NSA Ruling?
 

Is it illegal to heat a bat in NSA softball? And if so where in the 2008 rule book are you findng the ruling?

Don't know NSA, but in others it comes under altering the bat.

I don't do NSA, but I know they have their rule book online. The preamble to Rule 3 states:

"An altered bat is considered altered when the physical structure of the legal bat has been changed in any way, or when an illegal or non approved bat has been made up in such a way as to appear to be a legal bat. Examples of altering a bat are, but not limited to the following: Painting a bat, replacing the handle, or shaving the handle or barrel or the taper changed in any way. Such as by sandpapering or applying a solvent to the surface such as fingernail polish remover or by any other means. Removing or replacing the plug or changed in any way other than factory repairs. Had the knob removed/ replaced or changed in any way or had anything removed or added to the inside or outside of the bat other than the legal way to tape the bat the specified and appropriate place as described in the NSA Rule Book."

I would consider a heated bat to be altered IMO.

Earlier in the preamble, it states that NSA apparently will impose a five-year suspension without any right of appeal for anyone who refuses to allow an NSA representative to inspect a suspected altered bat or ball. If a bat or ball is determined to be altered, it would lead to a two to five year suspension for a first-time offender.

Why I agree that a heated bat should be considered altered, I don't know if NSA's wording goes far enough. The note above specifically states the "physical" structure being changed.

Obviously, everyone knows I'm ASA and they mention the characteristics of the bat changing. What I'm saying here is that the physical structure doesn't actually change by heating the bat, but reacts in a different manner when contacting the ball WHILE heated.

Last year I had a conversation with Dr. Lloyd Smith in Colorado Springs about "heating" the bat. If you don't know, he is the man who is charged with ASA's tests and standards out of Washington State Univ.

He told me that a heated bat would react differently (more flex) when hitting the ball. However, he also noted that presently, bats cannot sustain any additional applied heat once exposed to the air. IOW, unless the batter swings at a pitch immediately upon removal from the heated bat wrap, there is no affect on the effect of the collision between bat and ball.

However, don't look for anyone to change their rule anytime soon. Technology rarely stands still or moves in reverse and you just never know when someone will figure out a way to make heating a bat actually help their hitting.

I wrote a response last night, but then lost my connection. Hopefully, I'll write it as clearly as I did last night...

Bear in mind that I all call is ASA, and I have no idea how much focus the NSA devotes to bats, nor do I have any idea as to how NSA instructs their umpires to handle this situation.

I think an umpire should have an easy time declaring a bat as having been altered if it's being heated while not in use, and a simple high school chemistry class would easily defend your argument. When any object is heated, the chemical bonds are lengthened, allowing for rigid objects to become more flexible and malleable. Thus, a bat in a heated state would have more "pop" than a bat in a cooler state. This is why some manufacturers state that certain bats should not be used below a certain outdoor temperature due to the increased risk that they will crack.

However, the good Doctor is correct, especially in the case of aluminum bats. Aluminum has a much higher heat transference factor, which means the energy (heat) transfers out a lot faster than other materials. The batter would have to heat the bat - a LOT - then, s/he would have to practically run to the batter's box and take the first pitch for the heat on the bat to have any effect.

Regardless, I think you can easily make the argument that a player heating a bat beyond reason (other than keeping it under a towel or covered with Pedro Cerrano's golf club covers) is an example of altering a bat. Will it make a difference in the bat's performance in the end? Maybe, maybe not. Would that matter? Not to me. Toss the bat and have a little chat with the coach.

Interp from above.
 

I have attached the response from the NSA UIC.

Bill

Heating a bat "DOES NOT" enhance the performance of a bat. You can go online and look at our approved equipment list and you will find a bat warmer on there. It's legal in NSA


"By His Grace"
John 3:16

Eddie Ray Cantrell
NSA/BPA National Director of Umpires
Executive Vice President

Reading the NSA rule provided by another poster, it doesn't seem a heated bat fits any of the described categories as far as alteration is concerned.

If you think about it, how is a heated bat "altered"? Are we talking about its molecular structure and the excitation of the electrons?

Then we have to ask the question, how much heat is too much? 65-degrees? 80-degrees? 120-degrees?

