National Federation rule chances for 2007

[SAump]

Originally Posted by briancurtin

no, im just wondering why you string the most random thoughts together all the time. you went from the demand "wear the throat protection", to "breath in and cough twice and then let's strap it on."

Good. I thought I had stepped over someone disrespectfully, such as our elders RF or CC who had taken a moment of their time to kindly respond. Glad to know that wasn't the case here.

Think about the connection though. Anyone gets hit in the throat. It caves in easily. He loses whatever breath he had. Nothing else moves in or out. He cannot make a sound because his air passage is blocked. Those vocal chords are now useless. His brain begins to transmit a rapid sequence of his entire life span. His mind is working overtime and all he can do is HOPE for the best. His friends and relatives will soon learn the details and ask why you permitted him to play without a $5 throat guard.

Did I leave anything out?

Not on my watch. If I can hear air flow (breath in) or sound (cough twice), then everything is going to get better from that moment in time. If I cannot hear anything, then I know things are not in my hands anymore. I have a throat guard strapped on both masks and carry a spare. It is not an option. I know umps who have been rocked in the sac, struck in the throat and blasted over their snapped collar bone. All of this occurred in my first three years. It is not a pretty picture and it is not where I want to see anyone here anytime soon.

Understood? Any more questions?
Good, strap it on, now point and PLAY!

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Carl Childress

Very funny!

Of course, the National Federation system calls for that mechanic, which is the way the pros did it in the two-person system from 1905 to 1970 or thereabouts.

I'm always amazed that "modern" umpires, like you, know so much more than those in the Hall of Fame.

BTW: I won't wear the dangler, either. It's not a rule that can be enforced unless the State Association does it. Who will police it? It's among the more stupid moves they've made. Two rules where I think they screwed up worse are: (1) Allowing the pitcher in the set position to check the runners by swinging his shoulders; and (2) reinstating the appeal rule.

Lah, me.

1970 was 36 years ago, Carl. You'd think the NFHS would catch up by now.

Thanks for letting me know, though, that the NFHS hasn't changed this mechanic since I toss my manual away every year the second it arrives. With the far superior CCA manual, who needs it?

[Carl Childress]

Originally Posted by Rich Fronheiser

1970 was 36 years ago, Carl. You'd think the NFHS would catch up by now.

Thanks for letting me know, though, that the NFHS hasn't changed this mechanic since I toss my manual away every year the second it arrives. With the far superior CCA manual, who needs it?

You wouldn't be allowed to work in my association because you have no integrity. You're supposed to call National Federation games using National Federation rules and mechanics.

You expect the players to do what you want. But you don't. That's dishonest. If you want to be a rogue, don't take NFHS money.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Carl Childress

You wouldn't be allowed to work in my association because you have no integrity. You're supposed to call National Federation games using National Federation rules and mechanics.

You expect the players to do what you want. But you don't. That's dishonest. If you want to be a rogue, don't take NFHS money.

I have no integrity? OK, now you've taken some good natured bantering and have gone too far.

Carl, you know my thinking on this. I work for LEAGUES and SCHOOLS, not the NFHS. I've never had a check signed by the NFHS. It's ridiculous for me and my REGULAR partners to work differently in NCAA and NFHS games. And I have no irregular partners, since we don't have an assigning association here and I have to market myself and my partner for all the games (non-NCAA) we umpire.

The NFHS book is an antique that needs to be eliminated in favor of the CCA manual -- and some states are moving in that direction.

[waltjp]

FED is asking (requiring?) the use of a throat protector. How strictly that's enforced in your area is up to your state or local association. I see it as a personal matter.

It could be that they're just covering their behinds in the event of an umpire getting injured and looking to file a lawsuit. If you get hurt and you're not wearing the equipment they suggest or require then you're going to have a hard time holding them responsible.

Shin guards are required but I've worked with someone who didn't wear them. (Don't ask.) I know people who don't wear a cup or plate shoes.

If you’re allowed that level of flexibility in what you decide to wear and are willing to take the risks associated with foregoing certain items of protective equipment that's your choice.

[GarthB]

Originally Posted by waltjp

FED is asking (requiring?) the use of a throat protector.

According to the NFHS website they are including "throat guard" in their list of protective equipment. My mask has a throat guard. No problem.

[ozzy6900]

Well, I guess that I am on the FED list of defecation too! To make the ball "live", I point and call "PLAY" rather than use that idiotic beckoning gesture in the FED rulebook. I've been doing it that way for eons so I am probably "excommunicated" on top of everything!

[Carl Childress]

Originally Posted by ozzy6900

Well, I guess that I am on the FED list of defecation too! To make the ball "live", I point and call "PLAY" rather than use that idiotic beckoning gesture in the FED rulebook. I've been doing it that way for eons so I am probably "excommunicated" on top of everything!

Ozzy: That's the point of the new rule. The beckoning signal is out; the point is in. Hooray for you!

Now me? I always used the approved NFHS signal. (grin)

[UMP25]

Originally Posted by SAump

Perhaps offensive players. With the death of a pitcher who was hit by a batted ball off an aluminum bat, many states are looking at ways to prevent this from ever happening again.

