Bats

[oppool]

I understand the bpf rating that is marked on most bats is suppose to be a rating on how fast a ball comes off the bat using a .47 core ball do you know what the rating was on the titanium bats?? I did hear that a guy pitching in men's SP in Illinios(may have been Indiana) was killed this year when he was hit in the head by a batted ball.



Don

[Steve M]

Don,
I dunno that they were marked and I never looked into what bpf rating they may have had. There was a slow ptch game this past year where those bats were used?!? That's amazing that any tournament or league would allow them.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Okay, my turn to chime in.

For all of you folks who are thinking along the lines of expense, the bat companies have been aware of the rule for 3 1/2 years, so if you think you are getting screwed by the rule, you are looking in the wrong place. Hopefully, your daughters will not be injured as a result of ASA's failure to take a stand on this issue.

Stickers "falling off" is absurd. As of last Tuesday, the grandfather clause allowing the stickers supposedly expired. However, last year the ASA wimped out and put the onus back on the umpires by allowing them to make a judgment call on the manufactured date and whether it would pass a bat performance standard test. Also, there must still be a list available as it will still be part of the conditions making a bat ASA-legal unless there were some late, yet to be published changes for 2002. Therefore, the "sticker" is irrelevent.

Obviously, this puts every umpire in jeopardy on the safety issue. The "in my judgment" debate may work on the ball field, but will easily crumble in a court of law. And if you don't think there are ballplayers out there having bats repainted to try to get an edge, you are sadly mistaken.

I loved the "why can't we use the technology available to us to win ball games" argument on this subject. The answer is simple: there is no technological advances to help protect the youth and rec players defend themselves in the field. It isn't like the standards set were that restricting. With the exception of the titanium bats and a few Demarini proto-types, almost all the bats on the market at the time ASA began testing met the standards. If anything, ASA was simply trying to draw a line to keep the bats from getting out of hand, not pull bats off the shelves.

Then the argument started concerning toning down the balls. Of course, now the ball manufacturers are raising a stink and amid all the fuss, ASA opted to NOT change the balls this year. Some believe that is because Bernie Profato was not in attendence at the convention when the subject came to the floor. I believe it is because the manufacturers complained louder than the players.

BTW, it is my belief that while the new compression and COR requirements may keep the ball from travelling as far as before, it has very little effect on the first 90' the ball travels which is where the danger is regardless of what ball is used with some of these bats.

Even some of the Super players, Carl Rose in particular, are showing concern that the equipment is getting out of hand. Two years ago, Carl rearranged the face of a pitcher at the ASA Super NCs in Sanford, Fl. Now, this is a pitcher who is aware of the danger and he could not protect himself. So, how do you think the youth or rec player is going to handle that line shot coming off an equally souped-up piece of equipment?

I believe it is time to bring the game back inside the fences and see who are the real talented players.

Let them use wood.

JMHO,

Mike

[Skahtboi]

Rare as this may sound, you won't get an argument out of me on that one, Mike!

Scott

[Gulf Coast Blue]

Mike........in a women's game a few years ago..........I was PU and a the batter (a 21 yo perfect physical specimen).........drove a shot straight back up the middle that almost took the head off of F1........to this day, I don't know how she got her glove up in time.......this ball knocked F1 off her feet.

I personally think this particular batter could have drilled one with a piece of pipe though.........

One thing did come out of it........the F1 that got knocked down was a board member of the league.......and they switched pitching distance to 43'........


Joel

[Edited by Gulf Coast Blue on Jan 6th, 2002 at 05:53 AM]

[Steve M]

I've said for years that I'd like to see a game with wood bats and punky balls so we could see who realy knew how to play. I used a wooden bat for a good bit of the time I played. There's nothing quite like the sound of a well hit ball off a wood bat. Technology has changed the game into a gorilla match a lot of the time.

[Dakota]

This is a difficult discussion for me to engage, since I call only ASA JO, including a lot of league and rec level ball.

I suspect there is a big difference between adult players and 16U and under on this topic.

