2019 NFHS Rule Changes
 

Biggest change: Illegal pitch penalty is now a ball on the batter; runners don't advance.


http://nfhs.org/articles/equipment-r...rules-changes/ (archive link)

If the penalty for an IP is now only a ball on the batter, maybe more umpires will have the balls to call the IP.

Agree with Tru in Blu. MAYBE ... some umps will feel like they can step up and make the call.

Proposed in ASA a few years back and I believe was killed by consensus among the committees.

Discussion revolved around the IP doesn't really affect the runner in any manner. The NCAA and now HS have made the change and hopefully USA will follow suit this fall

Didn't appear to make that much of a difference in NCAA this year. Yes, there were more called but still plenty of illegal pitchers being ignored.

The problem now is, so many umpires have just been ignoring illegal pitches for so long, will they really start seeing what they haven't been for the last 5, 10 or more years?

If the rules relax IP penalties, then do away with IP's all together (i.e. allow leaping, stepping back, etc).

Supposed the count is 0-2. What really stops the pitcher from, say, stepping forward a few inches in front before starting the pitch? Sure, it's illegal. If it is called, no big deal, the count is now 1-2. If not called, it gets thrown by the batter for strike three if not called.

I say just go with international pitching rule.

The rule prohibiting tinted eye shields on the defensive player face masks will become a big issue as time goes by. There's a company out there that is pushing tinted face shields for those masks, and they're becoming pretty popular among the younger kids.

EDIT: And the more I think about it, that makes me a little angry. We beg these kids to wear masks, and they do quite often. In addition, they have to wear sunglasses under them. Then somebody comes up with a better option, and it gets banned. Why? Is it that important that we see a fielder or pitcher's cheek bones and eyebrows? Does anybody know why they won't allow those visors, but yet are cool with allowing sunglasses?

I just Googled this because I was wondering the same thing. The apparent reasoning is that medical personnel cannot see the athlete's eyes in the case of possible head trauma without removing the helmet. I guess they believe sunglasses could be removed without removing the helmet(?).

Wow. Thanks. Well, I AM a physician (when I'm not standing on a ballfield), and I say that is being WAY too picky. If the injury is that severe to begin with, I'm gonna take a pair of scissors (or a pocket knife in a steady hand) and cut the 4 fabric straps to the mask and simply remove it from the front of the kid's face without having to move her neck or anything else. Just shaking my head. So my next question is this--does the federation allow high school football players to wear tinted visors?

No, it is a standard rule across all NFHS sports. No tinted face shields. IMPO, this is overkill. In football and softball, the facemask can be removed via a trusty screwdriver.

Yeah, what's always fun is when you tell the kid he has to remove it in football and people run around trying to find that screw driver to pull the visor out to make the equipment ready to play. I think that it's more than medical personnel being able to see the eyes, it's also the officials since we are supposed to be watching for signs of a concussion. Also if the kid is unconscious, you might want to be able to see if his eyes are rolled up into his head.

I'm not any sort of trained medical personnel but those are reasons I've heard expressed. Sunglasses are just easier to remove. FWIW.

This is NOT a new rule, it has been in place for batters, and as BS noted, all NFHS sports for a few years now.

The concern as it was explained in a HS clinic some years ago was they wanted medical personnel to have a clear view of the player's eyes without risking further injury to the back/neck/etc. if they needed to manipulate or remove the headgear to do so.

Are you referring to removing the pitcher from the position?

I would agree with that, but there MUST be a numerical limit, not just when the umpire believes it is necessary or it is just a waste of time

No, not that part of the international rule.

Pitching regulations, such as only requiring one foot on (as of 2018) and leaping.

Okay, but as long as they adopt the entire rule, not just parts of it.