Proposed ASA Rule Changes #1

[SethPDX]

Thanks for the story.

Here in Oregon, OSAA says light blue and heather gray, and I don't hear complaining about buying two sets of pants. And I think that combination looks just fine on the field. I guess I just don't buy into any of the reasons given for blue pants.

Heather gray might win out, but by that time I wonder if the charcoal grays won't be creeping into softball.

[bkbjones]

Originally Posted by SethPDX

Thanks for the story.

Here in Oregon, OSAA says light blue and heather gray, and I don't hear complaining about buying two sets of pants. And I think that combination looks just fine on the field. I guess I just don't buy into any of the reasons given for blue pants.

Heather gray might win out, but by that time I wonder if the charcoal grays won't be creeping into softball.

Just depends on whether you wanna work for Duffy or Garrett.

[Steve M]

Originally Posted by SethPDX

Thanks for the story.

Here in Oregon, OSAA says light blue and heather gray, and I don't hear complaining about buying two sets of pants. And I think that combination looks just fine on the field. I guess I just don't buy into any of the reasons given for blue pants.

Heather gray might win out, but by that time I wonder if the charcoal grays won't be creeping into softball.

I understand the charcoal gray is now OK for school baseball here in Pa, and I'm hoping that goes over to softball. I'd prefer the darker gray over the heather gray - I think. I'm one of those who sweat - a lot. On a hot day, I'm soaked no matter what color pants I'm wearing. I prefer the darker colored navy because they do not show the wet.

As far as college ball goes, one of the groups I'm in seems to prefer the gray pants. The other almost insists on the navy.

As for PONY telling folks in NY to wear gray, that's local. According to their rule book, the standard uniform is navy pants & powder shirt - or so I think I read in the 2007 book. Although, most of the PONY ball I've done has been with gray pants.

I guess some folks like to look like high school umpires.

[tcannizzo]

Mike wrote:
Hey, look, Tony's still alive!!!
Gone but not forgotten.
Back but not umpiring.
Coaching 12-U.
Now just another PITA coach who thinks he knows something about softball and rules and such.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tcannizzo
Bunt – A batted ball not swung at, but instead hit by the batter who holds the bat in the path of the ball and taps it slowly within the infield

Quote:

a.) Define "swung"
b.) Define "slowly" - there is something called a push bunt which is a hard bunt intended to pass the pitcher or an agreessively charging defender.
c.) "Infield" implies fair territory, which would conflict with a 3rd strike bunt foul.

No argument the wording could be better, but your questions are the type of things that are causing folks to believe there is a need to define it instead of leaving up to the umpire's judgment. We all know when we see a bunt and I don't need a rule to provide specs.

As I replied earlier, then why the effort necessary to define "Bunt"?

Quote:

Charged Conference – It is not a charged conference if the pitcher is removed from the pitching position during a conference.

Quote:

Comment: Free ticket for coach abuse. Call time, go talk to your SS/2B, change the pitcher, no charge. Next inning, change pitchers back to original.

Not really. It is no different than what they can do now, it is just a matter of when the umpire is informed. And it is a valid argument if concerning the pitcher's health.
Concerning pitcher's health: Yes, valid argument, but with current rule, as a coach, if I am concerned about pitcher's health, I am notifiing PU before entering field of play. Said notification will include some sort of justification. New rule creates opportunities.

Quote:

Eliminate disqualification for an unreported substitute violation.

Quote:

Comment: This change should be for JO only. This is not a bad rule for adult ball as there is more liklihood for the adult player to be deliberatley involved in the unreported violation. Thus punishes a kid who is more likely to be an innocent victim.

Regardless of the change, I think you have it backwards. FP coaches are much more likely to be intelligent enough and sly enough to try to intentionally try to slip one by the opponent or umpire
C'mon Mike. Sure there are devious travel coaches. I happen to be one. But there are just as many devious coaches of adult teams. The likelyhood of an adult player being aware of the shennanigans is orders of magnitude greater than that of a youth player.


Quote:

Allow an unlimited batting order in Girl’s B FP and all FP pool play.
Comment: Good change.

That depends on whether pool play is for seeding or not and the ramifications of going short-handed being addressed.
Class B is just that. It is about participation.
Short-handed is still the same. Drop below 8 and you are done.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by tcannizzo

Short-handed is still the same. Drop below 8 and you are done.

No, that is not the rule, COACH!

