ASA Proposed Rule Changes of Note
 

Define "Errant throw" as "A thrown ball which draws the defender away from the area of the play or base at which a play is being made"

Comment: Term is used in rules without definition. This definition will aid umpires and players in understanding the rule.

Numerous scenarios in changing the FP distance to 43'.

No problem from my point of view.

A couple proposals to change the base distance in SP to 70'

This is not a new proposal, but as noted in the past, the game has caught up to the fields and 70' is a move which will be good for the adult game.

Safety Grip: Covers the handle region of the bat. The safety grip will not be less than 10 inches and not more thn 15 inches. There shall be no exposed metal in the 10-15 inch area. The safety grip may be a molded finger formed grip as long as it is permanently attached to the bat or attached with Safety tape. Resin, pine tar or spray substances are permissible on the safety grip only. Any tape applied to the safety grip must be sa continuous spiral. A bat having a flare or cone shaped grip attached is legal


Reason: Eliminates the issue of extra tape.

Maybe it is me, but the last sentance is a direct contradiction to the safetey aspect of the grip which has been standard for ASA in the past. If this change passes, does that mean ASA now considers a bat altered in this manner safe?

Changing the required ball requirments to a .520 cor an a 275.0 lbs of compression.

I have no problem with this change.

There are a couple requiring JO infielders and pitchers to wear masks? Failure results in a bench restriction and can no longer participate in the game.

Sorry, but I consider this over officiating and this this decision is one for the coaches, players and parents, not ASA.

Penalty for a player not wearing a mask during warm ups is a bench restriction for the player and coach.

Sorry, but I consider this over officiating and this this decision is one for the coaches, players and parents, not ASA. Not to mention it is impossible to enforce equally across the board.


Exposed jewelry must be removed and may not be worn during a game.


IMO, this change is also over officiating. I am not telling a 35 year old man or woman they MUST remove their wedding band. The rule presently in place works just fine and I see no reason to exacerbate an all ready tenuous situation in ASA softball.


Numerous suggestions concerning metal spikes in particular classes of ASA JO softball.


Okay by me.


A change to remove "heating" from the characteristic changing of equipment because at the present time, it is no more affecting th game than if the equipment being lying in the sun.

IMO, if it is not an issue AT THIS TIME, why worry about it being changed on the assumption it will never be an issue?

JO ball to allow one or two EPs

There needs to be some order in the game. If batting 9 or 10, why not bat 11 or 12?

Change UR sub to not allow a run to score if the URS did not report.

Change the tie breaker to place runners 1st & 2nd for the purpose of creating a possible force out for the defense.

Give me a break, that is the idea of a tie breaker.

During between inning warm ups, restrict the defense to 4 IF & 1 ball.

Someone is worried that the defensive player that comes out of the dugout to help may be in jeopardy of getting hurt.

GMAFB! We have more to worry about issues which directly affect the game. Maybe whe should have NASA scan the skies every half inning to insure a wayward meteor will not fall near a field.

Eliminate the low height of a pitch and restrict the high side to 10'. Why?

Nevermind, excuses are weak and this is not an NSA convention.

Drop awarded base from the IP enforcement.

Penalty is too severe. No argument from me.

Allow Adult FP players to select the OD circle they prefer to avoid a possible fould ball.

Really don't care, but IMO they are acking for trouble.

Make a foul ball an automatic dead ball on a 3rd strike so the defenders do not have to worry about making a play on a runner tagging and advanding.

Seems to me a certain someone is trying to shove NSA rules down ASA's throat. Maybe I'm wrong, but why should the offense be denied the ability to play the game and the offence, the same?

Eliminate stealing in SP below Men's A & B

Why? In my small part of the woods, it is not an issue.

Edited for some clarification and typo corrections

The elimination of the low pitch height and capping the high pitch to 10' is asking for some serious trouble. If they even discuss that, they need to move the pitching plate back to about 65'.

