The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Softball

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rating: Thread Rating: 3 votes, 5.00 average. Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Tue Feb 16, 2010, 06:43pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: USA
Posts: 14,565
February ASA Rules Clarifications

Amateur Softball Association of America (ASA)

ASA confirms no CR when the DP bats for the pitcher/catcher regardless of when the pitcher/catcher is entered into the batting order.

Confirms RS 36 doesn't read exactly as the rule is to be applied.
__________________
The bat issue in softball is as much about liability, insurance and litigation as it is about competition, inflated egos and softball.
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Tue Feb 16, 2010, 11:11pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Twin Cities MN
Posts: 8,154
Quote:
Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA View Post
...Confirms RS 36 doesn't read exactly as the rule is to be applied.
Finally... how many years did this take?
__________________
Tom
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Tue Feb 16, 2010, 11:27pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: USA
Posts: 14,565
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dakota View Post
Finally... how many years did this take?
Well, to them it was more directional/instructional than interpretation.

That's why we have things like clinics and schools to make sure the umpires on the field know better. In the past when raised, the umpire would accept the proper interp & ruling.

It wasn't until this year I have actually seen someone INSIST this was the proper interpretation.
__________________
The bat issue in softball is as much about liability, insurance and litigation as it is about competition, inflated egos and softball.
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Wed Feb 17, 2010, 09:06am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: NC
Posts: 4,361
I noticed that they provided clarification for the "non-approved bat" penalty.

Quote:
Question: Does a new model bat that does not appear on the non approved bat list and does not have the ASA certification mark on it fall under the penalty for using a non approved or altered bat?

Answer: Yes. Any bat that does not meet Rule 3 Section 1A [1-3] is considered a non approved bat whether listed or not. This is the reason we went to the one bat list called Non Approved bats with Certification Marks. When making the change to the new list, the definition in Rule 1”Non Approved Bat” was missed and the “and” in the definition should have been removed and replaced with “or.” If it does not meet Rule 3 section 1A [1-3] or is on the Non Approved bats with Certification Marks list then it is a “NON APPROVED BAT.”
So yes... A brand new bat with no ASA stamp (ie., U-Trip/NSA bats) is a non-approved bat, and a batter stepping into the batter's box with one of these bats would be out and ejected.

Did someone here bump that one up for me?
__________________
Dave

I haven't decided if I should call it from the dugout or the outfield. Apparently, both have really great views!

Screw green, it ain't easy being blue!

I won't be coming here that much anymore. I might check in now and again.
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Wed Feb 17, 2010, 09:29am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Sierra Nevada Mtns
Posts: 3,220
Feb 2010.. the Clarification to keep on the ole bookmark for the OBS debates. I wouldnt have minded them simply fixing the RS; however, I never really had a problem understanding the RS. The RS was too easily used out of context to justify an incorrect position in the OBS debate.
__________________
ASA, NCAA, NFHS
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Wed Feb 17, 2010, 04:33pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: USA
Posts: 14,565
Quote:
Originally Posted by wadeintothem View Post
Feb 2010.. the Clarification to keep on the ole bookmark for the OBS debates. I wouldnt have minded them simply fixing the RS;
May still happen. They haven't printed a new rule book since this was presented to the staff.

Quote:
however, I never really had a problem understanding the RS. The RS was too easily used out of context to justify an incorrect position in the OBS debate.
Hence the reason for the clarification
__________________
The bat issue in softball is as much about liability, insurance and litigation as it is about competition, inflated egos and softball.
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Wed Feb 17, 2010, 04:44pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: The Land Of The Free and The Home Of The Brave (MD/DE)
Posts: 6,425
Quote:
Originally Posted by NCASAUmp View Post
I noticed that they provided clarification for the "non-approved bat" penalty.



So yes... A brand new bat with no ASA stamp (ie., U-Trip/NSA bats) is a non-approved bat, and a batter stepping into the batter's box with one of these bats would be out and ejected.

Did someone here bump that one up for me?
Ejected ?? - for an illegal, not altered bat??
__________________
Officiating takes more than OJT.
It's not our jobs to invent rulings to fit our personal idea of what should and should not be.
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Wed Feb 17, 2010, 04:51pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: NC
Posts: 4,361
Quote:
Originally Posted by CecilOne View Post
Ejected ?? - for an illegal, not altered bat??
Did you read the rules clarification? Remember, we're not talking about altered bats here, we're talking about non-approved.

In 2008, ASA had a huge list of 100+ bats that were "non-approved." This included bats with stamps that were later rescinded, as well as bats that never had the stamp to begin with (ie., USSSA/NSA bats). Therefor, the definition of a non-approved bat was listed as:

Quote:
NON-APPROVED BAT: A bat that does not meet ASA specifications and is on the current non-approved bat list.
So in 2008, stepping into the box with a USSSA (non-approved) bat was an out + ejection, because all those NSA/U-Trip sticks WERE on the list.

In 2009, ASA changed rule 3-1 slightly to require the stamp on all 2000-or-newer bats. This eliminated the need to put all those NSA/U-Trip sticks on the non-approved list. However, they forgot to modify the rulebook definition of a non-approved bat. So by the strictest reading of the rules, a batter stepping into the box with a U-Trip bat was given a lesser penalty under the illegal bat rule: automatic out, no ejection.