The rule states:

4.1.D.2 If a team begins play with the required number of players as listed, that team may continue a game with one less player than is currently in the batting order whenever a players leave the game for any reason other than ejection.

Notice it states one less than is currently in the batting order, not one less than the required number to begin the game.

That means if the batting order includes 14 players, one leaves and another is injured to the point of not being able to continue, the game is over.

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

No, that is not the rule, COACH!

The rule states:

4.1.D.2 If a team begins play with the required number of players as listed, that team may continue a game with one less player than is currently in the batting order whenever a players leave the game for any reason other than ejection.

Notice it states one less than is currently in the batting order, not one less than the required number to begin the game.

That means if the batting order includes 14 players, one leaves and another is injured to the point of not being able to continue, the game is over.

Yes, if they are going to add bat-the-roster to the rule book, they will need to address the side effects. Among them are:

1) Shorthanded rule. What does shorthanded mean in a bat-the-roster game? If they drop down 1 (from, say, 14 to 13), do they take an out?

2) What about ejections? If one player is ejected, do they now forfeit (can't play shorthanded due to ejection).

3) Two players down... is it a forfeit to go from 14 to 12? (Mike's example)

4) Courtesy runner rule. Since everyone is batting, does this mean no courtesy runners?

If this gets added, I certainly hope the ASA conference / convention / convocation (whatever it is called) does not muck this rule up as badly as your typical rec league does.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by Dakota

Yes, if they are going to add bat-the-roster to the rule book, they will need to address the side effects. Among them are:

1) Shorthanded rule. What does shorthanded mean in a bat-the-roster game? If they drop down 1 (from, say, 14 to 13), do they take an out?

answered

2) What about ejections? If one player is ejected, do they now forfeit (can't play shorthanded due to ejection).

answered

3) Two players down... is it a forfeit to go from 14 to 12? (Mike's example)

answered

4) Courtesy runner rule. Since everyone is batting, does this mean no courtesy runners?

By rule, no.

There are no proposals to change the rule regarding playing shorthand. For that matter, a note attached to the change in 4.1.C states that the shorthanded rule would apply is it does presently.

If this gets added, I certainly hope the ASA conference / convention / convocation (whatever it is called) does not muck this rule up as badly as your typical rec league does.[/quote]

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

There are no proposals to change the rule regarding playing shorthand. For that matter, a note attached to the change in 4.1.C states that the shorthanded rule would apply is it does presently

Then, if the goal is participation, the rule is counterproductive. Leagues that would use this rule are by their nature less formal. Kids come and go ... arrive late, leave early, etc. Charging an out in a lineup that is batting 13, just because they started with 14 is silly. And, declaring a forfeit for a team being "shorthanded" when they still have 12 players on the bench eligible to play is even sillier. Giving up the courtesy runner is not that big a deal, but rec leagues can use all the help they can get to keep the game moving, so it is, again, counterprodutive.

[tcannizzo]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

No, that is not the rule, COACH!

The rule states:

4.1.D.2 If a team begins play with the required number of players as listed, that team may continue a game with one less player than is currently in the batting order whenever a players leave the game for any reason other than ejection.

Notice it states one less than is currently in the batting order, not one less than the required number to begin the game.

That means if the batting order includes 14 players, one leaves and another is injured to the point of not being able to continue, the game is over.

Ya got me, BLUE!!!
If the rule get written as described, then I would not be in favor of the rule for GFP.

[wadeintothem]

Originally Posted by SethPDX

Thanks for the story.

Here in Oregon, OSAA says light blue and heather gray, and I don't hear complaining about buying two sets of pants. And I think that combination looks just fine on the field. I guess I just don't buy into any of the reasons given for blue pants.

Heather gray might win out, but by that time I wonder if the charcoal grays won't be creeping into softball.

charcoal needs to creep in..
and ASA's OKC cowboy cut needs to run way.

[SethPDX]

Originally Posted by bkbjones

Just depends on whether you wanna work for Duffy or Garrett.

Well, Portland ASA is separate from the HS association, so all Duffy does is sell us uniforms. I've never met Garrett but since he tells our commissioner what's up I guess I work for him.

Originally Posted by Steve M

I understand the charcoal gray is now OK for school baseball here in Pa, and I'm hoping that goes over to softball.

From the baseball forum it seems like charcoal is gradually taking over everywhere; NFHS actually deleted the rulebook reference to "heather." If more of the baseball guys I work with in the summer had them I would pick some up as well since all I ever read is rave reviews about them.