....are now available at:

http://www.asasoftball.com

Thanks Mike

Do you use this list only or in conjunction with the old list? What is someone has a Demarini Doublewall Distance that does not have a recertified stamp on it for instance?

That bat was banned for this past season, let alone an upcoming seasons.

The old list has zero standing as of 12:01 A.M. January 1, 2004. Supposedly, there will be no grandfathering as all bat models which expect to become approved MUST go through the new testing. Since Worth just recently dropped their lawsuit, the manufacturers are just beginning to submit their new and existing models for testing.

All new legal bats will carry the 2004 ASA certification stamp. All other bats will appear on either a list of approved bats or banned bats.

"All other bats" or all other tested bats. Will we be able to get around matching every bat in every dugout to a 12 page approved list in the rain?

There's a saying... "Girls and women just play the game. Boys and men cheat." Like all such sayings, it is not true in all cases, but close enough most of the time. Fortunately (for me), most of the "problem" bats are big, heavy, end-loaded bats intended for slow pitch bubba, and are unlikely to be in the bat bag of a 14U girls fastpitch team.

For JO tournaments, all bats are inspected at team checkin and spot-painted. All the field umpire has to do is check for the paint. Rarely is a bat rejected, and when it is it is for physical condition (dents, cracks, grip) rather than for a banned bat. Teams just don't bring banned bats to the tournaments.

For league games, I usually make a quick inspection looking for dents / cracks and then ask the coach at the plate meeting to certify that all of this players will be using ASA-legal bats.

As a pratical matter, for a league game, there is no way I am going to make a 12U team remove the old reliable Louisville burgundy bat in good condition, regardless of what ASA does.

Tom,

While I can appreciate what you are doing, I certainly wouldn't want to be working a game where the pitcher takes one in the face off of that bat if is wasn't approved.

Ignoring the rules only makes those who enforce them look bad which means you are not doing anyone any favors.

JMHO,

Mike

Totally agree. If there is one thing that I cannot stand it is enforcing a rule and them getting told "The other umpires let us do it!" The rule is there, enforce it. If you don't like it, then work to get it changed, don't just ignore it.

"You are the only umpire that checks bats" http://www.stopstart.freeserve.co.uk...pshakehead.gif

"You are the only umpire that calls illegal pitches, she's been legal all year until now!" http://www.stopstart.freeserve.co.uk/smilie/poke.gif

"You are the only umpire that calls me stepping out of the box when I swing!!" http://www.stopstart.freeserve.co.uk/smilie/peoples.gif

I say "SO?" http://www.stopstart.freeserve.co.uk/smilie/jab.gif

Do your job, folks!

I understand your points on this, and am generally of a similar mindset, but I also call games according to my local leadership. Let me say that the way I have outlined handling this is well within local leadership guidelines.

For the coming year, ASA has declared all bats to be banned until they are retested. Most of the JO teams around here are not high-zoot travel teams, and have bat bags that are stocked with well-used $80 bats of the Louisville burgundy variety. I seriously doubt Louisville, Easton, et al will be submitting anything but current production models for re-testing. I also expect 3-1A(3) to go the way of the DoDo bird.

What will my local leadership do? BFOM. If they ask for letter-of-the-rule enforcement, I'll do it. I'll think it is silly to tell teams they can no longer use a 2 year old burgundy, but, just like the high schools did, they'll have to adapt.

So, in part my comment was expressing how it has been handled in the past around here, in part is was expressing frustration and sympathy for the teams financial situation, and in part is was just a bit of bravado. Would I actually allow a team to use a bat I knew to be illegal because it was a prior year's model not submitted for retest but which in no way would come close to failing the ASA test? Probably not. But we'll see.

IMHO If it stays with just these 12 bats there will be much less complaining from all involved but the more that gets added to this list the more complaining there will be from players and umpires alike as this affects everyone involved.

Louisville was the main reason the 2000 certification didn't work. When they hesitated to submit the popular older models for testing (assuming people would just go out and buy new Louisvilles), ASA added the caveat which allowed older, non-certified bats to be used at the umpire's discretion and it all went downhill from there.

If the local constabulary is going to vary from the list or rule, as an umpire, I would want a notarized letter clearly stating their intent. If an ASA game, your insurance will still cover you in case of a lawsuit or injury, but you will be on your own if an award exceeds the coverage.

I wonder if the bat manufacturers could be convinced to stamp a year on bats from now on, to make the grandfathering and grandmothering and "made before certification" easier the next ten times we go through this.