2018 NFHS Rule Changes

[Stat-Man]

Posted at http://nfhs.org/articles/high-school...lks-equipment/

• Intentional Walks (no pitches thrown) are now available in FP.
• Equipment doesn't need to be inspected or placed outside the dugout
• New rule regarding wristbands with a play card.
• Number of warmup pitches when previous pitcher is removed by rule or injury.
• The pitcher may step backward with the non-pivot foot at any time prior to start of the pitch.

At the moment, I feel indifferent about most of these. We'll see if I feel the same way come next spring.

[teebob21]

Equipment doesn't need to be inspected or placed outside the dugout

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

[CecilOne]

Originally Posted by teebob21

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

Hard to be indifferent about that one.

[CecilOne]

Originally Posted by Stat-Man

Posted at http://nfhs.org/articles/high-school...lks-equipment/


[*]Intentional Walks (no pitches thrown) are now available in FP..

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

[IRISHMAFIA]

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.

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

[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.

[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.