Most of the complaining I have heard has not been about the safety issue per se, but it has been about making bats illegal when the identical bat with the stamp is legal. Parents don't want to spend the extra money for a stamp. They would spend the money if they truly thought it was a safety issue. But to retire a perfectly good Louisville 555 (or whatever) just to buy another one with a stamp is a tough sell.

As an umpire, I don't like the ASA wimping out on following through by defining it as umpire judgment. After all, the only way I can tell if the bat is legal is by what is stamped or painted on the bat.

[Steve M]

Don't most parents or players buy a new bat every other year, if not more frequently. It sure seems like they do onc they reach high school age. It college, most schools have something going with bat makers, so they've rarely got an old bat - NCAA doesn't accept ASA's bat rule anyway. The few slow pitch games I do, it sure seems like an awful lot of new bats are used - so I don't see a real impact with them, either. The only group that doesn't seem to replace all or most of their bats every year are the B & C levels of adult fast pitch - A & Major usually have god enough sponsors that they get new bats every year. Anyway, the point of this rambling is that I think we'll see parents and/or players get the new bats but the maximum impact will be the expense of the bat ONE YEAR earlier than they would have without the rule.

[Dakota]

Originally posted by Steve M
A & Major usually have god enough sponsors that they get new bats every year.

I should think so with that kind of sponsorship!

Seriously, your point is a good one, but that doesn't keep people from complaining.

And don't forget, there are a lot of B & lower level JO teams out there who have players with their own bats, but who don't replace them every other year.

[Skahtboi]

I don't know about that Steve. My daughter, and most of her teammates played 4 years of high school ball and ASA tournaments every other weekend for that same 4 years, and nearly all of them had the same bat the whole time. That's a hell of a lot of mileage on a bat when you figure the number of times they made contact with the ball during all that playing. So I can understand the reluctance of these ballplayers parents to kick out another $200-400 for a new bat if they just purchased that same bat in the last year or two.

Scott

[IRISHMAFIA]

Dakota,

It's funny you should mention Louisville. H&B (Louisville Slugger) was one of the companies found to be intentionally holding back on having their old models tested, and sat back an blamed ASA for making the players buy new ones.

That was one of the reasons ASA backed off to the pre-1995 rule.

Also, I feel no sorrow for ANYONE who is stupid enough to spend $200-400 on a softball bat. Just another method of buying skill instead of developing it.

[Skahtboi]

Well Mike,

I don't know about the intelligence level involved in the bat buying at that price. Often it is a case of what the player wants and feels comfortable with. My daughter, fortunately, felt comfortable with a $90 Louisville bat. But that is not always the case with teenagers. Also, for someone that has the limited income that I have, I damn sure wouldn't have wanted to pay even that price every other year if the bat is still in excellent condition.

Scott

[Gulf Coast Blue]

I have spent as much as $125 for a bat and have seen fast pitch bats as high as $175........

Just got one of my daughters one of the new 2002 Connexion 777's for less than $95.........saw it sold for as high as $139......

Most of the super high-priced bats I have seen have been Slow Pitch bats.........

Joel

[whiskers_ump]

Originally posted by Gulf Coast Blue
I have spent as much as $125 for a bat and have seen fast pitch bats as high as $175........

Just got one of my daughters one of the new 2002 Connexion 777's for less than $95.........saw it sold for as high as $139......

Most of the super high-priced bats I have seen have been Slow Pitch bats.........

Joel

Yep....they got $500 dollar bat, $125 dollar pair shoes
and want to stand there and walk...or argue about a ball/
strike. ,

glen

[Gulf Coast Blue]

Yep....they got $500 dollar bat, $125 dollar pair shoes
and want to stand there and walk...or argue about a ball/
strike. ,

glen [/B][/QUOTE]

When I was at school at The University (The University of Texas)........we had a pretty good slow pitch softball team..........(My Senior Year, we came in 2nd in intramural)......including the Law School.......

Each year we each kicked in $3 bucks for equipment............I remember a HUGE argument regarding spending $18 for an aluminum Bomb-bat.........this bat would be considered archaic by today’s standards........

I swung my 33" Johnny Bench wood BB bat..............lol

Joel