NCAA rules clinic

[jmkupka]

2018 and 2019 Major Rules Changes for Softball

Copy in red indicates what has been deleted from the rules

8.5.1.1 Any player may be substituted for at any time when the ball is dead as long as she immediately participates in the game.
8.5.1.3 A coach of the team making the substitution shall immediately notify the plate umpire at the time a substitute enters the game.
A coach may make substitutes by notifying the plate umpire of the forthcoming changes.
Substitutes are not required to enter the game at the time the substitution is reported to the plate umpire. Projected substitutions and re-entries are not allowed.

Rationale: Improves the flow of the game by allowing a coach to make projected substitutions. Substitutes will now be reported to the umpire without being required to immediately participate in the game, e.g., allowing a coach to report more than one change in the batting order at the beginning of the inning or re-entering the DP before her next at bat. Projected re-entries, i.e., re-entries reported while the substitute is participating (running, batting, playing defense), will continue not to be allowed.

[jmkupka]

So, the "Substitutes are not required..." statement is being used to rationalize their inaccurate interpretation that a sub may be made for any player at any time in the future (and has to be accepted by the umpire when stated to him).

[CecilOne]

I appreciate the other sanctions even more.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by jmkupka

Rationale: Improves the flow of the game by allowing a coach to make projected substitutions. Substitutes will now be reported to the umpire without being required to immediately participate in the game, e.g., allowing a coach to report more than one change in the batting order at the beginning of the inning or re-entering the DP before her next at bat. Projected re-entries, i.e., re-entries reported while the substitute is participating (running, batting, playing defense), will continue not to be allowed.

I know you all think I'm a little soft on my opinions about rule changes, but this one is a load of shit. It improves absolutely nothing. If anything, it may add confusion to the game. IMO, it is a weak change with no consideration given to order of the game, rules and those tasked to officiate it.

I would love to know what influenced such a change.

[Crabby_Bob]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

I would love to know what influenced such a change.

Coach reports Flex batting for DP (who is only playing offense). At the end of the half-inning, the coach wants to reenter the DP. That was a projected substitution under the old rule. (Still is in the sense that it may be several innings before the DP's spot comes to bat again.) The coach was to be told to reenter the DP when the DP was due to bat. Coaches being coaches, they would forget and potentially be hit with an unreported substitute violation.

That and if substitutes on offense are taken one at a time, it slows the game down.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by Crabby_Bob

Coach reports Flex batting for DP (who is only playing offense). At the end of the half-inning, the coach wants to reenter the DP. That was a projected substitution under the old rule. (Still is in the sense that it may be several innings before the DP's spot comes to bat again.) The coach was to be told to reenter the DP when the DP was due to bat. Coaches being coaches, they would forget and potentially be hit with an unreported substitute violation.

That and if substitutes on offense are taken one at a time, it slows the game down.

I disagree that it would be a projected substitute. I've been dealing with attempted projected substitutes for a quarter of a entry and IMO that is a misinterpretation. While it may not be a smart move by the coach, there is no requirement for a player being entered in the batting order to make an immediate appearance as a batter. Then again, the BS I've seen thrown around NFHS recently, I have often wondered how many actually know what a projected sub is.

[Crabby_Bob]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

I disagree that it would be a projected substitute. I've been dealing with attempted projected substitutes for a quarter of a entry and IMO that is a misinterpretation. While it may not be a smart move by the coach, there is no requirement for a player being entered in the batting order to make an immediate appearance as a batter. Then again, the BS I've seen thrown around NFHS recently, I have often wondered how many actually know what a projected sub is.

I don't disagree at all [with you]. One can only work with the interpretations handed down.

[teebob21]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

(snip) there is no requirement for a player being entered in the batting order to make an immediate appearance as a batter

Last year's NCAA ruleset/interpretations did require this. For example, if the 4-5-6 batters were due up in the inning, Coach could not sub for B5 until her turn to bat. It was not intuitive, slowed the game, and complicated things with respect to DP/Flex. IMO, they fixed it, which is why I said earlier that I think this is a positive rule change.

[jmkupka]

However, Teebob, if the Defense coach wanted to pull his shortstop when she tanked a play, even if she's due to bat 5th in the upcoming at-bat, we still accepted that change. Go figure.

[youngump]

Originally Posted by jmkupka

However, Teebob, if the Defense coach wanted to pull his shortstop when she tanked a play, even if she's due to bat 5th in the upcoming at-bat, we still accepted that change. Go figure.

I found this post confusing. I'm not sure in what way it's a however. Let me restate my understanding.

Play: F6 commits a throwing error which results in a run scoring. The third out is recorded later in the same play.
NCAA last year: F6 cannot be replaced until she is due to bat.
NCAA this year and every other 4 base code: F6 can be replaced now even though she won't be up to bat until 5th in the inning.

Is that how we all understand it?

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by teebob21

Last year's NCAA ruleset/interpretations did require this. For example, if the 4-5-6 batters were due up in the inning, Coach could not sub for B5 until her turn to bat. It was not intuitive, slowed the game, and complicated things with respect to DP/Flex. IMO, they fixed it, which is why I said earlier that I think this is a positive rule change.

IMO, this is a result of a complete misunderstanding of alleged softball people of the definition of a projected substitute.

It is easier than understanding the effect of an infield fly. I believe there is too much emphasis placed on a player's defensive position or batting order slot. Making a change is not that difficult and when you make it, the change is effective immediately. Not next inning, not whenever the coaches ask it to be or any other time.

Again, it is not hard to understand. It doesn't delay the game or affect the flow. At least it hasn't for over 80 years of softball.

Going in any other direction can only set up the umpire and coach for possible failure at some point in the game.

[teebob21]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

I know you all think I'm a little soft on my opinions about rule changes, but this one is a load of shit. It improves absolutely nothing. If anything, it may add confusion to the game. IMO, it is a weak change with no consideration given to order of the game, rules and those tasked to officiate it.

I would love to know what influenced such a change.

Mike, even having met you for a whopping 5 minutes in person, I love your unfiltered opinions, and this is a good one (opinion). This "weak change" fixes the old rule of no "projected subs" where a 'projected' sub is immediate. As I understand it, subs are "effective" as soon as reported. No sooner, no later. As far as I am concerned, this is a positive rule change.

I reserve the right to edit this post if I am wrong. :}

[youngump]

Originally Posted by teebob21

Mike, even having met you for a whopping 5 minutes in person, I love your unfiltered opinions, and this is a good one (opinion). This "weak change" fixes the old rule of no "projected subs" where a 'projected' sub is immediate. As I understand it, subs are "effective" as soon as reported. No sooner, no later. As far as I am concerned, this is a positive rule change.

I reserve the right to edit this post if I am wrong. :}

It seems poorly written (as evidenced by the OP) but the rule just brings NCAA in line with every other softball (and baseball) code, no?

[jmkupka]

The people with whom I'm debating are not even concerning themselves with the re-entry yet... just the original substitution, which they think can be made 3,4,5 batting cycles into the future...

Strangely enough, I believe 1 small change (or even an addition) in the rationale explanation would clarify things immensely:

Projected substitutions, i.e., substitutions reported if the player to be substituted for continues to participate after the change is reported (running, batting, playing defense), will continue not to be allowed.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by youngump

It seems poorly written (as evidenced by the OP) but the rule just brings NCAA in line with every other softball (and baseball) code, no?

No. Well, not that way it is coming across.

It isn't hard. For that matter, it has been harder trying to create scenarios that try to redefine a projected sub in order to fix something that wasn't broken