Quote:
Originally Posted by Manny A
So, again, the only difference between the "normal" GD and the "modified" GD is that the umpire in the latter is closer to the plate, feet at heel-toe instead of squared, and feet spread wider to adjust to the top of the batter's zone?
|
You could say it that way.
I would look at it as more that the only difference between the USA/ASA stance that NCAA is also now pushing as THE stance (heel-toe as THEY describe it) and the "modified" GD is what you do with your arms and hands (hands pulled into your groin and set with your quads and lower back, or hands on knees and locked set and still with your arms).
It seems to me that if you get your head where it needs to be for optimal judgment (eyes top of zone, nose on the batter's box line, and far enough forward to be looking across the plate), then no association or sanction should be concerned with how the rest of your body is configured. Well, unless you interfere with the catcher or a subsequent play because you cannot move quickly enough.
That said, all the now "unapproved" stances that could accomplish that (modified GD, scissors, split scissors) should be acceptable. It is an absurd thought process (or an out-and-out fabrication) that tries to tell us that our head is more susceptible to injury when our legs are configured in scissors than in heel-toe, if/when the head is placed in the exact same location by either stance.
To those that aren't familiar with my definition change of "ear on the corner" to "nose on the line", well I just know better where my nose is than where my ear is; and I don't think I am alone in that thought process.