2004 ASA, & High School Bat Specs

[Michael Don Henry]

I can't seem to get a good understanding of the ASA rule, nor do I have an ASA new rule book. Can I get some clarification as to what bat's will be legal for High School, ASA, and AFA. I am buying a nice bat for my daughter who will be playing in those organizations and would like for here to be able to use it wherever she plays. I also will be umpiring for those organizations and would like clarification myself.
Does this mean that the ASA official rule will be for High School also? Is there a reference to BESR like the boys have? I don't see it. From what I can tell, any bat with the 2004 stamp is legal and any bat that is on the *Certified Equipment* list that has the ASA2000 stamp. Is that right?

Does this mean that the rules are going to change before or during the season?


. Could I get your interpretation on this? I am trying to understand what bats will be legal in primarily High School, but also ASA and AFA. Any help would be appreciated, as I am trying to purchase a bat for all three and I umpire all three organizations.



I took this straight off the NFHS website

http://www.nfhs.org/press/softball_rules_changes03.html

In other changes, Rule 2-4-3 adds a definition for a banned bat, which is not currently covered in the Softball Rules Book. The NFHS follows the Amateur Softball Association (ASA) standards for softball bats. Under ASA standards, all bats must pass a performance test to be approved for use. ASA has banned bats that were once approved, but no longer meet the performance specifications.




I took this straight from the ASA website
http://www.asasoftball.com/about/cer..._equipment.asp
The official bat in ASA Championship Play must meet all of the requirements of Rule 3, Section 1 and:

must bear either the ASA approved 2000 certification mark or the ASA 2004 certification mark as shown below, and must not be listed on an ASA Banned Bat List unless it also bears an ASA approved re-certification mark shown below, or

must be included on a list of approved bat models published by the ASA National Office; or
must, in the sole opinion and discretion of the umpire, have been manufactured prior to 2000 and if tested, would comply with the ASA bat performance standards then in effect.
Beginning January 1, 2004, all bats in ASA Championship Play must pass the ASA 2004 bat standard. All bats having the 2004 certification mark will be allowed in ASA Championship Play. Bats that have the 2000 certification mark will not be allowed in ASA Championship Play unless they are listed on an approved bat list on the ASA website. For convenience, the ASA website has a listing of bats that do not pass the ASA 2004 bat standard.






Further from the ASA website;
"Manufacturers continue to submit additional bat models for testing, and the ASA will update this list as test results become available."


This off the TASO website;
http://www.intra-focus.com/TASO/00C2...2B47FC285C.htm
"As we all know, there is a list from the ASA which contains names of the manufacturers and the model of the bat. To get that list, please Click Here and you'll be taken to the ASA website for the up-to-date list. Please remember that for a bat on that list to be considered legal, it MUST have an ASA Recertification Mark (embossed -- NOT a sticker) on it in addition to the ASA Certification Mark. Be sure you match the name exactly as it is written on the list as some bats have been modified slightly on the model number to meet the current specifications (i.e., the Worth "3DX" is not legal unless it has both the Certification and the Recertification marks on it, but the Worth "3DX(Fastpitch)" IS legal with only the ASA Certification Mark on it because it does not match the model number exactly as it is listed on the ASA list of banned bats.)"




Mainly wanting to know if this is *set in stone* or subject to change between now and the season.

Any help in clarification would be greatly appreciated, thanks in advance...

[Dukat]

ASA Keeps a list of both bats that have passed and Banned bats, Carry around your list of banned bats and check for those while umpiring. As far as buying one check the list of already approved bats to be sure what you are getting will not be put on the banned list next year. ASA has reserved the rights to add more to the banned list and are adding as tested on new bats to the approved list so the ones already on the approved list are good to go for 2004.

[whiskers_ump]

Mike,

Be sure you carry the banned bat list and not the one listing
the legal bats...You would never finish going through it. However,
if you happen to have a timed game, start the clock, then check
the bats. The Banned list only contains about nine bats that
are currently not allowed for FP.

glen

[Michael Don Henry]

That sure sounds like a pain. I can imagine someone hits a HR and the opposing coach comes running out wanting to check the bat to make sure it is legal. What's going to keep them from this? So this is going to change before or during the season? A lot to keep up with.

Thanks y'all


Nell Bennett responded with this;

"Any bat with the 2000 ASA seal or the ASA Recertification Seal or the new ASA 2004 Seal will be fine. Go the ASA web site and down load an approved bat list. All bats on that list are legal for play in HS, NCAA, and ASA."

Nell Bennett

[Steve M]

Mike,
Dunno 'bout you Texans, but in Pennsylvania we inspect the bats before every game for HS ball - college ball too - and some of us inspect them in ASA. I have found a number of illegal bats during the pre-game inspections and have only ever found 1 illegal bat actually in a softball game. I can't recall having a coach come onto the field wanting to verify that a bat was legal - I'd be pretty surprised if it ever happened. What's going to keep them from doing this - a large part of this is the appearance you make and the game management skills you show. Is this list going to change during the season? Probably, it sure has in the past.

