Thread: ASA or NSA
View Single Post
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Wed May 21, 2003, 10:02pm
IRISHMAFIA IRISHMAFIA is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: USA
Posts: 14,565
Re: ASA more established, NSA does some things right

Quote:
Originally posted by KentuckyBlue


But some NSA rules are an improvement over ASA -- I'd guess because NSA is younger, lighter in administration, and probably a faster organization in which to implement change. In SP I like the 3-foot-longer pitching distance and lower arc, and the less confrontational style of calling illegal pitches. (You don't have to say "illegal" and stick out your arm, so there's nothing that sets up a confrontation with the pitcher. You just call a ball and tell him/her it was high if asked.)

Good points. ASA tried to move the pitcher's plate to 53' last year (along with 70' bases), but it didn't get by. Hopefully it will this year. I'll be bouncing around Kissimmee pushing for it in November

I wouldn't mind seeing a 10' arc, but many umpires won't stop the pitcher at 12, so I don't see that causing much of a difference in the game.

However, I prefer ASA's illegal call for a few reasons. If done properly, there is little question for the batter. When you call it illegal, the pitcher rarely needs to ask and I don't particularly care to interact with the pitcher. And lastly, by calling it before it happens, there is no possibility of it seeming the umpire is making an excuse for not calling it a strike. When I was playing some USSSA ball, I didn't believe how bad it looked when a pitch would be on the way, the batter not like it and immediately turn to the umpire with a Pete Rose "I dare you to call that a strike" glare. Whether intimidated or not, it occasionally got ugly.

As a player, I preferred knowing instead of guessing what the umpire was thinking.

__________________
The bat issue in softball is as much about liability, insurance and litigation as it is about competition, inflated egos and softball.
Reply With Quote