So Irish tell me where do we as a society draw the line on laws that help us as a people. When ASA comes down with a Rule that's comparable to a Law ,isn't it? We as umpires enforce safety issues every game we do. When indivuals can't or won't protect themselves then it's up to Government to step in. Otherwise wejust as well should be in IRAQ!

What utter BS. Read my previous answer to WMB.

Please support this by quoting any relevant portions of the US or any state's constitution.

Define "society". There is no such animal. Most people use the term in a fashion that a "society" determine the set of rules by which a person wants to live with no regard to what another may wish. What one believes to be society here may be a cult elsewhere.

Under what authority does anyone have to determine what is better for the next guy? Guess what? People in this country are the same as those in Iraq. They will do almost anything to insure their next door neighbor live in the same manner as they do.

If you truly believe in freedom as most people in this country think they enjoy, you must be willing to accept another's way of life as you wish them to endure yours.

There is a huge difference in accepting rules from an organization and enduring and intrusive government. You can choose to not participate in a non-governmental organization. Unless you have unlimited resources, getting up and moving away from a government is a bit more difficult.

Of course it is. Otherwise they'd move the state to a better location.

Anyone who follows baseball knows that today's wooden bats don't crack. They SHATTER. Which is much more dangerous to a pitcher, and everyone else in the infield, than a ball coming off an aluminum bat.

Bob

If you disagree with rules designed to prevent a pitcher from being hurt due to a bat that causes the ball to come back to the pitcher too quickly, do you also propose unbanning all the banned bats? Do you also disagree with rules requiring batting helmets and facemasks or limiting the makeup and length of cleats? If you do not, where is the line between where an association bears the responsibility to prevent injury to the best of it's ability and where an association should not try to prevent a foreseeable injury?

I can't tell who you are addressing with this, so I will answer.

I think, in general, the youth sports organizations are becoming a bit to paranoid and "kid in a bubble" oriented. But, that is <font size=4>not even close</font> to my objection to such things as the OP issue.

If I don't like ASA's rules, I can umpire for AFA, or USSSA, or form my own league.

If I don't like the state's rules, I can suffer loss of property or liberty.

A huge difference, and I wish people would quit munging them into the same issue. They are not even remotely the same issue.

A law too often disobeyed is a bad law; it's up to the legislator eliminate it or change it, so that the same contempt will not affect the other good laws.
(Memoirs of Hadrian - M.Yourcenar)*

Roman Emperor Hadrian (of course his thoughts are made by the author of the novel, french writer M.Y.) perfectly knew that a bad (or weak) law will affect the entire system.
Sorry to say the same wisdom seems to me NOT to belong to New Jersey (or others) politicians...

*the original text is written in french. My text was in italian and the translation is mine... sorry!!!

To everybody: I learned more about USA by this thread than from several books at school!!
To Mike: your thoughts about the relations between induvidual and society simply fascinate me. And in a sense you partially changed my view of people from USA, thanks for this.

Ciao

"Herd" as in I HEARD a HERD of cattle running by?

Bob

In the case of state legislators, correct.

Irish, just got back in town, but my post was a, poor I guess, attempt at sarcasm!!
There's too many out there that actually believe what I posted in jest. Go figure...

IT's not so much the present day bat's makeup as it is the game itself which has gone through severe changes, the athletes and the dimension of the fields.
The game is faster, the girls more stronger and athletic, the bats more potent, but the dimensions of the field remain the same.
The pitcher's mound needs to be moved back. Also, I believe some defensive positions should be required to wear face guards and light chest protectors.
Some might laugh, but I've seen too many career ending injuries occur.
The girls will not give up their bats.

Pitcher's mound? What pitcher's mound. This board has discussed moving the Pitcher's plate back before to 43' That may well happen in the future
How is mandating protective equipment any different from a rules org declaring certain bats illegal?
The girls will give up their bats if ASA or some other sanctioning body says they will.

Please elaborate. I for one would interested in the anecdotal specifics.

I, for one, think we could accomplish the same affect with less overall impact by lowering the .COR of the game balls. Changing the .47 ball for a .44 ball would create a more than 6% reduction in the resultant force from the bat impact. I think that is a favorable alternative to reducing bat perfprmance 6%, and would certainly be less costly.

I am for moving the pitching plate back to the 43' mark, as we have already discussed in another thread. I am against any mandating of safety equipment by either the governing body of the game, or by the government itself. If parents, players, and coaches have concerns, then they certainly should be able to figure out what they need to in the area of safety equipment without it being forced upon them. I could also see approving the reduction in the COR of the ball, as Steve proposed.