licking fingers

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by 3SPORT

I agree and to make it an illegal pitch seems like an excessive penalty. Maybe without getting rid of a consequence they could make it a delayed dead ball and just a ball for the batter, instead of an illegal pitch.

I agree that it has no physical consequence on a pitch that is delivered.

I submitted a change to ASA a couple years ago and it went nowhere. Too many traditionalist that don't know why it is, but it has been that way for years and changing it would ruin the game. Huh???

[marvin]

Originally Posted by 3SPORT

I agree that it has no physical consequence on a pitch that is delivered.

Ban a pitcher who usually licks her fingers every pitch and you will (in most cases) see a difference. And if you don't see one, then that's OK, because the pitcher is now complying with the rules. You won't know is there is a difference unless you enforce the rule.

Trying to determine a 'gained advantage' or in your wording 'physical consequence' to the action is - to me - looking at the enforcement of a rule the wrong way. My position is always that if there is no advantage to breaking the rule there will be no loss of effectiveness if the rule is followed (if a coach is arguing there was 'no advantage gained'). If there is a loss of effectiveness, an advantage is certainly demonstrated. I have encountered this argument many times when dealing with illegal pitch calls.

[Dakota]

The rule is under the "foreign substance on the ball" rule, not under the "improve the grip of the ball" category. I have no argument about there being an advantage to having clean, slightly moist fingers to aid in gripping a dry, slick surfaced, sandy ball. However, the moisture that may be transferred to the ball has no discernible affect on the flight of the ball.

I (for one) didn't say I don't enforce the rule. I said the rule was stupid. I also agreed that complying with the rule can be done without removing the advantage. Another reason the rule is stupid.

Have you ever tossed a BALL from the game because it has been contaminated with saliva?

Didn't think so.

[Tru_in_Blu]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Then why aren't games stopped immediately when it begins to rain?

The same reason a drop of oil somewhere is better than a quart. Pitching a wet ball with wet fingers results in a loss of control. At that point, pitchers begin to lose their grip. And the ball gets heavier, even with someone wiping it off when it comes in from the outfield after shooting up a trail of water on the way to an outfielder.

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

It's a finishing coat sprayed to help the balls look pretty. I wouldn't doubt there is an additional value to protect the ball for during transportation, storage and temperature issues

Store 'em in the humidor?

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Feel for the ball I can buy especially since there is quite a variance in the stitching on today's ball. However, simply warming up with a particular ball does nothing to wear the surface unless you throw the ball into the ground. This is one place where, God forgive me for saying this, baseball has an edge. Like baseball umpires, we should take every new ball and rub it down prior to putting it into the game. It isn't difficult and barely takes 10 seconds. If you need to wet your palms or pick up an handful of dirt, do it.

I don't recall many warm-up sessions when I didn't manage to throw at least a couple of pitches in the dirt or off the backstop. But even throwing 40 or 50 pitches in a warm up will knock some of the sheen off the ball.

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

It is not an advantage to be able to grip the ball. If it were, resin and Gorilla Gold (drying agents in name only), would not be allowed.

Well, we definitely need to take different sides on this argument. Try throwing a ball, or any object, without fingers. If you can't grip something, how can you hold it, much less throw it. [Unless you're Larry Bird shooting foul shots w/ a bandaged hand against a sportswriter (Bob Ryan?)] There was the Gipper, and now the Gripless.

Ted

[argodad]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

It is not an advantage to be able to grip the ball.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by Tru_in_Blu

The same reason a drop of oil somewhere is better than a quart. Pitching a wet ball with wet fingers results in a loss of control. At that point, pitchers begin to lose their grip. And the ball gets heavier, even with someone wiping it off when it comes in from the outfield after shooting up a trail of water on the way to an outfielder.

This is a rule which was established way back when balls were still made of relatively raw horse & cow hide. The processing of the leather used had improved dramatically over the years and while still porous, today's balls are much more resiliant than those of the past.

Store 'em in the humidor?

It wouldn't hurt. During the processing, the hide is processed with whatever dyes/pretreatment (liquid form) being used for that piece, removed from the vat/drum, partially dried, staked (stretched) and dried in an oven-like chamber.

One of the first things my father would do when we came home with a new pair of shoes was to take them to the kitchen and put them under a running faucet. With all the treatments and applications applied to leather today, other than being left in a puddle of water, moisture should have minimal affect, including absorption, on the balls today. IOW, trying to weight a portion of the ball through moisture, you may need a garden hose.

