Here's a video showing examples (NFHS Rules)

http://www.nfhs.org/web/2008/02/soft..._training.aspx

I understand the NFHS ruling.

I understand the importance of priorities.

What I need is the ASA interpretation. :confused:

(Good discussion, nevertheless).

Assume it is different. How would that affect your call in ASA?

Then I would call it differently! :D

Ha ha :cool: , but actually, I was wondering if there is anyone who actually tries to determine if the pitcher's foot is landing partly on the line to just a smidge over... This one has to be obvious as far as I'm concerned, so if (that's "if") ASA says on the line is out, and NFHS says on the line is in, it won't make any difference in a real game. Especially since there isn't actually a line.

From the ASA advanced camp last year in Georgia, ASA's interpretation is the same as NFHS's.

Any umpire who is paying that much attention to even think they know whether it is on or just outside the H isn't doing the job for which they are being paid.

Just to put a final nail in the lid on this one, here is an email response from Kevin Ryan, ASA National Director of Umpires.

Bret,

In ASA Women’s or Girls JO we use the same interpretation (as NFHS). As long as part of the foot lands in the 24” length of the Pitcher’s plate they are OK.

Kevin

That is definitive enough for me!

Didn't I just say that, three posts prior?

When will you people learn to listen to me?

:D ;)

Wow!! We've never had anyone come on the board and quote a member of NUS, or a topic at an National School inaccurately ..........

Frankly, depending on which member you heard it from, it may not be the position of ASA. In this case, I knew where you heard it.

But, that is the same source as the logo on the glove making it multicolored, which I choose not to remember.;) ;)