|
There are five proposed changes mandating face masks/guards for JO batting helmets. Most likely, only one will be brought to the general council and pass. It is also likely the "mandating" of the masks will not be effective until 2005 giving manufacturers and NOCSAE time to get the standards in place along with allowing the teams time to fund this project.
This was a no-brainer Yup, I agree with thos one, too.
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Another change is to allow the runner to leave the base in FP when the ball leaves the pitcher's hand OR "when the pivot foot leaves the pitching plate on the delivery."
The reason offered was that different pitching styles proved to be advantageous to some teams (?)
With Andy's explanation, this could be a very interesting change. I would have opposed this change until that explanation, now I'm neutral on it.
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There is a change requesting the reinstatement of an interference call when a batter not entitled to advance to 1B on a D3K runs toward 1B. The reasoning is that the defense shouldn't bear the responsibility of the rule and that it can give the offense an unfair advantage.
IOW, the defense isn't smart enough to know the situation.)
This is a bad change, but like then again, there's the dumbing down movement - just look at the scholastic system......
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Change DEFO to FLEX because a DEFO can play offense and defense.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I disagree with this because I don't believe the DEFO is still the DEFO when they are in the offensive line up.
This is a good change. With this change, ASA, Fed, & NCAA will match rule and terminology.
Other changes affecting all disciplines:
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Remove "about to receive" from rules governing obstruction.
Make life easier for umpires and conforms to international rules.
Better get some very good case book plays for this change. With the definition of "about to receive" we had a measurable standard. Dunno that this is a good change, yet.
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The clock on a time-limit game begins at the end of the pre-game meeting at the plate.
I like this one, but then again, that's because it is my proposal
OK, no strong feelings about this one.
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Any player who leaves the game for any reason other than ejection may return to play at any time. IOW, if a team goes shorthanded due to injury or a player's absence, that player may return at their pleasure.
I don't like this one. Coaches in different forums I visit have already demonstrated their willingness to abuse the shorthanded rule which already offers a team without the proper number of players relief from forfeiting. Coaches will sit an injured player and take the out, then all of a sudden in the 7th inning, the injured player will be back in the line up.
I agree, bad change.
Just thought I would throw this out for you perusal, and I'm sure a comment or two I'll try to get the SP proposals shortly.
Thanks for the heads-up, Mike.
Steve M
|