2018 NFHS Rule Changes

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by teebob21

Hooray! Something that shouldn't have been our job to start with is no longer our job!

Actually, it is the umpire's job which now becomes more difficult as there is no preventive applications taking place.

You know as well as I that many of these coaches are not that savvy on equipment. Now, I suspect umpires will have to deal with "in game" challenges from opposing teams which will not bode well for the flow of the game or an umpire not well prepared to deal with such things.

IMO, it may be a problematic move that in the past was preempted by the pre-game check.

IOW, I do not trust some coaches to not take advantage by making this part of their game strategy.

[Stat-Man]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Actually, it is the umpire's job which now becomes more difficult as there is no preventive applications taking place.

You know as well as I that many of these coaches are not that savvy on equipment. Now, I suspect umpires will have to deal with "in game" challenges from opposing teams which will not bode well for the flow of the game or an umpire not well prepared to deal with such things.

IMO, it may be a problematic move that in the past was preempted by the pre-game check.

IOW, I do not trust some coaches to not take advantage by making this part of their game strategy.

My sentiments exactly.

Sure, doing an equipment check may not be the most exciting 5-10 minutes of umpiring a softball game, but it's probably the only chance to be preventative in keeping uncertified bats and other equipment not up to snuff out of the game. In my short season this Spring, I discovered three bats that lacked the necessary certification and three helmets where the screws holding the cage in place were too loose--or, in one insance, a screw had totally broken off.

Granted, the onus is on coaches to ensure players are legally equipped, but I'm doubting most check their bats and helmets game to game to make sure unusable items are properly dealt with and left out of the dugout. It won't surprise me to see coaches using the coming change to their advantage.

I'll be curious to see if ejections increase next year due to illegal bats being used on the field more as opposed to being removed during a pregame inspection.

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Actually, it is the umpire's job which now becomes more difficult as there is no preventive applications taking place.

You know as well as I that many of these coaches are not that savvy on equipment. Now, I suspect umpires will have to deal with "in game" challenges from opposing teams which will not bode well for the flow of the game or an umpire not well prepared to deal with such things.

IMO, it may be a problematic move that in the past was preempted by the pre-game check.

IOW, I do not trust some coaches to not take advantage by making this part of their game strategy.

IMO, the only real loss here is a safety check, not an illegal equipment check.

I don't recall ever finding an actual illegal bat in a high school game equipment inspection, but I have found numerous helmets with face masks missing screws or nearly in danger of falling off (it seemed) and once a cracked helmet. I have tossed a number of bats for being loose/wobbly.

If a coach / player has an intent to use an illegal bat, it is unlikely they will be putting it out for inspection anyway.

As far as unprepared umpires, such an umpire would likely have "allowed" the illegal bat during inspection.

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by Stat-Man

...

• Intentional Walks (no pitches thrown) are now available in FP.

....

Originally Posted by CecilOne

I don't believe that is part of the spirit of the game and also deprives the base runners of passed ball chances.

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

But everyone is doing it, even MLB, so it must be a good thing, right?

The dumbing down of the game continues. At least MLB's rationale was pace of the game (still stupid, with little effect on pace of game...). NFHS's rationale is what?

[RKBUmp]

At least MLB's rationale was pace of the game

Quickest stats I could bring up were 2015 MLB season on intentional walks. 3 teams were tied for tops in intentional walks at 45 allowed in 162 games for an average of .278 per game. So, roughly 1 IW every 4 games. And this is saving time and speeding up the game how? They are saving maybe 30 seconds every 4th game ? Ok, yep, really speeding up the game.

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by RKBUmp

Quickest stats I could bring up were 2015 MLB season on intentional walks. 3 teams were tied for tops in intentional walks at 45 allowed in 162 games for an average of .278 per game. So, roughly 1 IW every 4 games. And this is saving time and speeding up the game how? They are saving maybe 30 seconds every 4th game ? Ok, yep, really speeding up the game.

I agree... stupid. But it was their rationale.

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by RKBUmp

Quickest stats I could bring up were 2015 MLB season on intentional walks. 3 teams were tied for tops in intentional walks at 45 allowed in 162 games for an average of .278 per game. So, roughly 1 IW every 4 games. And this is saving time and speeding up the game how? They are saving maybe 30 seconds every 4th game ? Ok, yep, really speeding up the game.

I don't know if you are a fan of the NFL, but they did something about as stupid. In the name of "safety" they reduced the overtime from 15 minutes to 10 minutes. I saw an analysis of the 2016 season that calculated that if this rule had been in effect for 2016, it would have reduced playing time by 0.16%, or 24.5 minutes total across all teams, all games.

[IRISHMAFIA]

You need to remember a couple of things.