How was the bat heated? Was it just kept warm by being covered with blankets so as to prevent the metal from being cold-soaked on a particularly frigid day?

Was it placed briefly in front of a dugout heating device?

Or was it placed inside a heating blanket that is specifically designed to heat bats and that are openly sold by sporting goods vendors?

http://www.batwarmer.com/

Are players required to leave their bats exposed to ambient temperature conditions to be legal?

Is placing the bat inside a bat bag considered "heating" the bat?

What if the team employs a heating system for the players and the bat rack is right next to the heating element, causing the bats not to get cold-soaked?

What if they use the Pyroflite bat heater, as advertised in the link above? Couldn't they say, "I didn't heat the bat ... I heated the bat bag"? Would heating the bat bag be illegal?

After all, some of these super-light, thin-walled bats are specifically designed NOT to be used in cold weather conditions since it makes the metal brittle and more susceptible to breaking; which, in itself could be a hazard to the players. Under these conditions, an argument could be made that either:

1) No bat can be used if the temperature at game time is below the manufacturer's recommendation for safe use of the bat. And, by the way, that temperature is about 60-65 degrees. What are we going to do - cancel the game? Or, play the game knowing full well we are using bats that are being "operated" beyond the manufacturer's specifications? Who is liable should a player be injured by a shattered bat?

2) or, allow (No -require!) the participants to heat their bats in order to make them safer and bring them within manufacturer specifications?

Truly, a conundrum. :)

David Emerling
Memphis, TN

Imagine that - an organization making their rulebook available online for those who have questions about the rules. What a novel concept!

USSSA also has their rulebook online. So does the AFA. So does the USFA.

NFHS ... ASA? {crickets chirping}

I think we can all agree; making the rulebook TOP SECRET is an excellent idea.

David Emerling
Memphis, TN

Just out of curiosity, I fired off an e-mail to the maker of the Pyroflite Bat Warmer:

I asked:

Has any sanctioning body (ASA, NSA, AFA, USSSA, USFA, etc) ever prohibited the use of a bat warmer, that you know of? In other words, would a heated bat be considered illegal?

He responded:

Hi David,

I know my product in particular has not been banned by any....I can tell you that I'm a National Sponsor of the USSSA, as you can read in this press release that is attached to this e-mail! Also you can visit www.playnsa.com
and click on the approved equipment link off to the left and you well see that my PyroFlite Bat Warmer is approved equipment of the NSA!!

I know it is being used in all associations and is just a great product for protecting those expensive bats!!

Thank you for the inquiry and I hope to hear from you soon!!

To the e-mail he attached the USSSA press release to which he referred.

David Emerling
Memphis, TN

IOW, this gentleman doesn't even know his products marketability.

ASA has banned the icing, cooling or heating equipment. 3.7.Note.

BTW, do you like playing with a piano?

Wasn't it U-trip that "banned" a bunch of bats a few years ago where the issue was not bat performance but paying for "sponsorship" or some such tribute? U-trip "approval" is a commercial issue only it would seem.

I do think the ASA ruling on bat warmers is being just a bit fastidious, but it is their ruling.

Perhaps we could agree on that if there was anyone who actually did that.

I do see, however, that you are completely bought into the teenage file sharing notion that there is no such thing as a copyright that should be respected, refusing to accept that it is up to the owner of the copyright to decide how to make the work available.

Anyone who registers with ASA gets the rule book. Anyone who registers with their state HS league gets the NFHS rule book (if their state uses NFHS). Anyone who is a member of the NFHS Officials Association has online access to the rule book and the case book. You can also choose to buy both of those works without registering. They are available online for purchase.

So, is what this boils down to is you think you should get these copyrighted works free?

No, I don't think I should get the book for free, I think the rules should be readily available, online, for those who don't want to purchase the book. I can understand recovering printing expenses (and maybe with a little profit) for actually selling the book.

I understand the "intellectual property" argument with regards to music, movie scripts, photographs, etc. But the rules of a game, in my opinion, do not rise to that level.

