You are sadly misinformed if you think anyone of softball intelligence used this term as a legal method of pitching.

Yeah, so did Mike Candrea for two games and an ejection and then, like any intelligent coach, realized that it was their responsibility to have pitchers than can throw legally and the umpires were going to do what they were told.

And this is nothing new. The coaches were the ones complaining about the lack of IPs called. The NCAA softball program is coach-driven, so none of them really have a valid complaint for an umpire doing the job for which they were hired.

It isn't the NCAA's, (they do not included ILP in their team/conference scoring summary), but the 2010 Seasonal Statistics from the Syracuse Univeristy Athletic Dept.



The Big East uses BK (balk) instead of ILP (NCAA designation for an Illegal Pitch).

Leap and Drap phrase used in FED rules for years
 

The FED rules for years described a legal pitch using the wording leap and drag to describe a legal pitch where the pitcher pushes off (leap) from the plate while maintaining foot contact with the ground (and drag). So are you now calling FED stupid.

Interesting to see that you cannot support your statement that this umpire crew called just 3 illegal pitches over the entire season.

And BTW, Syracuse will go farther in the NCAAs this year than your Blue Hens will go in the next ten years.

[QUOTE=EdJW;677090]Leap and drag is the term long used to describe a moving forward from the pitcher's plate while dragging the pivot foot. I'm surprised you don't know this. But, perhaps you do know this and are just playing word games.

(snip)QUOTE]

I wasn't aware NFHS is using that expression.

But be that as it may, are you saying that:

1)
It IS legal for an NCAA pitcher to have both feet off the ground at the same time?
2)
The pitcher wasn't leaping?

Your word, not mine. BTW, do you have any idea how rules are created? This comment is not the wording used by NFHS.

I never made such a statement, but you know that and as usual, follow your method of just continuing to lie to support any argument you choose to make.

And I care about BJ and her weak program? I have no association with the UD, so why would I care?

toe down
 

when pushing off the rubber, most umps will not inject themselves in the game as long as the toe of the pitcher is down. if this call is totally enforced 90 percent of all college pitchers are going to be called illegal and the game is going to be about umps not players.

No its not. It is going to be about players and coaches who are incapable or unwilling to play a game by the predetermined rules.

I love people who "think" the umpire is trying to make the game about themselves. Here's a question. Why?

Are they going to get better and/or more assignments? No.
Are they going to have their picture plastered across the sports section in a positive manner? No.
Are they going to get a better job or become extremely popular? No.

What an umpire working college ball is going to get by not doing their job is a load of HS games the following year because the assigner will not invite them back the next year.

That is not an accurate statement - and certainly not made by one who umpires college ball. If an umpire - in an NCAA game - sees air between the pitcher's pivot foot and the ground, in excess of 95% of us will call that.

The only terms and definitions that the umpire needs to be aware of are the ones in the rules. As stated in this thread before:

1.73 Leap (Pitcher)
An illegal act in which the pitcher becomes airborne on her initial movement
and push from the pitcher’s plate.

It isn't word games to be precise when dealing with rules enforcement and interpretation. In fact, a lack of precision usually indicates poor knowledge of the rules.

from the letter by Dee Abrahamson concerning illegal pitch calling:

Specifically, umpires are asked to take the approach that a pitch is legal until the pitcher proves otherwise by engaging in any movement not in compliance with the pitching rules. Again, umpires need to enforce the pitching rules and yet, give pitchers the benefit of the doubt if there is any question of legality.

In a game at this level I doubt that the umpires did not "give pitchers the benefit of the doubt" and that each illegal pitch was called because the umpire specifically saw a violation.

The old injecting themselves into the game argument, coupled with the "toe pointing down" fallacy. I see no mention of the direction that the toe is pointing in the NCAA definition of a leap.

• The umpires are a part of the game, they can not inject themselves into it.
• Why is calling an infraction "injecting yourself into the game" when ignoring one isn't?
• IRISHMAFIA is correct - many umpires who take their jobs seriously and enforce the rules many times suffer for it. Not because there is anything wrong or lacking in their rules knowledge, mechanics, or professionalism - simply because some find the rules an unfortunate impediment to winning at all costs.

It is an affront to all of the pitchers who pitch legally and who work hard to succeed for those who cheat to avoid penalty. I thought this is what the umpires job entailed - fair application of ALL rules so that the playing field is leveled.

3 IP's were called on the Syracuse pitcher.
Big East stats show that she led the conference in IP's this season (13). Syracuse as a team led big East in IP's for the season with 16; followed by St.John's (12) and Louisville (11).

FYI....the 1st base umpire who you feel doesn't know what an NCAA IP looks like, worked both the Regionals & SuperRegionals last year, and the WCWS in 2006&2007.

What do you do...just pick a number out of the air and post it as a fact???
There were a total of 2 IP's called in the Louisville/Syracuse game.
The same Syracuse pitcher (Caira) who had 3 called on the in the DePaul game.

KJ, sorry, but you are definitely incorrect. Following the whole game and the live blog, I counted 9. Perhaps 2 were called strikes and then changed, but if you listened to the announcers/watched the crew, there were many more that were called balls and therefore might have went unnoticed by those who were not looking specifically for them.

Another point of interest is that NCAA boxscores do not accurate track ALL illegal pitch calls. Since they use a standardized stats program that is based on baseball (modified just slightly to grasp the nuances of DP/FLEX versus the baseball DH rule), they only track cases where runners advance, and then only to explain the advance. That is why they still use BK (balk) in the box scores.

KJ, like I, were using the box scores as a reference. Considering these are officia statsl, you would think their documentation would be accurate. After all, this IS the NCAA, not some chicken **** travel ball outfit :rolleyes:

Of course, why would such a large and statistically-heavy organization not have the proper programs? The NCAA scoring scheme uses ILP, not BK as their given indicator. Programming something to accommodate their game cannot be that difficult or expensive. Dave and Chuck could probably give us better insight to that point.

I guess I should be shamed for using "official" data in my discussion, so, Ed, you must be right concerning the number. However, I'd be willing to bet the ratio of ILPs and BKs are relatively the same.

And, again, a leap IS an illegal pitch and your pitcher knows it, as does the coach. As noted elsewhere, the argument since Day One has not been legal versus illegal, but the fact they are being called.

And I will remain behind these umpires, I know they are good and have all the confidence in the world on their performance.

I should have cited my information source....the box score for the each game... sloppy posting on my part.
I do not concern myself with what announcers say. Most of the time they are wrong, or at the least, not 100% accurate in what they are saying.
If I'm incorrect, then the official NCAA box score for the game is incorrect also. Go to the Big East Conference website and check the box scores for both games yourself.
Like Irish, I think that the box score would be pretty accurate. As he said, "this IS the NCAA." An I'd like to add, we are talking the conference tournament. I would suspect that they have more than the usual compliment of stats people on hand than they would at a regular season game.
AtlUmpSteve, provides information on how the stat is tracked/recorded that I was not aware of. Could there be a difference of 8 IP'S? Well after reading his post, yes, I guess there could.
However, I just find it odd, that because you "counted 9", that's correct. I cite the official box score (as did Irish) to support my post, and I'm "definitely wrong."