approved bats

[justmom]

My daughter owns an older bat without any certification mark. The bat model IS listed on the ASA approved bat list. Is this bat legal this year under high school/Fed rules? I thought it was legal, but an umpire team tonight wouldn't let my daughter use it.. I don't want to go to the expense to replace it if I don't have to. I didn't want to argue with her coach over it, but he insisted that there is no list anymore, and hasn't been since 2002. ASA does publish a bat list, so what gives? (FYI..Louisville Slugger Model FP7)

[SC Ump]

NFHS Rule 1, Section 5, Art 4
... All bats shall meet the 2004 ASA Bat Performance Standard (certified bats meeting this standard can be found at www.asasoftball.com).

It looks to me like this model is indeed on the web site. I would suggest you print a copy of the web site's page and stick it in your bat bag. Since you said it is old enough to not have the mark, you might have to do a little extra.

Best of luck.

[Steve M]

Originally Posted by justmom

My daughter owns an older bat without any certification mark. The bat model IS listed on the ASA approved bat list. Is this bat legal this year under high school/Fed rules? I thought it was legal, but an umpire team tonight wouldn't let my daughter use it.. I don't want to go to the expense to replace it if I don't have to. I didn't want to argue with her coach over it, but he insisted that there is no list anymore, and hasn't been since 2002. ASA does publish a bat list, so what gives? (FYI..Louisville Slugger Model FP7)

I'm pretty sure it is the same for Fed ball in other states, but in Pennsylvania, that is not a legal bat for school games. Even though it would be for ASA games. ASA is a bit more lenient with bats than Fed is - Fed sez no certification imprint/mark/whatever means not legal. Sounds like that umpire was correct in not allowing the bat to be used and wasn't correct when he stated there was no list. I carry the non-approved list. I do not carry the approved list.

[justmom]

Originally Posted by Steve M

I'm pretty sure it is the same for Fed ball in other states, but in Pennsylvania, that is not a legal bat for school games. Even though it would be for ASA games. ASA is a bit more lenient with bats than Fed is - Fed sez no certification imprint/mark/whatever means not legal. Sounds like that umpire was correct in not allowing the bat to be used and wasn't correct when he stated there was no list. I carry the non-approved list. I do not carry the approved list.

This happened in Michigan. The MHSAA has a link in their website to the ASA certified equipment pages. Look under Forms and Resources here: http://www.mhsaa.com/sports/soft/index.htm.

So, can anyone in Michigan tell me why the umpires would have not allowed this bat? Should I do as suggested and have her carry the list in her bag, or will umpires in Michigan continue to say no? BTW, tonight was our fourth night of doubleheaders, and this is the first time this has happened.

Did FED change these rules in the last few years? It almost seems like at one time maybe they said you HAD to have the certification mark on the bat (and there was talk about "grandfathering", but then ASA came up with the 2004 standard, so they changed the rule? Or am I confusing this with something else?

[WestMichBlue]

ASA is a bit more lenient with bats than Fed is - Fed sez no certification imprint/mark/whatever means not legal.

That is not true, Steve. Maybe you have an exception in PA, but the NFHS book simply says to conform to the ASA 2004 Bat Performance Standard. Which says that a bat either has a 2000 or 2004 cert, or is on the approved list, or is not on the non-approved list.

Justmom: So, can anyone in Michigan tell me why the umpires would have not allowed this bat? Should I do as suggested and have her carry the list in her bag, or will umpires in Michigan continue to say no? BTW, tonight was our fourth night of doubleheaders, and this is the first time this has happened.


There are over 13,000 officials registered with the MHSAA and you found one umpire that did not understand the rule correctly. I don’t view that as a reflection on officials in Michigan.

Yes, your bat is legal – it is on the ASA approved list (page 10 of 20). If necessary, carry the approved list, and a copy of NFHS bat rule listed above by SC Ump, and a copy of the ASA Bat Standards listed on the ASA website.