The foul ball automatic dead ball on a 3rd strike is an USSSA rule as well. Looks like the players are shoving this one around because ASA is the only code that still has it as a live ball.

Putting runners on 2B and 1B for the tiebreaker doesn't make sense to me. If the defense wants to set up that force with an intentional walk, they can always do so.

As far as the height of the pitch goes, it's going to be difficult no matter what the rule is. Changing to 10 feet with no lower limit might be going from the frying pan into the fire. The good pitchers are going to push the limits just as they do now.

Drop awarded base from IP? Yes! People might actually start calling IPs.

in vegas, they do 70' bases for SP and it really speeds the game up, very few infield hits, more outs on the bases. plus, assuming the IF dirt is now 5' deeper, IFers can play back more and get to more balls.

i wasnt sure about the metal spikes.... are you saying they are proposing allowing them in ASA and you are ok with that?

IMO its a very serious safety issue to not allow metal spikes, probably more serious than illegal bats.

in coed, walking a guy with a girl on deck is 2 bases so its not always possible to set up that force.

IMO its a very serious safety issue to not [?] allow metal spikes, probably more serious than illegal bats.

Naturally, it's possible to be badly cut by metal spikes. I once saw my third baseman's tendon and bone after a play, and it was 100% accident. But in actual practice, injuries from metal spikes are very rare.

Hot bats, I think, pose greater dangers, including death, facial disfigurement, and brain damage. From behind the plate, I saw the career of a high-level pitcher end on a line drive off his foot. We had tried to ban the Miken Ultra before the tournament, but the company threatened to sue and even sent a representative to make sure we allowed the bat.

Yes, Steve. I forgot completely about coed rules.

Who cares about co-ed rules, the TB is not used in co-ed softball.

The high school girls seemed to manage ... :cool:

Stupid. The idea of the tie breaker rule is to generate offense to break the tie. It is SUPPOSED to favor the offense. Jeez... do people think these things through or is it just some coach with a bug up his butt about his last game...

Definitely agree. Facemasks for batters was one thing, but this is entirely another. I certainly would recommend to 1st and 3rd basemen playing fastpitch to wear mouth guards and heart guards, but to require such things is over the line.

This would be an OK rule for JO... maybe. But to require this of adults is way over the line. They're perfectly capable of assessing the dangers of wearing jewelry.

Agree with Irish.

Also agree with greymule. Now we might actually see the IP's being called.

i figured you forgot, wasnt trying to sound snobby...

the metal spike thing kills me bc of the other rules ASA has in place for safety reasons that, IMO, are way over the top. maybe its fine for "major" players but for the weeknight rec league its beyond stupid.

Local leagues can ban metal with a local rule (and many probably will if this passes). The official ASA rule would only come into play in championship play.

Adults have always been allowed to wear metal spikes except for co-ed and senior.

Twenty years ago EVERYONE was allowed to wear metal spikes.

This change is directed toward JO players.

There was the same proposal for the ISF-Rules this year, submitted by the ISF Secretary General. They argued it would place the Visiting Team in an advantage since they could IBB the first batter to get the force play if they need to defend a single run to score.

But it was not accepted.

Raoul

Mike, was the ball composition change a typo?

Was that supposed to be .52 COR / 275 lbs compression?

Yes, that is a typo; the ball would be .520 and compression of 275 pounds or less.

Also, Mike's paraphrase of the rule proposal isn't correct. The rule change as proposed right now is to add that ball as an approved ball, in addition to those already approved at certain levels. This year's proposal doesn't YET change any levels to that ball, it simply makes it an approved ASA ball, and sets up the groundwork for the manufacturers to (consider to) begin mass production.

For those that always need to know the CV of those making the statements, I am actually at the National Council meeting (as is Mike), and serve on the Playing Rules Committee.

Steve, I've never doubted (and will never remotely consider doubting) your credentials. :)

Thanks for the clarification!