Why should only coaches and umpires have ready access to the rules? Why can't an inquisitive fan, or a parent, or a player, who has a passing interest in some particular aspect of the game, not be able to sit at home, fire up their computer, and see what the rulebook actually says about interference, obstruction, illegal pitches, base awards, or whatever? They have to order the book and wait for the delivery?

So, to address your question - I do not believe that the wide dissemination of the rules to the general public - making it easily accessible - is some silly "teenage file sharing notion" like downloading illegal mp3's. What an asinine comparison!

There's no point in arguing about this. This debate rears its ugly head at least once a year. Everybody takes sides and nothing is accomplished. Nobody's mind is changed. I simply think more good is served when the rules are readily available. Rules are not something that should be viewed as a for-profit endeavor. There are so many other ways to make money than to extort people into purchasing a book even if they just have a passing interest in some element of the game.

Which is more important, making money from the rulebook, or educating the public about the rules of the game? How is it most other sports organizations seem to do just fine by making their rulebooks readily available?

David Emerling
Memphis, TN

I just put it out there for what it's worth. I thought it would be interesting to hear what the manufacturer of such a product would have to say.

What the hell are you talking about ... "playing with a piano"? Huh?

David Emerling
Memphis, TN

In other words, you do not believe that the owner of the copyrighted work has the right to decide how the work will be make available, by what medium, and at what price.

Obviously, you've never actually looked at what ASA and NFHS have for sale. Fact is, you CAN do this with ASA (buy their CD) and you do NOT have to be registered with anyone to buy it. You CAN do this with NFHS, but it does require you to be a registered official with them. As to answering the question "why" is this the only way? Because the OWNERS of the copyrighted works have decided that is how they want to make THEIR work available.

It is a spot-on comparison. Both works are copyrighted (music, books), and neither owner of the work wants them available online for free distribution.

And, that is your opinion, but unfortunately, since you do not own the copyrights to these works, it is not your decision to make. Feel free to express you opinion to the ASA and to the NFHS. My only point is it is their decision to make. Not mine. Not yours.

Which of those two organizations have as their mission to "educate the public on the rules of the game?" The published rules are for the benefit of the participants in the game. They are made available to the public for purchase, but apparently you think they should be free. They disagree.

Yes. And the same thing happened with Dixie Softball Inc a few years back as well.

Of course they have the right! Did I say they didn't?

What I'm saying is that I think it is ill-advised that they exercise that right. I think the organization, softball, and the softball community would be better served if the system of rules was made readily available. And the internet is the perfect medium to do that - as countless other institutions have discovered.

I know! I know!

You do not have to be registered. I get it! But you always have to pay for it. It's never free and it's not readily available.

A parent watches their kid's game. Their daughter gets called for an illegal pitch. After the game, the parent asks his daughter, "Katie, why did that umpire call an illegal pitch? What did you do wrong?" (She's 12-yrs-old)

"He said I didn't wait long enough."

"Huh? Wait long enough for what?"

"I dunno. That's just what he said."

"Did your coach tell you anything?"

"He just told me to wait longer before I pitch."

"Wait for what?"

"I dunno."

So, the parent is not satisfied with the answers and decides he'll read through the pitching regulations before he goes to bed that night. He's just curious.

Bzzzzt!

Thanks for playing! Because Katie was playing under ASA rules and the ASA is going to make Daddy buy a book to find out. Or, Daddy has to ask somebody else about it and get the information second hand.

Fat chance he's going to buy a book to find out that one point of curiosity.

And, apparently, that's the way ASA likes it.

Are you friggin' dense???

I'm not claiming it should be my decision. I completely understand they have the right to exercise the distribution of their rulebook in any manner they feel is appropriate.

But it is my right to disagree with their decision.

Geez!

You act like you've never heard anybody express this opinion before. Amazing.

Yeah, whatever.

Very compelling.

David Emerling
Memphis, TN

Mr. Emerling..by any chance are you an attorney?

If you arent..you should be....because you shovel crap with the best of them.

LOL!!! Keep going, you are getting closer to joining the piano man :p

I have no idea what the this "piano man" reference is you keep resorting to. Is it some kind of oblique insult? Or, are you just entertaining yourself?

Quite frankly, I don't get. But if you want me to be upset and hurt by it - I'm devastated!
:(

David Emerling
Memphis, TN

Don't think so as I do not believe in words having the power to hurt anyone, they are just words.

