The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Softball

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Fri May 23, 2008, 10:24am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: USA
Posts: 14,565
Interesting use of adjectives on some questions.

Did they know you are an umpire?
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Fri May 23, 2008, 10:35am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: north central Pa
Posts: 2,360
Quote:
Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA
Interesting use of adjectives on some questions.

Did they know you are an umpire?
Mike,
They may have - I got one of those several years ago. They get sent to a small number of officials in each state yearly.

Andy - I agree with your answers, except that I would like to see the pitching rule changed to match ASA's.
__________________
Steve M
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Fri May 23, 2008, 11:37am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Glendale, AZ
Posts: 2,672
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve M
Mike,
They may have - I got one of those several years ago. They get sent to a small number of officials in each state yearly.

Andy - I agree with your answers, except that I would like to see the pitching rule changed to match ASA's.
Steve - Me too. I thought that I marked that when I copied the survey, but I guess I didn't. I went back and edited my post.

I think that the fewer differences between ASA and NFHS is a good thing.
__________________
It's what you learn after you think you know it all that's important!
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Fri May 23, 2008, 11:58am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: USA
Posts: 14,565
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve M
Mike,
They may have - I got one of those several years ago. They get sent to a small number of officials in each state yearly.
The reason I ask is that other than a coach, parent and player's doctor, who else would know if an injury was serious? For as much as anyone else would know, a slight turn at 2B could have been a grapefruit-sized knee or ankle the following day.

I am not questioning anyone's response, but it seems the wording could skew the validity of the information being sought. Of course, it could have very well been intended to do that.

Again, this is why I believed that NFHS should have treated the metal like other possible changes. They could have asked a few states to volunteer to allow spikes for the sole purpose of a more condensed and controlled environment which would hopefully produce a more specific view of any possible issues. JMO.
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Fri May 23, 2008, 12:50pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Twin Cities MN
Posts: 8,154
Quote:
Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA
Again, this is why I believed that NFHS should have treated the metal like other possible changes. They could have asked a few states to volunteer to allow spikes for the sole purpose of a more condensed and controlled environment which would hopefully produce a more specific view of any possible issues. JMO.
The NFHS, being (IMO) philosophically (if not legally) a public school organization, is overly concerned with "gender" issues, IMO. The sole reason this change was put in was because the boys play with metal. There is no apparent thought given to it beyond that. No one even (apparently) considered the possibility that the girls rules may just be BETTER in this regard than the boys; they (apparently) only noted they were DIFFERENT from the boys. In this instance, I don't think it will be a big disaster, as I'm sure their scientific survey will confirm.

If you'll bear with me, an example here in MN of the utter foolishness of this kind of girls=boys thinking.

High School Boys Hockey is the MN equivalent of HS boys basketball in IN or HS football in TX. It is THE hard-to-get state tournament ticket. Shortly after the new Xcel Energy Center (the X) was built for the local NHL team, the HS boys state tournament was moved into the X. The X has a sold-out seating of 18,064 for NHL games. For the boys tournament (2 brackets over 4 days) this past year, total attendance was 129,721

4 games were officially sell outs of the X:
Sat. Evening (AA Third Place and Finals): 18,689
Thur. Evening (AA Quarterfinals): 18,428
Fri. Evening (AA Semifinals): 19,559
Thur. Afternoon (AA Quarterfinals): 19,247

Girls HS Hockey is a newer sport without nearly the same following. The University of MN has a purpose-built on-campus hockey arena for their women's hockey team, called Ridder Arena. This arena is specifically for the women's hockey program (the men play in the larger Marichui Arena nearby). The Ridder has a seating capacity of 3,400. The MSHSL placed the girls hockey state tournament in the Ridder (also 2 brackets over 4 days - same number of games as the boys.)

Some fool filed suit because the boys played in the "pro" arena and the girls had to play in the college arena. The MSHSL caved in and moved the tournament to the "X". Here are the 2008 Girls Hockey Tournament results (results harder to dig out of the MSHSL web site - I wonder why?):

Total tournament attendance was 20,003.

None of the games would have been official sell outs AT RIDDER, and were absolutely pathetic empty houses in the X:

Big school final:
Attendance:2307
Highest attendance: 2986

There were a few other games between the two above in attendance.

Now, you tell me: did this decision benefit the female athletes who play ice hockey?

Who cares! It is what the BOYS do!
__________________
Tom

Last edited by Dakota; Fri May 23, 2008 at 12:52pm.
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Fri May 23, 2008, 01:07pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: USA
Posts: 14,565
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dakota
The NFHS, being (IMO) philosophically (if not legally) a public school organization, is overly concerned with "gender" issues, IMO. The sole reason this change was put in was because the boys play with metal. There is no apparent thought given to it beyond that. No one even (apparently) considered the possibility that the girls rules may just be BETTER in this regard than the boys; they (apparently) only noted they were DIFFERENT from the boys. In this instance, I don't think it will be a big disaster, as I'm sure their scientific survey will confirm.
Sorry, don't buy that for a minute. It may be an excuse, but a poor one that was NEVER raised by MS at ASA's convention when asked.

Title IX would only addresses what is provided for the teams and players. Since the HS do not provide the boys with footwear, they need not provide the girls with footwear, OF ANY TYPE.

This is just more Chicken Little reasoning, but like the schools use to dump men's sports while citing Title IX. Unfortunately, it has nothing to do with Title IX, but has a lot to do with the school showing its lack of student-athlete support. Title IX is intentionally misread by those looking for a way to expedite their agendas.

It is a sad statement of the manner in which we face life and problems.
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Fri May 23, 2008, 01:19pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Twin Cities MN
Posts: 8,154
I didn't say it was due to a Title IX complaint; I said it was due to being overly concerned with gender issues. This is my opinion, and it is based on comments made early on by NFHS representatives (before everything coming out of the NFHS on this was word-smithed to death).
__________________
Tom
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Fri May 23, 2008, 02:25pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: USA
Posts: 14,565
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dakota
I didn't say it was due to a Title IX complaint;
I didn't say there was a complaint, either. But the argument was made quite similar to you opinion that the cause was to avoid a Title IX issue. Remember, you used the word "gender" and that always results in a Title IX citation when dealing with ANYTHING any more, not just public schools or institutions even though it does not always apply.
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Fri May 23, 2008, 05:22pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Woodstock, GA; Atlanta area
Posts: 2,822
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dakota
I didn't say it was due to a Title IX complaint; I said it was due to being overly concerned with gender issues. This is my opinion, and it is based on comments made early on by NFHS representatives (before everything coming out of the NFHS on this was word-smithed to death).
I was told in a face-to-face with one person that attended the rules meeting last June (without any word-smithing) that NFHS faced a threatened class action lawsuit if they did not "give the girls the same" as the boys.
__________________
Steve
ASA/ISF/NCAA/NFHS/PGF
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
NFHS Survey Grail Basketball 29 Tue Feb 12, 2008 09:05pm
NFHS Survey tjones1 Basketball 25 Tue Feb 20, 2007 10:32am
NFHS Survey Grail Basketball 13 Fri Feb 24, 2006 01:51pm
NCAA rules survey Andy Softball 3 Fri May 13, 2005 10:19am
NEW - 2003 NFHS Football Rule Changes (as written by the NFHS Rules Committee) KWH Football 27 Tue Jan 21, 2003 11:30am


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:58am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1