[AtlUmpSteve]

This is a whole lot of to-do over nothing. The job of umpires did not get harder, and the liability of umpires is not extended if players intentionally play with an altered, illegal, or otherwise banned bat. The person with liability is the owner, and the user, of the bat. They can try until the cows come home to pass the responsibility to the umpires, but, we are not liable, we didn't knowingly try to sneak in altered, illegal, or banned bats. We have no added liability for doing bat checks; that is a courtesy to the players, not an added liability. Do you really think Bollinger would keep saying we should check bats if the lawyers were saying that made us liable? Don't be a fool. We do it to get the most unsafe bats out that we can. Period. We are not responsible.

Second point is Wade is all wet regarding the bat list. As far as I am concerned, they can add another 200 bats to the list without it taking one more second of my time, as long as those bats keep hitting the same category the vast majority of banned bats are in. What is that category? Bats that have NEVER been approved and have no ASA certification!! Add all of them you want, I just don't care. My bat review process is simple. 1) Does it have an ASA 2004 stamp? If so, just 3 bats I need to look for; • Louisville Slugger FPC305 Catalyst (-8) • Nokona Tomahawk • Combat VIRSP3 Lady Virus are the only three bats with an ASA 2004 seal that are on the Non Approved Bat List. 2) Does it have an ASA 2000 seal? That is a relatively short list of bats that were subsequently banned; add now the "grandfathered" bats. 3) Does it have no seal? Unless I recognize it as an old, dead, pre-2000 bat that should have been tossed 8 years ago, it won't get in my game. This is where the vast majority of non-approved bats exist, and it's the EASIEST category to remember and address!! 4) All bats that pass the first 3 simple tests I run my hand, I check for excessive wear or cracking, I look for evidence of tampering. If none, play ball with it.