|
|
|
Tue Sep 12, 2006, 05:10pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Wouldn't ASA rule 7 section 4E apply here?
4E says, "a strike is called for each foul ball when the batter has fewer than 2 strikes" which is followed by F (slowpitch) then a note. The Note states : NOTE E-F: if a pitched ball is swung at and missed, then hit on the follow through, it is a strike and a dead ball. The way i read that, if it's a 3rd strike, its still strike 3 dead ball. Batter out. 
|
|
Tue Sep 12, 2006, 11:15pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Yes, it would. However, that is for calling a strike. What happens when you rule the batter out on strikes the the coach protests citing 7.6.K.3 and Effect where it specifically states that this is a foul ball. And we all know, a foul ball is not a strike when the batter already has two.
It seems there is a contradiction.
__________________
The bat issue in softball is as much about liability, insurance and litigation as it is about competition, inflated egos and softball.
|
|
Wed Sep 13, 2006, 10:04am
|
|||
|
|||
|
It took us awhile (must be the off season for a lot of folks)... but we've finally gotten to the dilema on this situation.
Less that 2 strikes, there is no contradiction. But with 2 strikes, there is. Personally, I'm going with foul ball and letting the protest committee sort it out.
__________________
Tom
|
|
Thu Sep 14, 2006, 12:36pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
An interesting dilema. And here is an odd twist...
I don't have a 2006 book handy, but I do have the 2005 book on CD with me now. For the 2006 rule, is the above quote from "blue" accurate? Does the "NOTE" associated with 7-4-E really say that a ball hit on the backswing is ruled as "...a strike and a DEAD BALL"? My 2005 book reads that it is "...a strike and a FOUL BALL". A subtle editorial change? A misquote from "blue"? If this is an editorial change, it is one that would have a profound effect on how this rule is enforced. It almost looks like someone caught this inconsistency, slipped the editorial change in the new book, but forgot to make a corresponding change to the conflicting rule (7-6-K-3). In other words, it looks like somebody already tinkered with this, but they just didn't tinker enough! Last edited by BretMan; Thu Sep 14, 2006 at 12:38pm.
|
|
Thu Sep 14, 2006, 01:40pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Yes, the 2006 ASA 7-4 NOTE-E-F says "strike and dead ball.
__________________
Officiating takes more than OJT. It's not our jobs to invent rulings to fit our personal idea of what should and should not be.
|
|
Thu Sep 14, 2006, 02:25pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
So, between the 2005 and 2006 book somebody DID make a concious effort to clarify this rule.
Trouble is, they missed one more conflicting rule that would also need modified to totally set thing straight! 
|
 |
| Bookmarks |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