Yep, it was:eek:

Yes, but there is more to it. These are just a change in the parameters of allowable balls, not necessarily a requirement that this ball MUST be used. There is no proposed change prescribing this ball for any particular division of play.

However, if this change occurs, many expect some type of change in the bat certification requirements. That may be a problem without locking in this or a ball with a lower compression. Otherwise, we may end up with a non-approved bat list that may or may not be in effect depending upon what ball is being used.

:confused: Since when? Or are you just being scarcastic? :confused:

Since ever?

ASA 5.11, the Tie Breaker Rule is used only by Women's & JO Girls FP, Men's 40+ and 45+ FP and Men's Senior SP

Sorry, wasn't familiar with the tiebreker's limits in FP. I'm a SP guy.

We actually have a local league that uses the ITB for all of their league play. Gets games over faster.

I have no problem with this rule. Eventually, everyone will be pitching from this distance.

Seems totally contradictory to all the safety mumbo jumbo we have been hearing about for years.


Totally ridiculous, yet not wholly unexpected. I really wish that ASA would learn what is mommy and daddy territory, and what is the domain of the "Governing Body of Softball." These "feel good" rules are totally unnecessary, but I feel are probably brought on my parental pressure and manufacturing interests.

Then hire an official, whose sole duty it is to peruse the various corners, back alleys and what not around a complex to insure that this rule is being applied properly. Otherwise, leave it alone.

The one thing that I really don't like is being the jewelry police. If they want this rule in, then make sure to put the onus for its enforcement on the coach by making the penalty the coaches' immediate removal from the game. Otherwise, leave as it is already written.

No problem. Better traction = safer playing conditions. I really don't think that you will see a lot of JO players or coaches honing their spikes to pull a "Ty Cobb."

Heck, let's just let em all play. Sure would make line-up management easier! :rolleyes:

I really want to meet the "mental giant" who conceived of this rule change. :rolleyes:

Does this include the pitcher and the catcher? If so, we are basically looking at the pitcher doing their warm-ups and then a F4 and F6 standing around until a throw down??? Makes no sense. This safety conciousness is getting out of hand. One must allow for some liability/responsibility on the part of the players and coaches, or in the case of JO, players, coaches and parents.

Ain't that the truth?!

Why not just do away with the whole IP thing altogether? Or simplify it. While I agree that the penalty is severe as written, I don't think that this will cause any more IP's to be called. I think the women/girls (in FP) should have the exact same rules and or accepted conventions that the men have. One foot or two feet in contact with the pitching plate, their choice, and a leap with the toe down allowable. A replant being illegal. Also, there is way too much concern about the touching of hands...etc. I feel like it shouldn't matter whether or not a pitcher takes the PP with hands together or not, as long as there is a pause to take a sign (or to simulate same) before the hands separate and the pitch starts.

Yeah, they are acking for it all right! :cool:


You sure about that????? :D

Withdrawn



This passed in Equipment Certification!

Quote:

Changing the required ball requirments to a .520 cor an a 275.0 lbs of compression.

Equipment Certification shot this one down.

So wait, are you saying that flare/cone grips will be legal in 2010? Knobcuffs, Grip 'n' Rip, etc., will be okay? Done deal?

Nothing is a "done deal" until Thursday.

But the way the change reads:

Safety Grip: Covers the handle region of the bat. The safety grip shall not be less than 10 inches and not more than 15 inches. There shall be no exposed metal in the 10-15 inch area. The safety grip may be a molded finger formed grip as long as it is permanently attached to the bat, or attached with Safety tape. Resin, pine tar or spray substances are permissible on the safety grip only. Any tape applied to the safety grip must be continuous spiral. A bat having a flare or cone shaped grip attached is legal.

