"
davem%uvmark@merk.com             ||" ...This world is totally Fugazi"