When the bat issue reared its head in the SP game, the FP folks mocked any concern in their game and laughed at the possibility that any illegal or non-approved bats showing up on THEIR field. Yeah, little did many realize that some SP playing daddies were providing their carrot-chasing DD with hot bats. I don't believe this happened in HS simply because kids aren't being recruited out of HS.

Meanwhile, baseball, especially NCAA laughed their asses off at the possibility of altered bats in their game until HR started flying out of the park and all of a sudden there was a concern to the point they placed a moratorium on composite bats until they could address their safety 10 years after ASA got into the bat testing business.

And then there are the coaches who believe winning is everything and that means anything that they can get away with goes. No, this isn't rampant and probably barely a blip on the overall radar of the game. But it only takes one time and as an umpire, I would rather have done what I could on my end. After all, are you really expecting the manager to do a real equipment check to make sure someone didn't bring a non-approved or altered bat to use without the coach's knowledge?

As previously noted, it isn't just non-approved equipment, though helmets and masks need to have their certification check, but also the condition of the equipment. If there is any chance something could go wrong, I'd like to think I could help avoid and injury or worse by taking 2-5 minutes checking the equipment.

And then there is the issue of liability

[teebob21]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

And then there is the issue of liability

Which SHOULD fall squarely on the shoulders of the head coaches, and by extension the schools. NFHS themselves says, in print and in several places, that head coaches are responsible for ensuring that players are legally and properly equipped. That responsibility should extend into whatever legal concept EsqUmp can tell us about, where the adult assuming said responsibility at the plate meeting is in some way culpable for any harm resulting from a breach of it, and officials are released and held harmless.

But I'm an idealist and a die-hard believer in the weight of the printed word. Neither of these traits is worth a hill of beans defending ourselves as Random Joes in this litigious society...I know this. Sue me, I guess. No, wait: DON'T!

Your signature is as true and relevant as it was 8 or more years ago when you set it up. I am glad my off-hand comment generated so much good discussion about this topic.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Actually, it is the umpire's job which now becomes more difficult as there is no preventive applications taking place.

You know as well as I that many of these coaches are not that savvy on equipment. Now, I suspect umpires will have to deal with "in game" challenges from opposing teams which will not bode well for the flow of the game or an umpire not well prepared to deal with such things.

IMO, it may be a problematic move that in the past was preempted by the pre-game check.

IOW, I do not trust some coaches to not take advantage by making this part of their game strategy.

I'm a baseball guy who might be adding some fastpitch next year after coaching it for a while.

I've never had a bat challenged since we stopped doing checks 5-7 years ago. But I know the rule if one is and it's illegal.

[Mountaincoach]

I stood on a couple of fields yesterday with a lot of NSA umpires who do high school ball in the spring. I saw a lot of smiles when I mentioned the equipment check rule change. Some of them looked like a kid on Christmas morning.

[CecilOne]

Originally Posted by Rich

I'm a baseball guy who might be adding some fastpitch next year after coaching it for a while.

Does that mean harder to train?

[Rich]

Originally Posted by CecilOne

Does that mean harder to train?

Nah.

Truth is, the umpires I got around here for my team's games were horrible. For example, I liked using the DP/FLEX (when available) and at least half the umpires we had didn't know the rule. Most others didn't know the differences between USSSA, NAFA, NSA, etc. and just made crap up as they went along. In the end, I was just happy if they called strikes and got plays on the bases right.

I have been licensed to work HS softball for 3 years now and have not worked a game after giving it up in the mid 90s. I am an assigner and I consider my license an emergency replacement license just in case. Truth is, I do not consider my rules knowledge good enough to take the field right now even though I think I know the rules better than a majority of the umpires currently working. In baseball, I'm known as a "rules guy" and I simply couldn't work a sport unless I knew the rules to that level.

But I'm going to work on learning them for next season. In all honesty, HS baseball is starting to bore me.

[Manny A]

Just my opinion, but NFHS never really gave the 2017 equipment check rule change an opportunity to prove itself out. Before, we had to go into the dugouts to do them, which quite often required umpires to get in the players' way (and vice versa), and also discouraged players from actually removing bats from their equipment bags, etc.

With the rule change in 2017 requiring teams to have the equipment outside the dugouts for the inspection, I thought it made things more efficient for both umpires and teams. It rarely took us longer than 2 minutes per team if they had their gear out as required. As the season wore on, teams were quicker at being prepared. Seems odd that after a rule change that improved the process, in my opinion, they decided to scrap inspections altogether.

[john5396]

As a baseball guy, FED made the same rule change on equipment inspection 4-5 years ago eliminating the requirement for umpires to inspect the equipment. We gain respect of the coaches, since the assumption now is that they are educators working for their young men an women. The coaches have a major penalty as well as the liability exposure if illegal equipment is used.

Since umpire inspections have ended, we have not had a rash of, or any that I know of, cheating cases.