The following are the rule changes that will be presented to the General Council tomorrow as approved:

Change 16U & 18U FP to 43' pitching distance

Change base distance for Men's Adult SP (excluding Seniors) to 70'

Permit the Safety Base to be any color contrasting with white

Clarified a legal bat which includes a flare/cone at the knob end of the handle

Allow JO 16U & 18U FP to wear metal spikes

Eliminated "heating" from the Note restricting the changing of the characteristics of equipment

Change the rule to return all runners to their previous base ANYTIME the BR is determined to be an Unreported Substitute prior to the next pitch.

Change 4.7.C.5 from banning "communication equipment" to "electronic equipment" from the dugout. This includes video cameras.

Include "Modified" in the rule allowing the pitcher to use a drying agent

Allowed Modified to use a courtesy runner for the pitcher and catcher similar to that of the FP game.

The following are some of the proposed changes rejected, but may be resurrected on during General Council:

Changing the pitching distance to 53' for all adult SP except Seniors

Changing the base distance to 70' for all adult SP except Seniors and Masters

Changing the pitch height in SP to 6-10 feet

Allowing a courtesy foul in SP when the batter starts with a 1-1 count

Without any disagreement with Mike, here is what I posted on my local messageboard:

Sounds pretty good. Interesting is all the hubbub at the 18Gs about the grip attachements only to (probably) have it changed this year.

Good to see the cleat changes.

I think the pitching distance change is what parents/coaches think they want not realizing how badly most of their pitchers struggle even at 40'. I think they think their pitchers are better than they are. This change will help the top pitchers and hurt the vast majority of mediocre pitchers.. but if its what they want, oh well.

I experienced it several times last weekend with teams playing up to 18's expecting me to adjust my zone so their mediocre pitchers could get a strike.

Banning electrical equipment sounds like an unnecessary PITA.

I guess no news on whether the 18gs will be moving around?

Actually, 3 different proposals, I believe 2 of 3 may have passed.

One has it always being voted on and awarded like every other tournament. Second has it on OKC every 3rd year, with the Executive Director placing it in the off years.

The one I believe failed had it in OKC every 5th year, with the other 4 voted on and awarded.

Pretty sure one of the two will be the final outcome; surprising to me, #2 seems the favorite. Will be fought, as some want the membership to make all such decisions, and not give up any opportunities.

Actually, Steve addressed that.

The change was to allow the Executive Director designate the location.

At the time, I was sitting with a particular ASA member whom I believe has an inside track. One of the Past Presidents jokingly mentioned "trusting" RR to place the tournament around the country, including the possibility of Altoona, PA.

I turned to this individual and said, "I see it more like a rotation of Anaheim, OKC & Orlando".

He could throw Georgia a bone. If it wasnt for their weather, that place aint half bad. :D

As long as we dont have to go to Texas, least of all Midland.. its all good though. :D

How about also contrasting with the ground? Any color includes tan, brown, faded orange, etc.

Well, that would throw out Orange bases here, with our clay. :)

The following are the rule changes that have been approved:

Change 16U & 18U FP to 43' pitching distance

Permit the Safety Base to be any color contrasting with white

Clarified a legal bat which includes a flare/cone at the knob end of the handle

Allow JO 16U & 18U FP to wear metal spikes

Eliminate "heating" from the Note restricting the changing of the characteristics of equipment

Change the rule to return all runners to their previous base ANYTIME the BR is determined to be an Unreported Substitute prior to the next pitch.

Change 4.7.C.5 from banning "communication equipment" to "electronic equipment" from the dugout. This includes video cameras.

Change SP & 16" SP pitch height to 10' (passed by council, 162-58)

Include "Modified" in the rule allowing the pitcher to use a drying agent

Allowed Modified to use a courtesy runner for the pitcher and catcher similar to that of the FP game.

So those are completely done deals? All of those will appear in the 2010 book?

Yep

Thanks for the update. Looks good!

This one surprises me. Why did they lower the max height? To be more consistent with other orgs? Or to get greater consistency among umpires?

