|
It's what the players want.
The rule change has been proposed only because that is what the players at the tournament level have indicated they want. The fact that many, if not most, local leagues have adopted the same rule makes one believe it must be a good rule.
Truth is, it would already be a rule this year if some minor wording had been accepted by the rule proposer. It only failed because approval required 66.7% approval last year; this year will require 60%, and exceeded that last year, with expectation that it would have even more acceptance this year after wording is adjusted. |
Thats Interesting Steve, because I hear the opposite from the players..they like the open count..it lets them be a little more choosy about what they hit...either way, its their game..not ours...
|
Quote:
|
I seem to recall a survey taken at some ASA nationals, where more than 80% stated that, with the 4-3 count, rather than 3-2, that they always waited for a first called strike before hitting away. They wanted the more action with less dead time. Henry Pollard, now as a Commissioner, is the lead proponent of this rule, with Bernie Profato close behind.
This change will most likely (again based on last year's outcome) only apply, at least at first, to Adult Slow Pitch, not youth or Seniors. If successful, it may then start to spread, like stealing. |
there is not point to it...even LESS of a point of you are going to include the courtesy foul....
__________________ Darrell Phx ASA DUIC With all due respect, the point is it speeds up the game. Players come to the plate swinging and not waiting. We use it here in our state championship play and most games come in at about an hour. Take away the 1-1 and you get close to hour and a half. It also reduces 'Disscussion' about strike zones from pitchers and batters when they come up hacking. FOZZIE |
Nothing I hate more (as player and as umpire) than batters going up there looking for a walk, taking pitches until they get a strike. Starting at 1-1 should help things, and get people swinging.
|
Quote:
Many people see this as a speed-up rule. It is not. It is meant to make the players to take the bat off their shoulders and use it. The rule increases offense, thus increasing defensive action. This makes for a more exciting game. [Edited by IRISHMAFIA on Jun 28th, 2005 at 11:17 AM] |
Many people see this as a speed-up rule. It is not. It is meant to make the players to take the bat off their shoulders and use it. The rule increases offense, thus increasing defensive action. This makes for a more exciting game.
[Edited by IRISHMAFIA on Jun 28th, 2005 at 11:17 AM] __________________ Mike Rowe ASA Umpire You can count me as one of the people who see this as a speed up rule. at the National level they might be selling it as a rule to add offense, and I agree it certainly does. But as a local issue the reason they went to the 1-1 count was to speed up the game. With hour time limits the players were complaining about only getting in 3 or 4 innings in under the old 0-0 count. Now they are getting complete or near complete games in even with the time limit restrictions. FOZZIE |
Either way you slice it, it's effect will be both. It will speed up things by making batters swing at the first good pitch they see instead of trying for a walk. It will increase action by making batters swing at the first good pitch they see instead of trying for a walk.
|
Quote:
Given the changes with the home run limit rule, there's less incentive to wait for a teammate to crank one out of the park, thus de-valuing the BB: the incentive to play small ball (did I just say that?) in the modern SP game is an improvement, I think. I kinda like it; but I still need more time to get used to it. I still get kidded for calling the first ball "ball one" :) I think the shortening of the game (I noticed this right away) is a good thing, too, especially in this heat :) |
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:09pm. |