And I don't care if you don't get it. Say hello to Jim for me.

See ya.

I get it, Jim (err, I mean David). I always did. You want someone else's property free, just like the teenage file sharers. The owners choose not to give it away, so you try (in vain) to make yourself sound righteous. Frankly, I don't care whether Daddy understands the rules or not. Even if he is the coach. I just officiate the game according to the rules. The books are available to anyone who wants to educate themselves.

You are confusing information about the rules with the book itself.

I completely understand there are expenses associated with publishing a book. Those expenses need to be recouped in some manner. If somebody wants their own copy, I have no problem with them having to pay for it. Mostly coaches and umpires will want to have a paper copy, even if the rules were available online. And, some people simply like the convenience of having things on paper instead of their computer screen. They'll have to pay for that convenience. No problem. (Yes, I realize coaches and umpires get their own book upon registration. But they better not lose it!)

Personally, I prefer to study rules from a book, not a computer screen. Although, on occasion, it's nice to have the option to electronically search something if I'm having difficulty finding what I'm looking for - especially in a Case Book.

Why would any of this preclude making the rules available online? What would be the purpose of not making the rules widely known and easily accessible, even for just casual perusal by an interested party?

I understand that the ASA (and NFHS) has the right to not make their rules available online. I get that! They view it as something to be guarded closely - like an artist's song, or a movie script. But in these last examples, it is very clear why they don't want people to have these for free. If everybody downloaded Britney Spears' songs, for free off the internet, how would she make any money? It's a money thing! If bootleg copies of Steven Spielberg's movies were all over the place, it would cut into profits. The point of making songs and movies is specifically to make money - so, to protect those things makes complete sense.

Are you suggesting this is the same argument for the ASA and NFHS rulebooks? Get serious!

I'll bet more copies of the MLB rulebook are sold than the ASA rulebook, and the MLB rules are online for all to see.

Would you disagree with the following statement?

All interests are best served if information regarding a sport is readily available to all; which would include: officials, coaches, players, fans, and casual observers.

In my example of the father who is curious about an "illegal pitch" called on his daughter, you think that it's a good thing that he cannot quickly, conveniently, and readily satisfy his curiosity when it is quite evident his young daughter doesn't fully understand what happened?

Sure! Sure! It's the coach's job to explain it to her. I agree. But wouldn't it still be a "good thing" if more than just the game participants understood what was going on?

The bottom line is this: Not making the rules readily available online is a specious and self-serving argument that is not in the best interests of the game.

I realize that the powers-that-be in these organizations obviously disagree with me. They should wonder why they are in the minority on this matter as the overwhelming majority of organizations embrace the notion of educating the world about the details of their sport. They would probably be flattered if their online rules were getting thousands upon thousands of "hits."

I'm wondering what's next: an ASA secret handshake?

If you polled umpires and coaches (individuals who get their own book) and asked them if they would like the rules, nonetheless, to be readily available online: What do you think the results would be?

'nuf said!

David Emerling
Memphis, TN

No, it is you who are confusing intellectual property with the physical media used for distribution. Just like the teenagers.

Are you saying there's not a difference?

I can listen to Britney Spears' songs for free on the radio - can't I? But if I want my own copy, to listen to it whenever I want (as if I'd want to do that :) ) I'd have to buy the CD.

I can watch the movie "Saving Private Ryan" on CBS when it airs, but if I want my own copy, to watch whenever I want, I'd have to buy the DVD.

I can be a fan, watching a game, and be curious about an "illegal pitch" that was called. I could go home and check out the rule on the internet at a later time, but if I want to have the convenience of checking it out now, I'd have to have the rulebook with me. Which means I'd have to purchase one.

"Intellectual property" can be invoked on countless things. And many people do! But just because they do does not necessarily mean it is wisest to make the product difficult to access. Besides, many people who own the rights to something do not always expect, or desire, to profit from it. It's just information. They just want to own it and take credit for it. And that's usually the case with something as mundane as a codified system of rules for an athletic event. Well, with the exception, of course, of the ASA and NFHS.

Let's face it - they are the exception in this regard. I guess the real question is: Why?