The SP Task Force really wanted this. Some RPL players supported this as they contend it is easier to change bats than adjust timing. It was presented as something the players prefer and would possible draw teams back to ASA.

This was one of four changes for which the task force seriously lobbied and I believe it was the only one they got sold.

Kinda wish ASA would have stood firm on allowing college players in the Gold.. but I guess that had to go.

Thank GOD they didn't change the tie breaker as proposed - how long did it take for them to reject THAT?

Kind of surprised that the face mask didn't pass - that usually is the sort of safety thing that ASA usually takes a leadership role in promoting see, for example, the cage on the batting helmet. Perhaps if next year the proposal gets cut down to P, 1B, 3B, it will pass. And PLEASE do not lecture me on the 'its over officiating' or 'its Mommy and Daddys business' - I would prefer NEVER to see a bunch of 'bloody chiclets' out there. With a kid 12-13-14 crying in pain. If it takes me another minute or two of checking, instead of schmoozing with my partner, so be it....

It was rejected on Consent, held, debated on the floor and then rejected 178-38

Sorry, but that is ridiculous. What they are suggesting IS called parenting. And if you are aware of the hassles which were endured by ASA and the teams with the face masks on the batting helmet, you wouldn't even suggest we go through that again.

If memory serves me correctly, these proposals were rejected on Consent, did not come up for discussion in some committees due to a lack of a motion and never saw the floor.

It was, in fact proposed 3 different ways; just pitchers, F1-F3-F5, and all infielders. All were rejected by consent agenda, and all subcommittees.

And I'm thankful for that. I've not noticed a shortage of mommies and daddies at games, so they can parent their own kid.

Mike,

Did I read the Code changes correctly that said that College players were banned from 18U Gold and 18U 'B', but not from 18U 'A'? Or did I miss something?

Wonder if this will be a big topic at the 2010 JO Workshop?

Serg

College players cannot play ANY B ball which is ludicrous (when teams are classified appropriately).

They cannot play 18U Gold. However, they can play 18U A. This way they are not excluded altogether in areas where a 23U program is not available.

However, as I understand it, this is a band aid and the issue will be refined next year that may allow some "college" players back.

Craig Cress' interview with Fast Pitch Radio Show addressed the issue of the mask. It would, in fact, have to get NOCSAE-certified if they were to require such an item on the field. Just one more thing to add to the list, right?

Which would require the development of a safe standard, development of masks to meet that standard, NOCSAE approval which requires a one-year probationary period and ONLY then will a certification be applied which will require a stamp on the equipment which, like the batting helmet mask, require a purchase of new equipment by all those involved.

Then comes all the whining, crying and accusations of ASA conspiring with the manufacturers to force people to buy a product which is mandated.

And then ASA becomes the bad guy when these teams show up for a tournament with non-approved equipment because "they let us use these at home".

What next, mandatory chest plates for all infielders and batters since a thrown/batted ball to the chest can kill them?

At some tourneys, checking for the approval logo on approved chest plates is going to be quite a trick... if the nannyumps have their way.

Nahhhhhh, let just use one of those 6u ultra softballs. The ones that bounce around like super balls! now that's really 'softball' and no one gets hurt! :eek:

Don't give them any ideas! :rolleyes:

So what was the true reasoning given for not allowing College Girls play 18G? Who was the big lobby for that change?

So Cal coaches tired of the fact that they no longer dominate 18G.

The other huge driving fact.. the fact that many coaches and parents too simply want 18G to be a showcase division (hence the reason for a big end of year showcase through premier) and not a competitive division.

If they were honest about it the reasoning might have been about losing 60% of the top 100 teams to a competing organization whose members tried unsuccessfully to work within the system for change and were only heard on the way out the door.

What reason for moving the 18U Gold up a week can you come up with other than trying to get the teams that have committed to Premeir to at least show up to 18U Gold in addition.

