Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Dakota
I think that constitutes the majority of the list - bats that were manufactured for non-ASA play.
Given that we are now nearing 10 years from the first approval stamp, I believe it is time for ASA to dispense with the umpire judgment part of the rule and go with a simple "no stamp, not legal" approach. That would reduce the list to a current list of 16 bats (the 2004 stamped non-approved, and the no-longer-grandfathered list). It would also mean ASA would no longer have to keep a list of 16,293 U-trip bats (with pictures) on their non-approved list.
If it is approved, put a stamp on it. If it isn't, don't. If a previously stamped bat fails subsequent rolling or break-in or spot testing, add it to the (much shorter) "banned with a stamp" list.
|
Didn't ASA attempt to keep out non-stamped bats a few years ago? Maybe I've taken too many tipped fouls to the head... 
Again, I agree with Tom. Require the stamp. Mike, can you jot this down for the next rule change committee? That's my primo suggestion this year.
__________________
Dave
I haven't decided if I should call it from the dugout or the outfield. Apparently, both have really great views!
Screw green, it ain't easy being blue!
I won't be coming here that much anymore. I might check in now and again.
|