2009 ASA Rule Changes Approved

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by AtlUmpSteve

It will interesting to see how the NUS decides to address the discrepancy.

Steve,

Some good discussions in the lobby last night. Already talk of adding a courtesy foul to the SP rule, but we already talked about that.

You are probably right about the men's FP pitcher, but you never know about these things. The one thing for certain is that it does not apply to all players, just those presently designated in the present JO rule.

I missed the rules portion of the Commissioners' Meeting, but from what I understand, KR addressed a handful of rules which will need to be massaged prior to implementation.

Apparently, there were some serious misunderstandings with a code change or two that will need to be addressed and clarified.

Leah O'Brien Amico stopped by for a while. Apparently, she is going to cover the BOD meeting for one of the player reps (maybe Stacey).

ISF report revealed that when a completed survey of all sports (softball finished in something like the top 40% of all sports in any category), it is believed that the IOC members never read this report since the results were too good to ignore.

Those in the know are cautiously optimistic as to the chances of getting back into the Olympics.

[AtlUmpSteve]

Originally Posted by AtlUmpSteve

I think I would wait for the official interp before assuming that. In the Playing Rules Committee, the chairperson opined that if both passed at the same time, the more overriding rule would apply, not the more limiting rule.

I don't believe the intent of the body was to allow CR for pitcher and catcher for all, and then immediately limit that. Both were approved by Consent Agenda at the Council without discussion, as each were considered a good change.

It will interesting to see how the NUS decides to address the discrepancy.

Received by email the Official Rule Changes, about to be posted.

They eliminated completely the "catcher only" version, and have published:

Rule 8 Section 10: (All Fast Pitch)
Comment: All Fast Pitch will follow the Courtesy runner rule previously used only by the Junior Olympic Classification of Girls and Boys.

[JefferMC]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

All FP and ADA players can use courtesy runner. ADA CR can be any player.

So, what was meant by this was:

All FP divisions now use Courtesy Runners.

Any ADA player may have a Courtesy Runner, who can be any player in the lineup.

I read this, apparently like many others, to mean CR's for any position.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by JefferMC

So, what was meant by this was:

All FP divisions now use Courtesy Runners.

Any ADA player may have a Courtesy Runner, who can be any player in the lineup.

I read this, apparently like many others, to mean CR's for any position.

Then you need to read all of the posts.

If you check the Courtesy Runner rule, it clearly states that this is for pitcher and catcher only, but just JO. The rule change makes it all of FP.

[Gulf Coast Blue]

No penalty for an unreported substitute (as of now)

I never understood why they changed this in the first place. I never liked that a legal sub coming in would get penalized. JMHO

Joel

[Stat-Man]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

{... Snip list of rule changes ...}

Are these (or will these be) going to be posted online anywhere? I may pass these along to our SP "coach".

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by Stat-Man

Are these (or will these be) going to be posted online anywhere? I may pass these along to our SP "coach".

ASA will post the official rule changes, including explanations, on their web site in a few weeks. No doubt, someone will post a link here when that happens. I wouldn't distribute the postings here, since they are just a bit misleading in how some of them are worded, as evidenced by the discussions in this thread.

[Stat-Man]

Originally Posted by Dakota

ASA will post the official rule changes, including explanations, on their web site in a few weeks. No doubt, someone will post a link here when that happens. I wouldn't distribute the postings here, since they are just a bit misleading in how some of them are worded, as evidenced by the discussions in this thread.

Dakota: Thanks for the adivce. I never do that anyways; I prefer to get rule changes from the source if possible (such as NCAA, NFHS sites, etc).

Generally speaking now: If SP is going to a 3-2 count (I'm not sure if there is a difference between using a 3-2 or starting at 1-1 ), I figure we better be prepared for that before our first game. If I do slow pitch stats again for my friends, I'm willing to bet there will be people surprised about the count change.

[NCASAUmp]

Originally Posted by Stat-Man

Generally speaking now: If SP is going to a 3-2 count (I'm not sure if there is a difference between using a 3-2 or starting at 1-1 ), I figure we better be prepared for that before our first game. If I do slow pitch stats again for my friends, I'm willing to bet there will be people surprised about the count change.

Definitely a good thing to go over in the pre-game conference.

And no, there's no difference between starting with a 1-1 count and having a maximum 3-2 count.

[AtlUmpSteve]

Originally Posted by NCASAUmp

And no, there's no difference between starting with a 1-1 count and having a maximum 3-2 count.

There was one hell of a difference in the terminology to get it passed!!

Efforts in previous years had people voting against it because it changed the fundamental definitions of the game, that you can't walk on 3 balls or strike out with 2 strikes. It was even offered to the rule author as a friendly amendment that it could pass if he would just change the terminology, which he chose to not accept. So, it was voted down every prior year.

This method (you start with one ball and one strike count) eliminates that concern; 4 balls is a walk, 3 strikes is an out, just like hot dogs and apple pie. Never mind how many pitches were thrown to get to that count, all's right with the count!!