That's what it looks like to an outsider anyway. JOFP in ASA always seemed to me to be analagous to the Marine division of Honda. A few years back Honda automotive retooled the engine for the Civic and had all the old tools obsoleted and destroyed. Almost every Honda outboard motor used that old civic motor and when they asked that the tools not be destroyed to avoid the cost of reengineering 100% of their bigger outboards the answer that came back from Honda Automotive was "We make $7 Billion worth of automobiles every year. Why do you assume that your 100 Million in Marine sales is even worth discussing?"

That doesn't mean that ASA JOFP isn't the #1 youth softball program, but it means that the priorities of the passionate few aren't always the main issue.

re: college players: can't play in G or B, but can in A.

End result: 18A is now the premier 18U division and the 18G becomes the "high school all-stars who don't have a scholarship yet" division.

The cool thing is I've been awarded the ASA/USA 18A tourney next year.

Obviously while everyone else is showcasing their HS all star players at "other tournaments" (maybe they should just do a combine instead of a 18G tournament)... I'll be working the top level national tournament in the only open division 18 y/o competitive level left. :D

and I would be remiss if I didnt mention .. 18A, being the open division now, should be the tournament that counts as the major.. Not the 18Gold .. :cool:

Actually, not as far fetched as you sound. It was even mentioned in committee that maybe ASA needs to create what is basically a "competitive" division and a "showcase" division. The possible names noted were the 18U Gold (comp) and 18U Silver (showcase).

The point being (which many parents/coaches seem to miss) is that the premier softball tournament should be played by the best 18U teams in the country and that cannot exclude the better ball players that properly qualify to play. The fact that they may be in college should be irrelevant to an age-oriented classification.

IMO, if teams were properly classified (okay, stop laughing), the "B"s would be the perfect place for the returning collegiates to play.

Well then, congratulations and West Coast represent! :cool:

"GMAFB! We have more to worry about issues which directly affect the game. Maybe whe should have NASA scan the skies every half inning to insure a wayward meteor will not fall near a field."

They already do! They're also scanning your field and sending info to the NSA. Will there be a uniform change to allow foil hats?

Official Gear has already got them in stock.

http://sabian.whispers.org/tinfoil-hat-asa.jpg

That's just what they want us to do...

On the Effectiveness of Aluminium Foil Helmets: An Empirical Study (MIT)

I am a SoCal parent. Never been a softball ump or a coach.

How does the elimination of college players address the issue in your first statement?

John

I hear they fade rather quickly, so dont wash your tinfoil.

Continuous spiral?
 

So the new ASA rules for 2010 have been posted on ASA's website here: http://downloads.asasoftball.com/abo...thcomments.pdf

In it, they talk about allowing an item such as the Grip-N-Rip (pictured here), but also requiring them to be taped. They also mention that the tape must be a continuous spiral. Does this mean that the tape securing the G-n-R must be continuously spiral?

My though is "no," as the G-n-R is a grip in and of itself, and securing it to the bat with tape should be enough. However, I'd like your opinions first.

Actually, it doesn't mention any item other than tape and a finger molding grip. The GNR isn't the only finger molding on the market and not all GNR products are finger molded.

My opinion, for now, is that any attachment should be under the tape, but you never know.

I do believe that the rule requires it to be firmly attached with tape. My concern, of course, is that the rule also specifically states that the tape must be continuously spiral. I think that in the case of the Grip-N-Rip pictured in my link, keeping it continuously spiral without completely taking away from the effects of the finger molding might become difficult.

Sorry to drag up an old thread, but I was wondering if anyone had any other thoughts regarding requiring a "continuous spiral" over these knobcuffs? I'd promised another person on another forum that I would ask around.

My interpretation is that the tape must be continuously spiral, but can go under the finger-forming/flare/cone grip, so long as the finger-forming/flare/cone grip is also securely taped to the bat (umpire's reasonable judgment) AND that there is no exposed metal in the 10-15" area.