ASA did not intend to lessen the penalty for bringing a bat that ASA never approved into the box, which is why they provided this month's clarification.
__________________
Dave

I haven't decided if I should call it from the dugout or the outfield. Apparently, both have really great views!

Screw green, it ain't easy being blue!

I won't be coming here that much anymore. I might check in now and again.

Last edited by NCASAUmp; Wed Feb 17, 2010 at 04:54pm.
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Wed Feb 17, 2010, 05:00pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Woodstock, GA; Atlanta area
Posts: 2,818
Quote:
Originally Posted by CecilOne View Post
Ejected ?? - for an illegal, not altered bat??
And, let's be honest. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know that if it doesn't have an ASA approval it isn't approved for ASA play.

This also closes the previous logic hole; that a baseball bat was only an out, but a softball bat that might have an ASA approval stamp (and the owner isn't bright enough to check if it has been nonapproved) is an out and an ejection.

So now, it appears the only outs are for bats that have become illegal by use.
__________________
Steve
ASA/ISF/NCAA/NFHS/PGF
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old Wed Feb 17, 2010, 06:50pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: The Land Of The Free and The Home Of The Brave (MD/DE)
Posts: 6,425
Speaking ASA:
As Dave pointed out, I did not read the clarification before asking for confirmation of his "non-approved ejection" comment. I have now read it without full comprehension and reviewed the rule itself. Yes I see the ejection for non-approved in 7-6-B.

I have always understood the rule to be out/ejection for altered, just an out for other illegal. To me, non-approved meant the same as illegal. I have trouble understanding how a bat can be "illegal" and not be "non-approved". Am I just trying to apply a dictionary to rule book semantics?

Further, I thought the non-approved list (http://www.asasoftball.com/about/bui...t_one_page.asp) was to correct those previously certified and those rejected to begin with. The idea being to minimize having to search the approved list for every bat. Are we/they using "non-approved" in two different ways?

What I seem to have missed is there are three categories, approved, non-approved, and non-approved with certification. The second, non-approved seems to include non-tested, which I assume are those referred to as USSSA/NSA for lack of a more specific name. (Does non-approved mean the same as disapproved?).
__________________
Officiating takes more than OJT.
It's not our jobs to invent rulings to fit our personal idea of what should and should not be.
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old Wed Feb 17, 2010, 06:51pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: The Land Of The Free and The Home Of The Brave (MD/DE)
Posts: 6,425
Quote:
Originally Posted by AtlUmpSteve View Post
So now, it appears the only outs are for bats that have become illegal by use.
Please explain.
__________________
Officiating takes more than OJT.
It's not our jobs to invent rulings to fit our personal idea of what should and should not be.
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old Wed Feb 17, 2010, 07:43pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: USA
Posts: 14,565
Quote:
Originally Posted by CecilOne View Post
Please explain.
Steve means that "illegal" bats are previously legal bats that have become illegal due to the use or abuse of the bat.

For example, a legal bat which has dented, bent, creased, cracked, been damaged in any way that made the surface of the taper or barrel something other than smooth (like a discernable scratch), the end cap pop off, etc.
__________________
The bat issue in softball is as much about liability, insurance and litigation as it is about competition, inflated egos and softball.
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old Thu Feb 18, 2010, 09:16am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: The Land Of The Free and The Home Of The Brave (MD/DE)
Posts: 6,425
Quote:
Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA View Post
Steve means that "illegal" bats are previously legal bats that have become illegal due to the use or abuse of the bat.

For example, a legal bat which has dented, bent, creased, cracked, been damaged in any way that made the surface of the taper or barrel something other than smooth (like a discernable scratch), the end cap pop off, etc.
Isn't that "altered"?
__________________
Officiating takes more than OJT.
It's not our jobs to invent rulings to fit our personal idea of what should and should not be.
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old Thu Feb 18, 2010, 11:00am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Posts: 1,640
I always took "altered" to mean the bat was purposely tampered with the express intent to change its charateristics, not damage or wear that can occur from normal usage.

In regard to the clarification of R/S #36- the "Ruling" posted on the ASA site might be more "clarifying" if they hadn't omitted the "Play" that apparently should precede it!
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old Thu Feb 18, 2010, 11:29am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: The Land Of The Free and The Home Of The Brave (MD/DE)
Posts: 6,425
Quote:
Originally Posted by BretMan View Post
I always took "altered" to mean the bat was purposely tampered with the express intent to change its charateristics, not damage or wear that can occur from normal usage.
The definition of altered bat just says legal bat physically changed.
No mention of purpose, intent, or why.
__________________
Officiating takes more than OJT.
It's not our jobs to invent rulings to fit our personal idea of what should and should not be.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
April ASA Rules and Clarifications SRW Softball 10 Tue Apr 07, 2009 07:50pm
ASA Clarifications IRISHMAFIA Softball 5 Fri Jul 06, 2007 03:40pm
New Ump - Rules Clarifications kyleflan Softball 5 Tue Jun 26, 2007 03:27pm
Some Clarifications PYRef Basketball 10 Mon Nov 27, 2006 11:18am
New Fed "Clarifications" mick Basketball 56 Thu Oct 30, 2003 10:28am


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:58pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1