How 'bout getting rid of aluminum bats then? Yeah, yeah, people will scream it's all about the money. Uh huh.

Besides, there isn't any better sound in sports than the crack of a bat--and not the PING of a bat--hitting a baseball.

[TussAgee11]

Originally Posted by UMP25

How 'bout getting rid of aluminum bats then? Yeah, yeah, people will scream it's all about the money. Uh huh.

Besides, there isn't any better sound in sports than the crack of a bat--and not the PING of a bat--hitting a baseball.

Did my first wood bat league game this year, it was pretty neat to see hear. I agree NFHS should go with wood bats. If they are so set on forcing teams to spend money to helmet all defensive players (which would cost alot of money), why not put that money to wood bats? Wouldn't it solve much of the problem?

[SAump]

Originally Posted by TussAgee11

Did my first wood bat league game this year, it was pretty neat to see hear. I agree NFHS should go with wood bats. If they are so set on forcing teams to spend money to helmet all defensive players (which would cost alot of money), why not put that money to wood bats? Wouldn't it solve much of the problem?

Placing blame on the type of bat is like placing blame on the type of weapon that fires a bullet. Aluminum bats are more dangerous only because people prefer to buy them. Wood bats are as dangerous and there is no evidence to support a safer wood bat. This bat discussion leads us to redesigning a safer bullet or wearing a bullet proof mask.

If serious about safety, pass new playground equipment rules. A pitcher standing 60 feet away from an adult hitter places himself at risk. One way to reduce the risk from being struck by a batted ball is to place a screen in front of the pitcher. To protect our children, require the use of protective mask/helmet combos and redesign the baseball as they have in Japan. In Japan, the youth simulated baseball is made of hard synthetic rubber. A dozen rubber baseballs are a lot cheaper than a dozen fielder's helmet with face mask. If everyone agreed to play baseball with a hard rubber ball, than with a plastic helmet-face mask combo wouldn't be needed. That would save everyone a lot of money.

[UMP25]

Your analogy is faulty, for it is the bat and not the ball that is in question at the high school and NCAA levels. A BB gun carries nowhere near the force and potential lethality that a rifle carries.

No one ever said wooden bats were immune from causing injury, but they are less dangerous than metal bats. One need not be a physicist to understand how and why.

If metal bats were no more dangerous, then why do their manufacturers and the various baseball regulatory bodies tinker around with the exit speed ratios and other characteristics of such bats? We don't see continual changes to wooden bats the way we do with metal bats.

Simply put, metal bats are more dangerous.

[TussAgee11]

Originally Posted by SAump

The Japanese love to play our game. Perhaps we can "take away" something from their game. Their "nankyu baseballs are renowned in Japan for their safety and durability." 70 years of baseball tested. Changing the baseball and leaving everything else alone is so much cheaper. The wood bats do not prevent death. Helmets are much more costly. If NFHS knew about this baseball, I feel they would also find this alternative more acceptable than restrictive bat and helmet laws.

Here is some of the dish. http://www.kenkobaseball.com/about.html

Here is some more written in Japanese. http://www.jsbb.or.jp/

Wood bats would decrease the speed that the ball comes off the bat, hence increasing reaction times for players, hence keeping them safer.

So how are wood bats not safer? I like the other poster's analogy of Rifle vs BB gun.

[LDUB]

Originally Posted by TussAgee11

Wood bats would decrease the speed that the ball comes off the bat, hence increasing reaction times for players, hence keeping them safer.

I thought BESR made the speed of the ball coming off non wood bats equal to the speed of a ball of a wooden bat.

"The best major league bat yielded a BESR of 0.728, which the NCAA then set to be the maximum allowed value."

http://www.npl.uiuc.edu/~a-nathan/po...WhitePaper.pdf

[SAump]

Originally Posted by TussAgee11

Wood bats would decrease the speed that the ball comes off the bat, hence increasing reaction times for players, hence keeping them safer.

So how are wood bats not safer? I like the other poster's analogy of Rifle vs BB gun.

It was a good analogy, but think of a weapons safety timeline as if one exists. Start a child off with a toy gun, switch to the dart gun, add BBs, exchange for the 22 rifle, then move up to the 410 or 20 gauge, and finally the babe is ready for anything. Right? Life is good as you move up in the world. However, kids these days start with a NINTENDO rapid-fire blaster. Without any previous instruction, background check, responsibility or risk training; these young men are then allowed to own semi-automatic weapons. We live in a very dangerous world and it has very little to do with baseball.

Think of the evolution of weapons timeline. Fire off a wooden musket from the early 1800, then fire off a cold steel revolver from the early 1900, and finally fire a hard plastic resin 9-mm pistol a century later. Also look at another sport, tennis. Their racquets follow the same timeline of wood, steel and plastic resin polymers. The serves and volleys now reach speeds of 145 mph. I don't see anyone in the tennis circles demanding a reduction in serving velocity. I am sure plastic resins are cheaper and last forever. Now imagine the dangers of plastic resin polymer bat designs. There wouldn't be a need for steroids. We can make bats out of ceramic, if need be. However, the risks will always remain until we decide to redesign the ball.