I don't recall many warm-up sessions when I didn't manage to throw at least a couple of pitches in the dirt or off the backstop. But even throwing 40 or 50 pitches in a warm up will knock some of the sheen off the ball.

That still doesn't insure the coating will be removed equally. It is easier and more consistant to just rub the ball down.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by argodad

Do you think it is an advantage for a player to be able to get a good grip on the ball?

[wadeintothem]

I feel like I've seen odd movement in damp games. That makes me think that if the pitchers knew how to use it, they could. I doubt most do know how to do that. I think many male FP pitchers can, but since they are much more creative than that.. dont need it.

I dont know, I'm on the fence on the issue. Its not a big deal. In 97% of the JO tournaments I work, enforcing this involves sending the catcher out to tell her to wipe her fingers. The other 3% of the time I guess I deal with it, but its usually a non issue. In mens FP for the normal tournaments I get myself in enough trouble without opening this can of worms. Add it to the list of illegal stuff they do in men's FP.

[Tru_in_Blu]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Do you think it is an advantage for a player to be able to get a good grip on the ball?

Well I have a couple of questions?

1) Pitching clinics for girls aged 10 to 14 years old will quickly introduce the concept of:
a) the grip
b) identifying the batter's weaknesses
c) the physics of pitching a softball
d) how to leap without being noticed

2) It is an advantage for a player to be able to get a grip on:
a) the ball
b) the bat
c) OOO umpires
d) all of the above

Ted

[Crabby_Bob]

A softball is less dense than a baseball thus, is more susceptible to aerodynamic forces. From a doctoring viewpoint, the object is not to add a great mass of goop to the ball, but to alter the boundary layer of air flowing over the ball, in particular by changing the smoothness over a region. A gross example of this can be seen in the curveball trainers found in sporting goods stores. Much less dense than a baseball (same size though) and it has a series of grooves over half the surface.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by Crabby_Bob

A softball is less dense than a baseball thus, is more susceptible to aerodynamic forces. From a doctoring viewpoint, the object is not to add a great mass of goop to the ball, but to alter the boundary layer of air flowing over the ball, in particular by changing the smoothness over a region. A gross example of this can be seen in the curveball trainers found in sporting goods stores. Much less dense than a baseball (same size though) and it has a series of grooves over half the surface.

While noted as a point of the foreign substance issue, I do not believe it is the point here. Talking about moistening a particular spot on the ball to make that side heavier through the absorption of saliva.

However, you also must take into consideration the distance and speed as to the affect it would have on the ball.

Back to the point. Simply dampening one's fingers is not going to affect the ball's path to the plate.

[Dakota]

Mike,

Other than your well known ability to play mind games, you're not one to misstate the obvious, especially several times in one thread.

Makes me wonder about the "advantage" thing. The best I could come up with is since it is obviously an advantange to be able to grip the ball, compared with the absurdity of not being able to grip the ball, you were using the word in the rules sense of "illegal advantage." Or, you could just be playing mind games. Or, both.

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by Crabby_Bob

A softball is less dense than a baseball thus, is more susceptible to aerodynamic forces. From a doctoring viewpoint, the object is not to add a great mass of goop to the ball, but to alter the boundary layer of air flowing over the ball, in particular by changing the smoothness over a region. A gross example of this can be seen in the curveball trainers found in sporting goods stores. Much less dense than a baseball (same size though) and it has a series of grooves over half the surface.

Here's the thing... compared with a baseball, a softball has greater mass and travels a shorter distance. The aerodynamic forces would, therefore, have to be greater to influence the linear momentum of the ball (product of velocity and mass) quickly enough to have any material effect. It is possible to doctor a softball to cause this, but simple saliva won't cut it. And, as Mike pointed out, compared with the mass of the softball, the saliva has no shot at unbalancing the ball, either.

It is a stupid rule.

[shipwreck]

I agree, stupid rule. If the pitcher wets their fingers to be able to grip the ball better, to be able to control it better, but must wipe off, why not make spitting on your hands before you grip the bat illegal also? They should have to wipe off also. They are doing THAT to be able to grip the bat better and have more control with it. Dave

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by shipwreck

I agree, stupid rule. If the pitcher wets their fingers to be able to grip the ball better, to be able to control it better, but must wipe off, why not make spitting on your hands before you grip the bat illegal also? They should have to wipe off also. They are doing THAT to be able to grip the bat better and have more control with it. Dave

Here and I thought they did that to discourage the ODB from using the batter's expensive bat!