View Single Post
  #15 (permalink)  
Old Fri Jul 18, 2003, 04:25pm
IRISHMAFIA IRISHMAFIA is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: USA
Posts: 14,565
Quote:
Originally posted by DaveASA/FED
I agree that the intent of the rule is to have a pitch that is at least around the batter when she swings at it. As stated in ASA it does not have to be a hittable pitch. As Irish has stated it could be ruled an illegal (IMO it would not) but then we would have to award each runner the next base. In all seriousness what would you do in this situation? If you allow the D3K you have a batter getting 1st if you call it illegal with a runner on 3rd you may have just scored the winning run to protect from a batter getting 1st.

Ain't it funny how such an "easy question" can spark such a good debate??

[Edited by DaveASA/FED on Jul 18th, 2003 at 12:34 PM]
Dave, you are correct, it shouldn't be an "illegal" pitch. My point was that a ball which slips out of the pitcher's hand on the back-swing does not meet the definition of "legal pitch" in rule 6. Therefore, if there wasn't a "legal pitch" offered, how could their be a D3K?

__________________
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