Is this right ?

[CajunNewBlue]

Originally Posted by AtlUmpSteve

OK; but "prior to pitching". The act of disengaging (stepping off) means the action wasn't prior to pitching.

Let me ask it this way. Many pitchers like to keep the pitching plate clean, and between pitches, use their foot to sweep it clean. I think it is safe to say that we differentiate that contact from the preliminary to pitch by the fact that she then steps back off, prior to formally stepping on to start the required sequence. You would not invoke any preliminary pitching requirements, that she didn't have shoulders facing properly, that she didn't come to a full stop, that she didn't then immediately pitch. Why not? Because she legally stepped off; if she stayed there and then started a pitch, you would call it illegal. Suppose she had her hands together while using her foot to clear the plate? Is that different? Would you call that action an illegal pitch? I speculate (and surely hope) not; you would allow her to step off, disengage, restart under the sequence, legally engage.

Prior to pitching isn't an action that can be designated as concluded until the pitch begins; then the action to that point was prior to the pitch. It (prior) starts with engaging the plate, it (prior) ends when the pitch starts. Pitchers may legally disengage and restart by stepping off; that option is available when the hands are brought together (last in the required sequence) as long as the pitch hasn't started, no matter what else might happen wrong preliminary to the pitch, so far as I can tell. How/why is that option not available when the hands are together while stepping on?

Well, that was a very well thought out and eloquently typed out argument, and me showing up with my knife... lol.

All I can retort with is that I know an illegal pitch when i see one and i know when she is cleaning off the plate when i see it.
And if she steps on the rubber with her hands together i'm making this call regardless if she finishes the pitch or if she disengages. Because at the end of ART1 the penalty for failure to do anything exactly how its spelled out in 6-1-1-a thru f is to call an illegal pitch and I will deal with the coach in a professional manner when questioned.

ie: pitcher has one foot on the rubber, hands together, she then proceeds to fill in a little divot in front of the rubber. she is satisfied with her landscaping duties and then places landscaping foot behind rubber and does not disengage with other foot, she then moves on to simulate taking of signal or actually takes a signal (im in illegal pitch mode) she then thinks ok i need a moment and disengages. thats an illegal pitch.
I am taking liberties with assuming what she is thinking, but i am judging her by her actions.

gotta go Duke is winning.

[DeRef]

Originally Posted by CajunNewBlue

gotta go Duke is winning.

Yeah, but you don't get a W for leading at halftime. How 'bout them Heels baby!!! However, it was an excellent, well played game by both teams.

Sorry for the off-topic post

[CajunNewBlue]

Originally Posted by DeRef

Yeah, but you don't get a W for leading at halftime. How 'bout them Heels baby!!! However, it was an excellent, well played game by both teams.

Sorry for the off-topic post

yep... was, still dont agree with that T for the elbow... looked like his hand slipped off the ball during the scrum. but then again im biased.

[Dakota]

Why would someone from Cajun territory be a Dookie? Just askin'.

[Tru_in_Blu]

I've done ASA for a few years now. This year I'm also trying to get certified for NFHS and we're doing our training this month.

There are some differences in the pitching rules between the two associations, as I'm sure most of you are already aware.

On this year's ASA test, question 15FP:
"The pitcher may step on the pitcher's plate with their hands together as long as they separate them to take a signal before starting the pitch."

If this was an NFHS question, I'd say "false" because of:
6.1.1.a "Prior to pitching, the pitcher must take a postion with shoulders in line with first and third base with the ball in the glove or pitching hand, and with the hands separated."

PENALTY: (Art. 1) An illegal pitch is called.

Since this is an ASA question, it requires a bit more applied logic to decipher the ruling, as the ASA wording is not as specific as NFHS.

6.1.D "While on the pitcher's plate, the pitcher shall take the signal or appear to take a signal with the hands separated. The ball must remain in either the glove or pitching hand."

...then...

6.2 Starting the Pitch.
"The pitch starts when one hand is taken off the ball after the hands have been placed together."

So in the ASA wording, if the pitcher who arrived on the pitcher's plate with hands together separates the hands to take a signal, by definition she has already started the pitch. If she follows through with the pitch, assuming there was no signal given/taken, maybe that's legal. But if she separates the hands to take a signal, and puts the hands together again to start the pitch, I'd say that was illegal.

BTW, the wording of "when one hand is taken off the ball" is technically incorrect also. Since one hand has a softball glove on it, there's really only one "hand" available. And a pitch cannot be delivered from the glove. If she took her "available" hand off the ball the ball would remain in the glove or fall to the ground. Maybe better wording might be something like: "The pitch starts when the pitcher removes the ball from the glove or otherwise disengages contact with the glove hand." (I'd occasionally hold the ball behind the glove while presenting an empty glove to the batter until beginning the pitching motion.)

