|
Speaking of justifying a call or no-call, from where does this "leave" versus "lose contact" comparison come?
ASA 8.7.S; NFHS 8.6.18 clearly state the runner is out if they lose contact with the base, not "leave" the base.
NCAA 12.20.1 & 12.20.2 also mentions losing contact with the base, but mixes in the notion of "leaving" the base.
Yes, a player shuffling or switching feet contacting the base has nothing to do with the rule at hand and it is clear the purpose of the rule is to keep the offense from gaining some type of edge and changing feet does not do that.
However, if the runner is leaning toward the next base or behind a base and in each case loses contact, that can place them in an advantageous position.
I see the "lose contact" as a standard set to eliminate the "buts" and "what ifs" and "spirit of the rule" arguments people, including umpires, raise to avoid addressing a possible violation.
If the player is losing contact to try and steal the signals, that can be an advantage gained that may have not been available had the not violated the rule.
__________________
The bat issue in softball is as much about liability, insurance and litigation as it is about competition, inflated egos and softball.
|