View Single Post
  #10 (permalink)  
Old Sat Nov 27, 2010, 10:15am
AtlUmpSteve AtlUmpSteve is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Woodstock, GA; Atlanta area
Posts: 2,822
Quote:
Originally Posted by NCASAUmp View Post
And they most certainly take advantage of this. They often play so far back, I'm standing as far as 10 feet into the grass.

An extra 5 feet won't be that big a deal.
I see others do that; I simply refuse to play that game. Just like the players, I have a job to do, and to do it effectively, it requires me to be in the infield. And, I find that I got a lot more ankle twists and rolls when I started on the grass, and/or made the transition back to the infield.

If an "infielder" starts on the grass, I will move more to one side or the other (depending on the game situation, or if he is well in the 3-4 hole for a hook pull hitter) to be out of his range, but I stay in the infield.

In prior years, as a member of the Slow Pitch Task Force, our discussion of 70' didn't consider helping the defense to play deeper. We discussed that the defense could make a "defensive" knock-the-ball-down-and-still-have-time-to-throw-a-runner-out play if the runners had to take one or two more steps to each base. If some ying-yang thinks this was the permission to play deeper, go ahead and think that.

The only negative raised in the past was from Parks and Rec people that claimed it would cost them too much to 1) move or add new base stobbs, 2) cut the grass deeper, and 3) possibly have to move a sprinkler head or two as a result of the different grass cut. Perhaps the supposed "safety" aspect helped convince them to stop fighting the option.
__________________
Steve
ASA/ISF/NCAA/NFHS/PGF
Reply With Quote