You're not. Most umpires I work with will not call timeout in the OP, unless we're playing the waiting game for no reason. In fact, we often brag in the dressing room (or the bar) about how many half innings we had that were live the whole time. I'd say that more than half of my innings are constantly live - with the majority of breakages caused by conferences and fouls out of play.

Well, now that Steve stole my thunder.....:cool:

I don't think you can compare NCAA ball to much else. There are people who CANNOT get up off the ground and keep contact with the base. And just who determined this had to be a "live" game?

What is the purpose of not granting the player's request for time to get up and prepare to continue the game? There is no more delay than there would be for the crew to move into position. For that matter, it might even allow the game to proceed at a quicker pace.

Sorry, I just don't see the fascination with the "live" game issue. Then again, about a year ago I asked someone to give me a valid reason to keep the game live other than "because" or "it's always been that way" or "it's tradition" and I'm still waiting for an answer. :rolleyes:

I don't understand your fascination with trying to turn the fastpitch game into slowpitch without the arc rule.

I also don't understand why you think it is a good thing for the game to remove the requirement that the defense maintain control of the ball to keep runners from advancing.

Why is calling the game the way it's meant to be called a "fascination"? There's no reason to stop play every 30 seconds to reset. This isn't football. There is a flow to the game. Constant stoppages for unnecessary timeouts disrupts that flow.

But calling time to allow a runner the ability to get up is IMHO not "unneccessary". With that said though, I have had too many runners think they can just throw their hands up and say time and jump up before I grant it and that out usually gets a conversation with the coach as they cant understand how she is out when "SHE called time"

There's my point. Thank you, very much. WHO SAID THE GAME IS MEANT TO BE PLAYED "LIVE"? What God of softball made that determination?

BTW, you may keep the ball live in FP, but nothing is supposed to happen, so what difference does it make? You get a gotcha on a runner who comes off a base every now and then? Is THAT the way the game is supposed to be played?

If "stoppage" is so bad, why is it that the SP game (which Tom mistakenly believes is part of my belief on this subject) which has more action, more offense, more defense, more at bats and the same number of outs takes only 2/3 of the time it takes to play a quick FP game?

Couldn't be farther from the truth. Don't go strawman on me.

Please note where I make such a statement? Don't waste your time, you cannot find what doesn't exist.

As previously noted, nothing is supposed to occur between the end of the play and the next pitch anyway, so what it the difference? If the defense needs to do something like pull back hair, tie a shoe, or whatever, the game is going to be suspended anyway, so where is the issue?

Still waiting for a valid answer to my question.

To me, softball and baseball are games designed to test a multitude of skills. One of the lesser of those skills is the ability of a runner to stay on a base without getting tagged out. Until the runner demonstrates this ability, I don't have relaxed action.

I will not call time in this situation unless the runner on the ground and the fielder holding a tag freeze for a few seconds, in which case I call time even without a request (assuming no other action on the field). I will call time upon request if the runner is stretched out in such a position that they would have unreasonable difficulty in regaining their feet without coming off the bag, such as a hook slide away from the bag with one toe touching.

Sometimes repeated requests will elicit a "You don't need time" from me.

However, I don't feel strongly about this issue and have no problem with another ump handling it differently.

Strawman is as strawman does. You started this with the "fascination" charge.

You want to kill the ball when all play has stopped. So, all play has stopped, F6 is standing there with the ball. All runners are stopped on a base. All that remains is to throw the ball back to the pitcher. So, you want to kill the ball then. F6 then overthrows F1. Ball is dead, runners cannot advance. What is the advantage in killing the ball? Easier on the umpire?

If you want to compare apples and apples on slow v fast pitch, don't compare men's slowpitch with JO fastpitch. What is the pace of the game for a men's fastpitch compared with slowpitch at the same skill classification?

And why are you the sole arbiter as to what is a "valid" answer to your question?

Occasionally Mike is WRONG.... today is one of those days

Just an FYI.. There are still some places that have JO Slowpitch that is very competitive.

Sorry gentlemen, it was not my intention to ignite a firestorm. AtlUmpSteve summed up my thoughts on this fiasco much more eloquently than I ever could. Like Steve and Paul L, among others, I didn't mean that I am willing to stand there while a fielder holds a tag on a runner who can't walk it up, and I tried to reflect that in my original post.

I have now officially flip flopped on this issue once again. I see myself being like Paul L in that while I may not grant time every time it's requested, it won't chap my hide if somebody else does it.

Dukat, I would have a hard time stopping myself from responding to the coach who complains "SHE called time" with a "Yes Coach, she did call time but the shortstop called 'Play Ball' before she made the tag." :p

Ha! No problem. Steve opened a door (maybe knowingly :rolleyes: ) on a favorite topic of mine and I walked through it. After a little note to Tom and Darrell, I'll be finished.........for now.

Tom, Tom, Tom.....why is it that you seem offended by that word? There is nothing wrong with being fascinated by something. Fireworks come to mind?

However, the way so many jumped in, it seems that by the definition, my use of the word was quite accurate.

Hey, you want to wait until the ball gets back to the pitcher in the vicinity of the PP, that's fine by me. Just like anything else in the game, you can "what if" it to death, you can always find a scenario that doesn't fit the rule.

I was not comparing games. I was demonstrating that the fears of my suggestions affecting the flow of the game are not valid. Nothing would change in the player's or coach's mannerisms if play was suspended. The ONLY difference would be that one umpire wouldn't have to wait for the partner to return to position before s/he could do so.

I believe that, if anything, it could be beneficial to all. The coaches don't have to worry about getting the attention of their pitcher and infielders who are watching the runners. The pitching coach gets the signal to the catcher/pitcher sooner, the base coaches can concentrate on giving the batter her signs which means she is in the box and ready to hit sooner and, yes, the umpires can move back into position and concentrate on what they should be and not whether little Susie falls off a base or does a little groundkeeping around the base. I know Sue Enquist (UCLA) might have had a couple more notches on her belt had my methods been in place in the NCAA a few years back. :)

It's been so long since I saw a men's FP game, I couldn't tell you how long they run now. When I was still playing FP in the early 70s, game lasted about 90 minutes.

Because it IS my question :p Cliff's question was correct, "Who are three people who have never been in my kitchen!"


Darrell, Darrell, Darrell......tsk, tsk, tsk! :D

Actually, I wasn't. It was your feigned offense that resulted in my pointing out who started this. I've never had a discussion about how many live ball innings I've had; heck I'd have no idea. It is not something I pay any attention to.

This is not an unusual scenario, and you're the one who is advocating the slow pitch approach of killing the ball when all play has ended, not me. You said that; you didn't suggest waiting until the ball is in the circle (this time around). Maybe that is because it doesn't speed things up as much as you claim if you wait that long. I still fail to see how calling TIME and suspending play speeds anything up at all. The umpires getting back into position is hardly a big time consumer.


Tomayto, tomahto.OK, it would protect players from stupid mistakes. Maybe we should allow mulligans also. What would work for you? Three a game?It's Larry, Darrell, and Darrell. If I recall, they were from over your way. ;)

PS to those new to this board: This is an old discussion that renews itself every so often, kinda like the profanity rule discussion. All we need is for wade to jump in again on the side of suspending play as a way to speed things up. At least I think that was wade... Wade? ;)