The answer can't be: Because that's the way they want to do it!

That's not an explanation - that's an observation ... an obvious one at that.

Why do you feel the need to be such a sycophant for these organizations? I think they're great organizations that do some great things for America's youth - but that doesn't mean they cannot be open to some constructive criticism.

David Emerling
Memphis, TN

No, it is not free. The station pays royalties, which are (in turn) paid by the advertisers.Again, not free. Paid for by the advertisers.

It is not at all difficult. It is just not free.

And, this is relevant how? Why not? It is, after all, their property.Nice try at an insult. Maybe you don't actually understand the meaning of the word. In fact, I am merely pointing out that just because you want it to be free does not in and of itself constitute a criticism. There are plenty of "free" rule books available for the education of the general public. How has that worked, so far, in educating daddy?

ASA and NFHS choose to not make their rule codes available for free download or free online browsing. All of your high-sounding arguments really just boil down to you wanting it free of charge.

This topic has become useless for softball. If anyone sees something new and useful in it, please letthe rest of us know in another topic. Actually, I'm hoping not to have to scroll through this one anymore, but Christmas has past.

Then don't read it! That's the beauty of the internet. Nobody is guiding your mouse, are they? ;)

It is about softball! If the topic bores you, don't read it. There are plenty of threads I don't find interesting, so I choose not to read them. For instance, I could care less about a discussion about the latest and greatest umpire mask.

Which is the lightest?

Is it comfortable?

How much did it cost?

I can understand how some might be interested in a thread like that - I'm just not one of them. I certainly won't take the time to interject myself and tell them that I don't care about the topic. I just don't click on it.

David Emerling
Memphis, TN

Mr. Piano,
er...
Mr. Emerling:

You contradict yourself. You obviously don't understand your own argument.

You forget about the interests of the copyright owners.

They are. Buy the CD or buy the book. Contact your local Commissioner or JO Commissioner for a copy. You can even order the CD online, which is readily available to anyone, as Dakota previously pointed out.

You obviously do if you want the copyright owners to post it online for free... hence your next quote:

Duh. Of course. If I write and publish a book, why would I want to give it away for free? And as to it being readily available, see above.

40,000 ASA umpires buy their book each year, along with thousands of coaches. Do you really think over 60,000 copies of MLB's ORB are sold each year?

Bah, I'm tired of feeding the troll.

What - websites don't have paid advertisements? In many ways, websites work in a very similar fashion as TV/radio stations. There is a fine line between "web hits" and "Nielson Ratings." When you *click* on one of those advertisements, it frequently brings additional revenue to the web owner in additional to the costs of placing the ad in the first place.

It works in a similar fashion. Frequently, the "free" information on a website isn't so "free."

If you haven't noticed, the ASA website has no shortages of opportunities to buy stuff - although, they usually don't choose to sell anything that is not specifically sold by them. I haven't checked, but I doubt you will find a link (or advertisement) for Honig's umpire equipment anywhere on their website. But that's their choosing. That's their right. I'm just saying that it doesn't have to be that way. In fact, the ASA might even sell more of their stuff if there was more of an enticement to visit their website.

That is a comment that most people make when they're running out of things to say; as if the question, in itself, somehow diminishes the relevance.

It's relevance should be obvious. You seem to be making the argument that because they own the rights to the rules, they should maintain the rules' limited availability. I'm pointing out that plenty of people do not exercise their ownership in that manner. I'm suggesting that the ASA exercise their ownership in a more liberal fashion - for the greater good. It's just my opinion - and I suspect many others hold the same opinion.

That's how it's relevant!

So you'll agree that many fans are woefully ignorant of the rules? I agree!

How could it make things worse by making the rules available for somebody, like a fan, who may have a passing interest in some aspect of the game? ... especially since you seem to be acknowledging that it's a problem. Wouldn't it be better if daddy was better educated?

I say, the opportunity to be a better educated fan (whether they choose to take the opportunity to educate themselves or not) is a good thing.

I guess we can just agree to disagree.

I have the book - legally! I don't need a bootleg copy of it. But it would be nice, at times, when I don't have the book in my back pocket, whenever I have a question, to be able to fire up the computer and check it out online. It would be a nice convenience even for an umpire or coach who actually does get a copy of the book after registering.

