PU Hold while BU(s) position or Both back in simulataneously

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by kcg NC2Ablu

at on etime they were .... are they now?

Of course, they are not and that was my point.

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Of course, they are not and that was my point.

Which is a valid point on the expectation that the LBR may find itself similarly in the dust bin of softball history someday. But, until then, it is a rule of the game that the umpires should be prepared to enforce. And, being prepared to enforce it includes being in position to enforce it.

Calling TIME to get back into position is easier on the umpires and, it could be argued, simpler for the players, but in addition what it does is take the LBR out of the picture during that time. Good or bad, intent of the rule or not, that is what it does. I can't find in the list of times when the umpire should suspend play "when the umpire believes the LBR is stupid."

[wadeintothem]

They suspend play in SP so the fat guy in centerfield can get the ball to the pitcher without haviing to run it all the way in, so we dont have to wait 22 minutes for him to walk it in, and because they are calling time for fear of over throwing it.

LBR aint going anywhere in the FP game.

[ronald]

Originally Posted by wadeintothem

They suspend play in SP so the fat guy in centerfield can get the ball to the pitcher without haviing to run it all the way in, so we dont have to wait 22 minutes for him to walk it in, and because they are calling time for fear of over throwing it.

LBR aint going anywhere in the FP game.

That is not the only reason. One other is the shenanigans fast runners will play with the pitcher or infielder holding the ball, each deeking, yadda yadda. Time.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by Dakota

Which is a valid point on the expectation that the LBR may find itself similarly in the dust bin of softball history someday. But, until then, it is a rule of the game that the umpires should be prepared to enforce. And, being prepared to enforce it includes being in position to enforce it.

Calling TIME to get back into position is easier on the umpires and, it could be argued, simpler for the players, but in addition what it does is take the LBR out of the picture during that time. Good or bad, intent of the rule or not, that is what it does. I can't find in the list of times when the umpire should suspend play "when the umpire believes the LBR is stupid."

Ya know, Tom, at no point did I suggest an umpire not apply the LBR when appropriate, yet some have determined they know what is in my mind better than I and have responded as if I did.

At no point did I suggest the LBR is stupid, yet some have chosen to respond as if I did.

How I initially responded was directly to the subject by stating there was an option (approved by ASA) to just kill the ball to allow umpires to return to their positions.

Unlike what some would like to believe, I do not jump up on my soapbox at the mention of the LBR. I will, however, voice my opinion when the discussion gets to that point and I will not apologize for doing so.

And for those who are still searching for a valid reason to retain the rule, the manner in which the umpire enforces the rules would not change, you just don't call the runner out.

[SethPDX]

Originally Posted by kcg NC2Ablu

at on etime they were .... are they now?

These still are in LL softball (and baseball) for players age 12 and under:

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Runner may not lose contact with the base until the ball reaches the batter.

Substitute pitcher must pitch to one batter.

Batter is out immediately after three strikes are called (no 3rd strike rule).

At the upper divisions you can leave when the pitch is released, and a third strike must be caught.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by SethPDX

These still are in LL softball (and baseball) for players age 12 and under:


At the upper divisions you can leave when the pitch is released, and a third strike must be caught.

Not trying to be a smart ***, but LL did not have softball at the time these rules were in place. To be honest, I don't believe you can compare LL to the rest of the softball world. Many of the rules are baseball-based (as were many of the early softball rules) and remain so at the original age levels.

And like ASA changes at the men's FP game, I believe it may be that the rules at the older levels of LL softball were possibly forced changes to stay competitive with the softball organizations with which they compete.

Just an opinion.

[jmkupka]

Mike, I'm assuming that you advocate eliminating the LBR, but retaining a rule preventing a runner from leaving before the pitch is released. Otherwise there will never be another out at 2B on a steal attempt(?)

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by jmkupka

Mike, I'm assuming that you advocate eliminating the LBR, but retaining a rule preventing a runner from leaving before the pitch is released. Otherwise there will never be another out at 2B on a steal attempt(?)

Correct. That is a separate rule which I have not discussed. As previously noted, nothing really changes except the runner is returned to the previously touched base instead of being ruled out.

[SethPDX]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Not trying to be a smart ***, but LL did not have softball at the time these rules were in place. To be honest, I don't believe you can compare LL to the rest of the softball world. Many of the rules are baseball-based (as were many of the early softball rules) and remain so at the original age levels.

And like ASA changes at the men's FP game, I believe it may be that the rules at the older levels of LL softball were possibly forced changes to stay competitive with the softball organizations with which they compete.

Just an opinion.

I agree with you on this. LL is different, and you're probably right about the reason for the changes at the upper levels. It wouldn't bother me to see LL take a long look at its softball rules and maybe get closer to the rest of softball. I can dream...

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Ya know, Tom, at no point did I suggest an umpire not apply the LBR when appropriate, yet some have determined they know what is in my mind better than I and have responded as if I did.

At no point did I suggest the LBR is stupid, yet some have chosen to respond as if I did.

How I initially responded was directly to the subject by stating there was an option (approved by ASA) to just kill the ball to allow umpires to return to their positions.

Unlike what some would like to believe, I do not jump up on my soapbox at the mention of the LBR. I will, however, voice my opinion when the discussion gets to that point and I will not apologize for doing so.

And for those who are still searching for a valid reason to retain the rule, the manner in which the umpire enforces the rules would not change, you just don't call the runner out.

Joke #42 ...

"searching for a valid reason...." No, just valid enforcement. I don't like the slow pitch rule for the fast pitch game, since the defense needs to play the game, too, including accurate throws of the ball in to the pitcher, etc.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by Dakota

Joke #42 ...

"searching for a valid reason...." No, just valid enforcement. I don't like the slow pitch rule for the fast pitch game, since the defense needs to play the game, too, including accurate throws of the ball in to the pitcher, etc.

Who said it was a SP rule. What do you think they did in the FP game before the LBR was effected?

And, FYI, in SP, the ball is live until all play is complete even in the game without stealing. After a pitch, where there is stealing, the runners can advance until the ball is returned to and possessed by the pitcher in the infield. IOW, the action in SP is the same as you asked for in FP. Wow, what a shock that must be!