National Federation rule chances for 2007

[Pete in AZ]

I think Windy posted about a company that offers to re-paint bats so they look like the real thing. Imagine a -8 bat in the hands of a college kid or good HS hitter.

[tjones1]

Well, once the helmets for the defensive are completely in, we will probably see foam padding placed in the outfield so no one gets hurt when they make a diving attempt.

Give it time....... before too long, none of us will be on the field anymore. Instead, the games will be loaded onto a PlayStation 1000 so that Little Timmy has the chance of hitting a home run too.

We can only hope it stops somewhere, but the chances are they won't.

[waltjp]

Originally Posted by Pete in AZ

I think Windy posted about a company that offers to re-paint bats so they look like the real thing. Imagine a -8 bat in the hands of a college kid or good HS hitter.

I've heard that you can find these bats on e-bay.

[mcrowder]

BESR is only an accurate comparison of wood to metal if the weight of the bat is the same. Metal bats are lighter, in general, and can be swung faster, so even though the BESR might be identical between two bats, the speed (which is multiplied by the BESR) of the bat is higher. There is no question that the ball can be hit with greater velocity by an aluminum bat than a wood one.

[scarolinablue]

Originally Posted by SAump

A ball or a balk, any word about runners staying in place or awarded one base?

Sorry to dig up an old thread, but we had quite a discussion in our clinic tonight about the rule change to 6.2.1.e, which now states "For infraction (e), a ball shall be called each time a pitcher violates this rule."

Previously (i.e. in 2006), 6.2.1.e was treated the same as 6.2.1.(a-d), which allowed for an immediate dead ball, and umpire discretion on ejection. Now, you are to award a ball for each infraction. Where it is unclear, and the point of our debate, is should a ball be awarded if it is a balk situation (i.e. if there is a runner on base, do you award both a balk as well as a ball on the batter). I was staunchly on the side of doing awarding both a base to the runner(s) and a ball to the batter, but in the publication "2007 High School Baseball Rules by Topic", on page 52, there is a comment section, part of which states "When a balk is called, it never includes the awarding of a ball in addition to an advance by the runner(s)."

Based on this, I believe now that you do NOT both award a base to the runner(s) AND a ball to the batter, but only the award to the runner(s). However, as is often the case with Fed, the rulebook doesn't specifically make this distinction, and the emphasis on "a ball shall be called each time" makes it confusing. I suppose I was reading too much into it, and the fact it would be a balk with runners on would supercede this, and you would not penalize the defense twice. Thoughts?

[David B]

Originally Posted by scarolinablue

Sorry to dig up an old thread, but we had quite a discussion in our clinic tonight about the rule change to 6.2.1.e, which now states "For infraction (e), a ball shall be called each time a pitcher violates this rule."

Previously (i.e. in 2006), 6.2.1.e was treated the same as 6.2.1.(a-d), which allowed for an immediate dead ball, and umpire discretion on ejection. Now, you are to award a ball for each infraction. Where it is unclear, and the point of our debate, is should a ball be awarded if it is a balk situation (i.e. if there is a runner on base, do you award both a balk as well as a ball on the batter). I was staunchly on the side of doing awarding both a base to the runner(s) and a ball to the batter, but in the publication "2007 High School Baseball Rules by Topic", on page 52, there is a comment section, part of which states "When a balk is called, it never includes the awarding of a ball in addition to and advance by the runner(s)."

Based on this, I believe now that you do NOT both award a base to the runner(s) AND a ball to the batter, but only the award to the runner(s). However, as is often the case with Fed, the rulebook doesn't specifically make this distinction, and the emphasis on "a ball shall be called each time" makes it confusing. I suppose I was reading too much into it, and the fact it would be a balk with runners on would supercede this, and you would not penalize the defense twice. Thoughts?

I agree with your logic, when you penalize the infraction as a balk, there is no further penalty. The award of a ball to the batter is for the times that there are no runners - that is the change in rule.

I don't really understand the logic behind the rule change, but it is what it is.

Speaking of meetings, we discussed the crazy rule change about coaches being in the boxes etc., No one could seem to find any logic behind that change - more like typical FED changes.

Thanks
David

[SAump]

Failing to wipe places the batter at a disadvantage, so I can reason that adding a ball to the count and leaving the runners in place is justified when the pitcher toes the rubber. How can it be a balk if the pitcher hasn't come set? How does it deceive the runners? Again, I am asking for clarification. Is that a balk?

[scarolinablue]

Originally Posted by PWL

By rule a balk in Fed is always a dead ball situation, so why would a pitch be added to the batters count?

According to the rule, as stated, an illegal pitch as defined in 6.2.1.e is also a dead ball situation, but a ball is always awarded under the new ruling. So, I guess there are cases where you award a ball, even during a dead ball situation.

However, the question is still out there...do you award both a balk and a ball in the case where a runner is on? I'm leaning toward no (even though I stand to lose $20 I bet when I was sure you would award both a ball and a base), but I suppose I'll have to wait until our state rules clinic on Thursday to see how we'll handle this one in the great state of SC. Though, we have one state association ruling I love...no appeals allowed!

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by PWL

By rule a balk in Fed is always a dead ball situation, so why would a pitch be added to the batters count?

This is true, and following this logic, once the pitcher balks, the ball becomes not only dead, but no-pitch as well. So, if it is no-pitch, you could not add an artificial "ball" to the count.

And please, as Bob Jenkins pointed out to me awhile back, use dashes for rule book citations, such as 6-2-1e, and dots for case book citations, such as 6.2.2g. This way, folks can tell whether to look in one book or the other. Thanks.

[BretMan]

Nope, it's not both a "ball" and a "balk".

For this infraction the ball becomes dead and the penalty is a "ball" added to the batter's count. Runners are not advanced.

See the attached link for 2007 NFHS interpretations regarding this rule (situations 7 through 14).

(Note: There are a couple of those situations where a balk IS called, but that's because the pitcher did something else besides just licking his fingers.)

http://www.nfhs.org/web/2007/01/2007...erpretati.aspx

[scarolinablue]

Originally Posted by BretMan

Nope, it's not both a "ball" and a "balk".

For this infraction the ball becomes dead and the penalty is a "ball" added to the batter's count. Runners are not advanced.

See the attached link for 2007 NFHS interpretations regarding this rule (situations 7 through 14).

(Note: There are a couple of those situations where a balk IS called, but that's because the pitcher did something else besides just licking his fingers.)

http://www.nfhs.org/web/2007/01/2007...erpretati.aspx

BretMan...thanks for the NFHS reference. That certainly helps clarify it more than the published rulebook and casebook. I'm glad you took the time to do a little research - this was the clarity I was looking for. I wasn't convinced the other explanations were correct.

And Steve, I'll certainly get the dots and dashes correct the next time. Thanks.