I've seen posts within this very forum where a poster will say something like: "I'm at work, I don't have my rulebook available, but I think that it says such-in-such ..."

I guess we can say that we got the annual debate over online rules out of the way early this year. :)

If you're convinced the softball world is better served by the manner in which the ASA and NFHS chooses to dessimenate their system of rules, I can see I cannot convince you otherwise.

At least admit that it is highly more likely that their decision is more of a business decision than it is a softball decision. And, in my opinion, I don't even think it's a very good business decision.

I guess I'm both an idealist and a purist on this matter.

{que up John Lennon's "Imagine" - but make sure it's not a bootleg mp3!}

David Emerling
Memphis, TN

My gosh, it's not like it's "War and Peace."

The point of writing a book, making a movie, or writing a song, is usually with the specific aim of making money by providing entertainment.

Even instructional manuals are sold for profit. The author is selling knowledge that the reader would not otherwise have - that the author does. That's understandable.

I don't see how the rules of a commonly played game rises to that lofty level of copyright protection.

Sure, it's their right to do it - I just think its an example of the poor exertion of a right. Like I said, other organizations aren't as protective about their rules.

David Emerling
Memphis, TN

I'm not talking about umpires and coaches - I'm talking about people who want to know the rules who do not fit into one of these categories.

The better question would be: How many non-umpires and non-coaches are purchasing the ASA rulebook versus the number of people who grab the Sporting News edition of the Official Baseball Rules which can almost always be found in the sports section at almost any bookstore - despite the fact that those rules are readily available in countless locations on the internet, including MLB's website?

Nooooo! :D

David Emerling
Memphis, TN

Feel free to propose a different business model to the ASA. One thing about free enterprise - every enterprise gets to choose their own business model. Some succeed; some don't. ASA seems to be doing reasonably well with theirs.

BS. Your initial statement is the retort used when there is nothing left to say. It is irrelevant because there is no requirement, suggestion, or even economic theory that says all businesses operating in the same area must or should follow the same business model. What others do and how they do it is irrelevant, unless your only point is that it is possible to give it away. I never argued it was not possible; only that they had no obligation to do so and that they are not in existence as a benevolent organization out to educate the general public. Nevermind that giving the rule book away won't educate the public anyway.

You've stepped down quite a bit from claiming it would educate daddy to saying it wouldn't cause any harm. Since there are ample rule books out there online, and since most of the rules essentially are the same, we have more than sufficient evidence this does not solve the uneducated fan (or even coach) problem. Hence, there is no benefit on this front from giving the rule book away.

Oh, but you CAN do this; you just have to PAY for it for ASA and NFHS. Join the NFHS Officials Association, you have online access. Buy the ASA CD, load it onto your computer, and you have computer access whenever you are near your computer. Load it onto your home computer and your work computer and you'll have it both places. I suppose now you'll argue that it is not there when you use the public library computers. Well, you're right. Yawn.

Find where I said anything about this other than it being their right to make their own business decisions about how to distribute their property. You are the one making the high-sounding claims about the goodness to mankind.

That's two words, I guess, but inaccurate ones. You consider it idealistic for property owners to merely place everything into the public domain? As an engineer whose stock-in-trade is intellectual property, I can tell you that model for civilization will not work. I think there was a former world power that tried something resembling that model where everyone was supposed to operate for the good of the whole for some 90 years before they gave it up.

I'm saying both! I've been saying both.

"essentially, the same"

Boy, that sure would be helpful to look up the NSA substitution rules when curious about the ASA substitution rules.

Yeah, I guess if you wanted the definition of a fair ball, you may be right.

By the way, the AFA rulebook says the hands are part of the bat.

Aren't these additional charges over and above the hardcopy you get when registering with ASA?

Does a registered ASA umpire get the CD? He gets the hardcopy rulebook. If his perferred method of studying rules is more suited for online or computer study, he has to pay even more - is that what you're saying?

Then why are we even having this debate, if all you're saying is that they have the right to distribute their rules in any manner they see fit? Where have I disagreed with that? Of course they have the RIGHT.

