Quote:
|
Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA
I wouldn't doubt that the reason the Fed is slow moving to completely accept it is because they fear "forcing" schools to buy new equipment and the thousand excuses why it cannot happen here or there.. . . . . . What can I say, you're dealing with NFHS. . . . .
|
Strange statements from the FED basher - When it is you that has repeatedly stated that you don't like the double first base; you don't think that it makes the game safer; and you would just a soon it disappear.
Actually, I think that you and the NFHS are in agreement on this issue; the NFHS does not want to make the double first base part of their game. BUT - they have to recognize that some H.S. games are played at REC fields where both bases have been installed. The DFB was approved by ASA in '94 and soon after the NFHS
allowed it to be used in H.S. games. If it was used in a game, we had to explain the ASA rules to the coaches and some players in the pre-game conference.
In 2006 the NFHS created a new section (8-10) to list the ASA DFB rules. (Of course, ASA changed their rules in 2006, so now the NFHS will have to catch up in 2007.)
A few simple case plays were added to the 2006 Casebook, but they do not recognize the ASA errant throw interpretation. And that is what this thread is about. There is NO difference between the ASA and NFHS rules. However, ASA umpires have the infamous Henry Pollard interpretation of an
errant throw. An NFHS umpire not aware of this interpretation might use the Webster definition of errant and come up with a very different view of a play with a bad throw.
I have submitted the Pollard interpretation to the NFHS committee for consideration this summer. If they approve it, they have been asked to write a caseplay to define it to NFHS umpires.
WMB