Ted

[AtlUmpSteve]

Originally Posted by Tru_in_Blu

On this year's ASA test, question 15FP:
"The pitcher may step on the pitcher's plate with their hands together as long as they separate them to take a signal before starting the pitch."

Since this is an ASA question, it requires a bit more applied logic to decipher the ruling, as the ASA wording is not as specific as NFHS.

Ted

OK, I'll bite. (My philosophy that stepping back off being a remedy notwithstanding.) How is the new rule 6.1-a not crystal clear in itself?

"The pitcher must take the pitching position on the pitcher's plate with hands separated and the ball in the glove or the pitcher's hand."

No exceptions. No applied deciphering. Separating them after engaging isn't taking the position with them separate.

(But, I still contend that she can step off before she separates to remedy. That ends the action and makes her prior engagement NOT taking a pitching position.)

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by AtlUmpSteve

...(But, I still contend that she can step off before she separates to remedy. That ends the action and makes her prior engagement NOT taking a pitching position.)

Speaking NFHS, what do you do with the case play I cited above? The case play states that once she steps onto the plate with the hands together, it is an IP.

[CajunNewBlue]

Originally Posted by AtlUmpSteve

(But, I still contend that she can step off before she separates to remedy. That ends the action and makes her prior engagement NOT taking a pitching position.)

I wish I could agree with you by rule.. I do in fact agree with you on this, based on principle and spirit of the rule.

I also wish the "NFHS powers that be" would allow the pitcher a way "out" if she does violate a thruf before she release the ball... and a pretty solid way would be to allow a legal disengagement.

I also wish I wasn't so cheap and would buy a winning powerball ticket.

[youngump]

Originally Posted by Tru_in_Blu

If she follows through with the pitch, assuming there was no signal given/taken, maybe that's legal.
Ted

Nope. The pitcher shall take (or simulate taking) a signal. If she doesn't it doesn't much matter what she did with her hands.
________
Ophelie live

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by Tru_in_Blu

I've done ASA for a few years now. This year I'm also trying to get certified for NFHS and we're doing our training this month.

There are some differences in the pitching rules between the two associations, as I'm sure most of you are already aware.

On this year's ASA test, question 15FP:
"The pitcher may step on the pitcher's plate with their hands together as long as they separate them to take a signal before starting the pitch."...

In prior year's ASA had a set of requirements that, taken together, meant the pitcher must not step onto the plate with the hands together.

She must, while on the plate:
1) Take the signals (or pretend to) with the hands separated;
2) Bring the hands together for 1-10 seconds;
3) Separate the hands to begin the pitch;
4) Not bring the hands together a second time;

Taken together, it was not possible to do all of this if the hands were together when the pitcher stepped onto the plate.

The change only clarifies this.

Originally Posted by ASA 2009 Playing Rule Changes

Rule 6 Section 1 A Fast Pitch and Modified: The pitcher must take the position on the pitcher’s plate with the hands separated and the ball in the glove or the pitcher's hand.
Comment: This only clarifies a rule that Fast Pitch and Modified umpires have enforced for years.

[FullCount]

Speaking ASA. Starting in 2009 there's no longer in leeway for interpretation. I believe that prior to the 2009 rules that a pitcher could step on the plate with hands together and then remedy the situation by stepping back of the plate with both feet prior to separating their hands. I realize that many umpires in this area called that illegal but I don't think the rules supported the IP. However, we were told in the NUS here in the DFW area that the 2009 pitching rules were specifically modified to clear that very issue up and remove all variations in application of the rule. Per their discussion and specific statement, under the 2009 rules it is illegal for a FP pitcher to step on the pitchers platewith hands together. Walt S.'s comment was "we all knew that it was illegal but this just made the rules clear and to match how it was being called in games." His discussion suggested that the rule clarification was help eliminate argument from coaches primarily.

[CajunNewBlue]

Originally Posted by Dakota

Why would someone from Cajun territory be a Dookie? Just askin'.

Because I have exceptional taste. (most of the time people take exception to my taste) but i digress. ohh yeah and my mom lives in the raleigh area... chapel hill, so im told (never been there)

[NCASAUmp]

Originally Posted by CajunNewBlue

Because I have exceptional taste. (most of the time people take exception to my taste) but i digress. ohh yeah and my mom lives in the raleigh area... chapel hill, so im told (never been there)

Well, if you're ever up this way, let me know. I'm in said area, and we can hoist some beers together.

[CajunNewBlue]

Originally Posted by NCASAUmp

Well, if you're ever up this way, let me know. I'm in said area, and we can hoist some beers together.

definitely... BTW: we gotta have crawfish with that.