My argument isn't even that they should give away hardcopies of their rulebook for free. I've never even said that.

My point is much simpler: Their rules should also be online. Just that.

It's my opinion the sport would be better served, if only in a small way, by doing so. Certainly not harmful.

David Emerling
Memphis, TN

So, as I said before, you just want it free (online).

As to rules essentially the same, the example you gave earlier of a quick pitch call would be the same in just about every fastpitch rule book.

As to AFA saying hands are part of the bat, BZZZZT, Wrong. Quit relying on the online (but wrong) AFA book from a year or two ago that you apparently downloaded and read the real one. Or, go to the AFA web site and download a corrected one.

NFHS is online (but not free). ASA is computer readable (but not free). Notice a trend here? NOT FREE.

Your position is you want it free on your computer. Too bad. You attempt to glorify this into some altruistic "good for softball" rationale, but even then, you are reduced to a "wouldn't hurt" argument.

And speaking of "wouldn't hurt" - that was not your initial position. You claimed you wanted to educate daddy. In fact, it seems to me you merely want it free on your computer.

As to the various organization's pricing policies, additional charges (as if that is some un-American thing for additional value), etc., check with them. I know ASA does not require you to register to get the CD. I know NFHS does require you to join the Officials Association to get online access. Beyond that, check for yourself. Check ebay, whatever floats your boat.

But you wouldn't know that unless you checked.

I love poking fun at them for that. I even wrote the organization a letter about it. It doesn't surprise me that it no longer appears in their rulebook. I haven't looked at it for some time. I'm sure it's been corrected.

You motivated me to go to their website. I notice that, already, they have their 2008 rulebook available. They have been notoriously delinquent in keeping their rulebook up-to-date, frequently stating on their website that it's "in the works."

See how nice it was to go to afasoftball.com, click on the rulebook link, and immediately be invited to either purchase their rulebook or view the online rulebook for FREE?

Is that so hard?

How convenient!

Can't you tell it makes the world a better place? :)

The fact that you could even verify the fact that they have removed (i.e. corrected) "the hands are part of the bat" phraseology was because they had their rules available online - for you to look at. Unless, of course, you have your own hardcopy of the 2008 AFA rules, in which case I stand corrected.

Unquestionably!

That's my entire argument - it wouldn't hurt. Further, it would probably help. And, yes, you're right, it is an altruistic view on my part. Call me naive.

I guess I'm just a pure fan, umpire, and coach that has a hard time wrapping my mind around the need to make a system of rules into some kind of Dead Sea Scroll secret that is intended to be a cash cow.

Without a doubt - it's their right. I can't argue that.

That daddy-post came later, as an example of how it could help and serve a useful purpose. That, in itself, is not the entire essence of my argument. But it's part of it.

David Emerling
Memphis, TN

Wow. So I am not an AFA umpire. I don't know their rules, I don't umpire for AFA, never even been to their website until today.

And gosh, they CHOOSE to sell you a rulebook... and they CHOOSE to freely distribute their rulebook as a PDF for free. They, as the copyright owners, made that choice with their intellictual property.

But it would appear, Mr. Piano, that you are 100% wrong in your statement above.

It took me 3 minutes to look up their website and find at least 3 references to the hands and the bat. Perhaps you should look it up too.

Here, I'll even make it easy for you. Click here and go to page 90, bottom of the page. Or even page 96, o. Or page 99 note 3.

I know. This has already been discussed.

I'm just poking fun at them, because in their previous rulebook (prior to being completely rewritten), they had this exact phrase: "The hands are part of the bat." It was probably a misprint. At least, I hope it was a misprint.

Without any doubt, it did appear in their rulebook.

But, unwittingly, you make my case!

The beauty of it is that you were able to look it up! And, by your own testament, promptly! All this despite your not owning an AFA rulebook. And it's unlikely you would have purchased one to find the answer to that one point of fleeting curiosity.

I'm saying that it's a "good thing" that you were able to do that.

I don't think rules knowledge should the sole province of coaches and umpires and that somebody should be extorted into buying an entire book to answer a simple point like "Are the hands considered part of the bat?"

