[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally posted by Larks

I'll agree to disagree with you. I have the same guys playing the same level and our team's runs have gone from 14.9 per game to 13.1 avg. If you take that and double it thats a savings of 3 and a half runs per game, times 4 or 5 games a night and suddenly the 10:10 game actually starts on time for the most part. Also, our home runs have gone from 2.1 per game to 1.2 per game. (These are averages, obviously I know you cant hit .2 of a HR)

Disagree all you like, I cannot help it if your guys are not hitting as well this year as last. Around here, I'm seeing zero difference in the game I say last summer.

You apparently don't understand the responsibility of sanctioning bodies. ASA handles championship play. They do not have the authority to tell private organizations how to run their business, just as ASA will not have those organizations dictating to them how to run championship play. Granted, the local parks are taking a risk when using equipment which has been deemed unsafe by other organizations, but if it is such a problem, why do the teams use the balls? The rules set a maximum standard, which means if you choose to play with balls that are of a lesser COR or compression, there should be no complaints

Mike - Isnt there park and team insurance that comes thru sanctioning? I would think you could mandate an equipment standard such as a maximum compression to be eligible for coverage. I dont have the perspective of having the option to hit 47s or 44 / 525s. The parks around here mandate the 44 / 375 for all play. They actually all settled on the Worth 44 / 375. We provide our own and can buy them from the parks at a fair price.

They can purchase their insurance from whomever they please, it doesn't need to be ASA. So the answer to the mandate question would be "no". Also, I cannot help what your local park does, nor can ASA. The sanctioning body sets the maximum allowance. If the people who run your league are boneheaded enough to circumvent ASA's rule and lock you in to a particular ball, you need to take your argument to them.

If the manufacturers weren't so damn greedy and would actually look at their product's affect on the game instead of their bank account, the game and it's participants would be much better off. And they would still make their bucks, just legitimately

I dont totally disagree with this point but is it fair to paint a broad stroke that all the MFGs are trying to get over? Bottom line is that the manufacturers have contributed to this mess. I dont think anyone would disagree with that. The main issue to me is how we get the jeanie back into the bottle without wrecking the sport.

.

No, just the one's who cheat and sell their product under fraudulant conditions.

As an active player, can you tell me the affect of what you consider the unpopular decision to ban the Miken UltraII has taken on USSSA or NSA? I haven't heard any complaints.

As I understand it, The Miken was not submitted to testing to the NSA or USSSA. No test = ban. I think the players pretty much know that was the case. Now the recent Synergy ban by NSA took a lot of people by surprise. Easton has announced a more than fair replacement program (2 different bats and a bat bag) for those players that dont want to wait until or if NSA and Easton settle their differences.
[/B][/QUOTE]

From what I understand from Miken is that they were told their Ultra II did not meet the new standard and a grandfather clause would not be offered. The testing was already performed on existing, previously approved bats, hence there really isn't the need to do it again, is there?

Okay, I have offered all I can. Anyone out there can take it for what it's worth. Some understand, some don't, but it's not worth the argument.

I will be closing this thread and will offer a new one when I receive more information on any further action by ASA.