First basemen's mitt

[kjm930]

Just wondering the ASA rule on this one. A girl on our team (10 and under slowpitch) is using her mom's old mitt. Her mom was a 1st basemen, she is not. Can another coach protest a game if a girl is playing short or third wearing a first basemen's mitt? Thanks for your replies.

[JEL]

Originally posted by kjm930
Just wondering the ASA rule on this one. A girl on our team (10 and under slowpitch) is using her mom's old mitt. Her mom was a 1st basemen, she is not. Can another coach protest a game if a girl is playing short or third wearing a first basemen's mitt? Thanks for your replies.

Can't protest the game, but you can "protest" the illegal glove/mitt. If a play is made the offended team will have an option to take any part of the play, or nullify the play. If the umpire refuses to allow that, and says the glove doesn't matter then you could protest the entire game. (well, the game from that point on)

From a coaching perspective, as with batting out of order, I wouldn't point out the illegal act until the penalty to the other team would benefit mine. In other words, if the SS is wearing a catchers mitt, but never makes an out with it why protest it? She may make a play in the 7th that you could reverse and thus benefit your team.

As an umpire, I would have the glove removed as soon as I was aware of it.

[AtlUmpSteve]

If a play is made the offended team will have an option to take any part of the play, or nullify the play.

I agree with everything JEL said, except this. The only two options are 1) nullify the play, and resume with the previous count (do-over), or 2) accept the play as is, and ignore the illegal act. ASA 8-8.O Effect. Accepting "any part of the play" reminds me of Dixie Youth baseball that I did many years ago, but isn't in any form of softball I call (ASA, NFHS, NCAA).

[JEL]

Originally posted by AtlUmpSteve
If a play is made the offended team will have an option to take any part of the play, or nullify the play.

I agree with everything JEL said, except this. The only two options are 1) nullify the play, and resume with the previous count (do-over), or 2) accept the play as is, and ignore the illegal act. ASA 8-8.O Effect. Accepting "any part of the play" reminds me of Dixie Youth baseball that I did many years ago, but isn't in any form of softball I call (ASA, NFHS, NCAA).

Yep, Steve is correct, I was thinking Dixie rules (BB at that!)

[whiskers_ump]

Originally posted by JEL

Yep, Steve is correct, I was thinking Dixie rules (BB at that!)

Mike is always ing in our heads, This is a softball board.

[funning of course]

[MrRabbit]

Question?

I agree with ATLUMPSTEVE and JEL. But my question is why the answer to question 49 on the ASA test having to do with the illegal glove used to catch a infield fly and protested by coach is "D" The play stands as infield fly takes precedence over the illegal glove?

Rabbit

[whiskers_ump]

The play stands as infield fly takes precedence over the illegal glove?

Was the glove involved with the out? NO, the enforcing of
the IFR was.

[rhsc]

Originally posted by whiskers_ump
The play stands as infield fly takes precedence over the illegal glove?

Was the glove involved with the out? NO, the enforcing of
the IFR was.

Durnit, I knew that one, just aint quick enough off the draw for papasmurf.

[DownTownTonyBrown]

I realize the original question was ASA.

For NFHS rules (1-4-3), there is nothing said about "first baseman" gloves. There are ONLY size restrictions - heel to tip, 14 inches max, etc.

Are first baseman gloves typically larger than this?

Has anyone ever made the effort to measure a glove during a game?

A team complained to me last year about a SS using a first baseman glove. Not having a tape measure I said it didn't matter what style of glove was used. Hope I was right.

[whiskers_ump]

DTTB,

You are correct. Anyone in FED may use a mitt/glove, just has to meet
the standards, and no, I do not carry a tape with me, if it looks like
a glove/nitt, then it must be a glove/miott.

[whiskers_ump]

Surely none of the glove companies would produce a glove/mitt that
would not meet the standards as set forth by the different associations.
Most list the same specifications for gloves/mitts. Just as any bat
company would not manufacture a bat that was not legal, nor a face mask/
guard that was not certified.

[Homer]

Originally posted by whiskers_ump
Surely none of the glove companies would produce a glove/mitt that
would not meet the standards as set forth by the different associations.

Well, the catcher can use ANY sized mitt.

[NorthAlaUmp]

Originally posted by whiskers_ump
Surely none of the glove companies would produce a glove/mitt that
would not meet the standards as set forth by the different associations.
Most list the same specifications for gloves/mitts. Just as any bat
company would not manufacture a bat that was not legal, nor a face mask/
guard that was not certified.

Read on another board a post from a parent who bought a face guard and, before he opened the package, realized it WAS NOT certified by NOCSAE. The store and the manufacturer refused to refund it! He was pubilicizing the fact for others to beware. Never put it past any company to try to get rid of old stock that might not now meet standards.