Fed and NCAA both use the ASA list - this means that they accept the ASA standard. That's a good thing, let's just stay with a single performance standard. In the past, ASA has been a lot more gutless about enforcing their standard than Fed. We'll just leave NCAA alone, for now. They have their own way of doing things (if you want, download their rule book and look at the banned bat procedure).

Who's Nell Bennett?

btw - welcome to the board

[bluejay]

Glen, are you serious about starting the clock and then checking bats?

Jay Garner

[bluejay]

Nell Bennett is the President Elect for TASO softball in Texas. TASO is the organization that provides officials for all Texas High School sports. She is also one of Walt Sparks' Deputy UICs in San Antonio. Also, she is the Umpire Coordinator/assignor for NCAA Southland conference in DI. She knows her stuff.
Jay Garner

[oppool]

Nell Bennett responded with this;

"Any bat with the 2000 ASA seal or the ASA Recertification Seal or the new ASA 2004 Seal will be fine. Go the ASA web site and down load an approved bat list. All bats on that list are legal for play in HS, NCAA, and ASA."

Just remember the bats that are on the recertification list will have a 2000 ASA approved stamp on them. For them to be legal they must ALSO have the recertify etching or marking on the bat for the bat to be LEGAL for play


JMO

Don

[Steve M]

Thanks, Jay. I'm showing some of my regional ignorance.

[bd2632]

Your take on recertification??
Many of the Worth softball bats appear on the ASA website "with recertification" and then appear also without the recertification note. Ex: The EST5 (gold model)appears on the approved list and a separate entry appears "with recertification".
Is the bat legal in either form, my opinion is yes, but wanted other opinions as well.

Thanks,
Bob

[oppool]

No the EST5 and other bats that are on the recertification list must have the recertification marking on the bat to be legal. If not the bat is illegal and there are many different ways and marking the bat mfg used when putting on the recertified marking. Sometimes it not easy to find


Don

[bd2632]

FYI -- I was still confused so I e-mailed Worth last night and below is the response I received from Worth Customer Service:

If the bat is on the approved list it is legal for any type of play regardless whether or not it was recertified. When ASA passed their bat standard for 2004 and started accepting bats for testing we immediately sent some bats that were not recertified and they passed on first try which as we see it, the recertification process as a total waste of players and manufacturers time and money. That is water under the bridge and now your bat is legal for league, tournament and championship play. Thank you for using Worth products.

Customer Service
Worth Sports

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally posted by bd2632
When ASA passed their bat standard for 2004 and started accepting bats for testing we immediately sent some bats that were not recertified and they passed on first try which as we see it, the recertification process as a total waste of players and manufacturers time and money. That is water under the bridge and now your bat is legal for league, tournament and championship play. Thank you for using Worth products.

Customer Service
Worth Sports

This should indicate exactly how the manufacturers address player safety...THEY DON'T CARE! It is apparent their sole concern is sales, period. They get caught in a fraudulant scheme and then talk about the waste of time and money it is to correct the situation.

I also question their truthfulness of the statement above, whether intentional or through omission. What bats did they send? Were they the bats which were not produced according to the original specs or are they the bats which came off the line AFTER the required correction was instituted? The comment above makes it seem as if the testing was wrong and they have been right since day one. Seems to me if that were true, they wouldn't have dropped their lawsuit(s) involving the testing and banning of bats.

Nothing like a little propaganda to go with the equipment. This is one reason why I will not, nor suggest that anyone who ask me, purchase anything produced by Worth.

JMHO,

[oppool]

You are right bd2632 from the way ASA websight reads the bats that were on the recertified list are now legal with or without the recertified marking. That SUPRISES me, only the bats that are now listed as banned on there new list dont make it and cant be recertified. Our ASA metro meeting is this Sat. I will be interested in seeing what Mr. Butler and other say on this issue


Don

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally posted by oppool
You are right bd2632 from the way ASA websight reads the bats that were on the recertified list are now legal with or without the recertified marking. That SUPRISES me, only the bats that are now listed as banned on there new list dont make it and cant be recertified. Our ASA metro meeting is this Sat. I will be interested in seeing what Mr. Butler and other say on this issue


Don

Sorry, but I don't see what the big deal is concerning this issue.

It was made quite clear when the new testing procedure was set in place that everything started from scratch and that no, NO bat was preapproved. That means that ANY prior lists are null and void.

The new lists (2004) is just telling us which bats passed the new standard test. From the confusion shown in this thread, it is obvious that it was necessary to distinguish that the EST5 (and others) is a legal bat whether it had the recertification mark or not. And that is just what they did.