ok here some noise

[Roger Greene]

Does anybody out there who has their new Fed books understand 8-2-7?

"Art.7...The batter-runner with a play at home plate in an attempt to prevent an obvious out at home plate"

There must be some words left out. "interferes with" would fit nicely immediately after batter-runner, and the penalty would make sense.

Is this rewright close to the ASA book, and if so does it have a related article?

Thanks,
Roger Greene

ps
In a related remark they didn't keep the old 8-3-3c4. which nobody could explain.
Roger

[Edited by Roger Greene on Dec 16th, 2001 at 04:40 PM]

[whiskers_ump]

As usual, you are correct Roger. They have left out
something. Since Section 2 covers Batter-Runner being
out when - then Art 7...does not make sense unless you
read into it. I agree with your interpretation. it will
probably be like some of last years changes and come out
after the season starts and half of us have had to argue
with a coach or two over the wording. They did re-write
Rule 8 and did drop 8.3.3c4. Good call partner...grin

glen

[Steve M]

Roger,
Yup, that doesn't seem to read too well. Also, read the bold penalty note for Articles 5-8. It's assumed, I think, that we'll realize that 5-8 deal with interference.
'Course 5 & 6 mention that it's interference. Now, that penalty note also states that for Article 7, the runner is out along with the batter.

In ASA, Rule 7, Section 6, Article "last" - the batter is out for the interference and all runners must return to the baseoccupied at the time of the interference. Fed is giving 2 outs on this while ASA is giving 1 out.

[Roger Greene]

Steve,
What is your opinion of the Fed overhall? I just read it through for the first time today and it appears to have removed several differences with Pony. I'll have to compare them more closely after the Fed test. How about with ASA?

So far I think I like most of the clairifications and changes, even though I've got some studying to do.

I don't think any of us approves of the substitute reentry, but It'll give coaches an extra opportunity to pinch hit the brusier that kills the ball but can't make it to second if the ball stayes inside the fence.

This clause and the definition of the Base Path (2-3-2) were the main things that confused me.

There appeared to be a typo in 2-42-1. There may be others I missed.

Roger Greene

[Gulf Coast Blue]

Roger.......et al.

I find the FED book to almost be unreadable.........

I despise their codification and wording on most rules.

They have a horrible system of cross-referencing their plays and the index is confusing.........

However.........Steve's publication helped me immensely.......for those that call both......it is a Godsend.

Joel

[Steve M]

Roger,
I pretty much agree with Joel - I much prefer ASA's rule book to Fed's. I'm still told that ASA, Fed, and NCAA are trying to match each other as much as they can and that each year they are moving a bit closer. For the most part, I like Fed's overhaul - since it moves them closer to ASA. Like most of us, I wouldn't care for the subs being able to re-enter, but ya know, ASA made that same change for 2002. NCAA did not make that re-entry change and I don't think they will (I hope).

From what I hear, Fed is working on redoing their entire book - to clarify and simplify.

[whiskers_ump]

I sent a e-mail to TASO [Texas Association of Sports
Officials] asking for clarification of the rules that
you gentlemen have questioned. NFHS request that all
questions should be directed to the state association
which is responsible for administering and conducting
the high school softball programs in your state. TASO
is mine. Will post the answer, if they have one..grin

Damn, you read that stuff close Roger, maybe that is
why I dont do well on test, I do not read all of the
words of the questions.

glen

[Roger Greene]

You better read those dang Fed questions close. Some of them are obtuse, and all of them use that R3 on 1st mess!!!!!!!

Roger Greene

[Dakota]

Originally posted by Roger Greene
all of them use that R3 on 1st mess!!!!!!!

It's just softball's way of annoying the baseball folks! Is it working?

[Roger Greene]

Yes, and Fed baseball uses it also. It must be a plot to confuse any person who possesses a logical thought process.
Roger Greene

[Dakota]

I got no bone to pick here, but there is a logic to softball's nomenclature, too. The logic is the players are numbered in the order they appeared in the inning.

[Dakota]

BTW, I assume baseball's numbering system existed first. So, I do wonder why softball invented their own. Anyone know?

[Steve M]

Can't say for sure, but I suspect it's for the same reason that there are umpteen different sanctioning bodies - for each game - that each have their own set of rules.

[Skahtboi]

Glen:

Don't mean to sound, ummmm...what's the word I am looking for here....negative, but I sent TASO an email back in September and have yet to hear a word from them. So, I am guessing that they are not real swift in the reply department. But...there is always hope.

Scott

[whiskers_ump]

Originally posted by Skahtboi
Glen:

Don't mean to sound, ummmm...what's the word I am looking for here....negative, but I sent TASO an email back in September and have yet to hear a word from them. So, I am guessing that they are not real swift in the reply department. But...there is always hope.

Scott

You are right Scott, I do not think that TASO will get
caught up this year. They still trying to figure out
what happened last year. It may be that not only are
they [TASO] not real swift in the reply department, but
that they just dont have an answer and are hoping that
we will go away.

glen