WMB

[Steve M]

Originally Posted by WestMichBlue

ASA is a bit more lenient with bats than Fed is - Fed sez no certification imprint/mark/whatever means not legal.

That is not true, Steve. Maybe you have an exception in PA, but the NFHS book simply says to conform to the ASA 2004 Bat Performance Standard. Which says that a bat either has a 2000 or 2004 cert, or is on the approved list, or is not on the non-approved list.

OK, maybe it's just PIAA. But, no certification imprint/mark/whatever on the bat means that the bat is not legal while it may well be perfectly legal in an ASA game.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by Steve M

OK, maybe it's just PIAA. But, no certification imprint/mark/whatever on the bat means that the bat is not legal while it may well be perfectly legal in an ASA game.

When ASA started the certification markings in 2000, you are correct. The Fed demanded all base be properly marked.

However, that went by the wayside a couple of years ago. For that matter, in my area, the NFHS UIC asked the coaches and umpire what they thought it should be and he was in Indianapolis for their explanation.

Just another one of those "hanging chads" from my good buddies.

[justmom]

Thanks WMB for your reply, and your advice. I thought it was strange that both umpires working the game looked at the bat, and NEITHER would let her use it. Otherwise, they called an excellent game, so I can't complain about their competence. We will make sure to carry the rules book and the bat list to the rest of the games. Now, if I can just educate the coach and assistant coach who both insisted emphatically that a bat list hasn't been used since 2002... we will be all set!

Thanks so much again!!!
PF

[CecilOne]

As long as we are dissecting this, let's clear up something. The NFHS book says bats must meet the 2004 ASA Standard; which means the 2004 seal and not bats with just the 2000 seal unless they are on the approved list. Is that correct? Are there bats on the non-approved list which have a 2000 seal?

[justmom]

Originally Posted by CecilOne

which means the 2004 seal and not bats with just the 2000 seal unless they are on the approved list. Is that correct?

ASA website says: ....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 non approved list, or

so, it appears that neither mark is the ultimate authority. You need to consult a list anyway. This must be a lot of fun for you guys

[CecilOne]

Originally Posted by justmom

ASA website says: ....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 non approved list, or

so, it appears that neither mark is the ultimate authority. You need to consult a list anyway. This must be a lot of fun for you guys

And also says: "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." (my underlines).

[justmom]

Originally Posted by CecilOne

And also says: "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." (my underlines).

I can see what you're saying here. But why does ASA keep updating the banned bat list? It seems to imply that there are bats with the 2004 mark that are banned, or is it just new models that don't meet the standard? Does anybody know if there are actually bats on the banned list that have the 2004 mark on them?

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by justmom

I can see what you're saying here. But why does ASA keep updating the banned bat list? It seems to imply that there are bats with the 2004 mark that are banned, or is it just new models that don't meet the standard? Does anybody know if there are actually bats on the banned list that have the 2004 mark on them?

That is because the manufacturers make and distribute bats that are not in spec, yet placed the certification mark on them. They also produce bats that are not meant to be ASA approved.

The Cat FP305 was placed on the non-approved list AT THE MANUFACTURER'S request.

[Steve M]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

When ASA started the certification markings in 2000, you are correct. The Fed demanded all base be properly marked.

However, that went by the wayside a couple of years ago. For that matter, in my area, the NFHS UIC asked the coaches and umpire what they thought it should be and he was in Indianapolis for their explanation.

Just another one of those "hanging chads" from my good buddies.

Mike, OK, Pa is different. From our mandatory interp meeting
"The following is the NFHS Bat Performance Specifications as well as the PIAA procedure. This procedure is slightly different than the ASA in only that bat MUST have at least one (1) of the two (2) “CERTIFIED” seals as shown below to be considered legal. The “certified seals” below are the only approved seals acceptable for NFHS / PIAA competition."

Let me rephrase what I said earlier - In Pa, no seal means the bat is not legal for a PIAA game.