If your car needed new windshield wipers, would you think it proper to be forced to buy the whole car just to get new wipers? If that were the case, you'd probably resign yourself to the fact that it's just going to suck every time it rains and you have to drive. You'll do without.

That's the position casual fans and interested parties are in with regards to ASA rules. Again, I'm excluding registered umpires and coaches. And yet, even for them, it would still be nice to have it available online without additional fees, over and above the cost of the hardcopy rulebook.

Thank you!

David Emerling
Memphis, TN

I don't believe you. If you meant it to be a poke, you would have had a "smile" next to it. No, I believe that you just got caught, and are backpeddling like you have been this entire thread.
Prove it.
And I think it's unfortunate that AFA has chosen to not be reimbursed monitarily for distributing their intellictual property in an electronic format.
You don't know me. It rains a lot up here in Seattle... ;)

BTW I'm done. The troll should be sufficiently well fed today.

I found this funny; the tagline on your last post was:

We see with our eyes. Fans and parents see with their hearts.

I chuckled to myself and said, "The only thing fans and parents have is their hearts - because they sure as hell don't have a rulebook." :)

I know! I know!

Then they should BUY one!

David Emerling
Memphis, TN

Oh, I'm so glad you said that!

OK, I will!

First of all, I can't give you a link to a set of rules that is out-dated and has recently been updated. That would be impossible.

But I did write an article for officiating.com and made a reference to this rule and provided a link to the AFA rules. At the time, this was the only link available since they were in the middle of a complete rewrite.

I don't know if you're a subscribing member, but the article to which I'm referring is: Softball - How different is it really? Part III

At the time, the AFA rule was 10.15.a.2.

Their 2008 rules were not out at the time I wrote the article (September 4th, 2007). I'm happy to know that they are now available. I learned that today, because of their website.

If you go to that article and *click* on the link I provided, you will discover that that link is now broken. http://www.texasafasoftball.com/rulebook06.html

At the time, this was the only place to get the AFA rules. It was a 2006 rule set. And it was their rules, I assure you.

If what I'm saying is not true, then why would I risk creating a link and discussing what their rules say in a published article - that ultimately got approved by the editor - if it were not true?

I could probably go rooting through my archives on another computer where I used to collect all this junk and even send you a copy of their 2006 rulebook that had this comment. But I'm hoping you'll be satisfied with this.

Or, is there another gunman on your grassy knoll?

David Emerling
Memphis, TN

If you were an actual umpire who was paying attention instead of making inane posts about things you know nothing about, you would know AFA corrected this typo some time ago. However, since you are not an actual umpire who was paying attention, you thought that was their actual rule and that it was still in force.

BZZZZT!

It also goes to show how little credibility your "article" about softball had. You knew so little about the game, you actually thought that was the rule!

BZZZZT!

If you read the article I cited, the context in which I mention the AFA "rule" is clear: poor wording, poor explanations, and poor interpretations give rise to unintended misunderstandings.

I already told you that I wrote the AFA to verify that this was a misprint. I suspected it was.

But don't you find it funny that an italicized section of the rulebook (as if to emphasis the point), perpetuates one of the most famous myths in the sport?

The AFA's response was nothing more than, "We're rewriting the entire rulebook," without acknowledging what I had originally asked. It had to be pretty embarrassing, I guess. I just had to know if that was a misprint or intentional. It was just too juicy to ignore.

When I cite the misguided rule in the article, I say, "You might need to read that sentence again, slowly." It's pretty obvious it's a misprint.

Imagine you were a new umpire and read that rule - not knowing any better. Hell, it would take years to undo the damage of that sentence.

One thing I do know is this: I don't need you to characterize what I meant.

What - you've run out of pithy arguments about online rules? When you can't handle the substance, you have to dispute the style. When you can't handle the message - attack the messenger?

Oh - you can do better than that.

C'mon! Impress me!

Ah - what the hell - just ignore me. I debate things too much as it is. But I never get angry. I think things can be debated civilly - even if I tend to be kind of sarcastic at times. Perhaps my poor attempt at humor. I need to work on that - huh? :)

David Emerling
Memphis, TN

My God, I will be glad when 8u Softball starts back up in Tenn....

Your credibility is shot. Give it up.