NCAA considers changing IP penalty

[CelticNHBlue]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Question is, NCAA is now in the middle of a two-year rule book period, so can they change during an off-year?

Yes, the rules committee still meets and, if a change is considered significant enough to warrant release in an 'off' year, the change can still be made. The rule(s) change(s) will be distributed as an addendum to the current (2-year) rule book.

[topper]

Changing the penalty to just a ball on the batter works for me. As long as the coaches know that they can expect more IPs called per game.

Changing the pitching rule would be a better option where the leap is concerned. Specifically stating that a pitcher can leap as long as they aren't higher than the top of the pitcher's plate would help. The plate, by rule, is supposed to be flush with the surrounding ground anyway. I think some of the air umpires see below the feet is due to the raised plate. So are the pitchers, the fields, or both violating the rule book?

Personally, I like the ISF rules concerning the feet.

[Skahtboi]

Hmm....rather than change the penalty, why not change the rule? If they are not wanting the IP called, then allow the leap, the crow-hop and stepping outside the 24 inch lane. Seems to me that would be easier!

Either that, or just eliminate the base award altogether, with no magic number for the base award to kick in.

Gotta admit, though, I like Mike's idea of tossing the coach and forfeiting the game if it continues!

[MD Longhorn]

I know how to stop it. 4 base award, 1st offense. I guarantee you the pitchers stop leaping then.

[Crabby_Bob]

Originally Posted by topper

Changing the penalty to just a ball on the batter works for me. As long as the coaches know that they can expect more IPs called per game.

Not sure why coaches should expect more IPs called if the penalty is changed.

I disagree with changing the penalty to just a ball to the batter. Answer this question: What would be the largest number of consecutive IPs thrown by a pitcher before a run scores? Under current rules, the answer is six, the run scores on the seventh. If the penalty is a ball only, the answer would be 15. How many chances does the pitcher need to get it right?

[topper]

Originally Posted by Crabby_Bob

Not sure why coaches should expect more IPs called if the penalty is changed.

Because the many umpires who are afraid to call IPs that advance runners or score runs will have less to be afraid of.

[MigoP]

Originally Posted by topper

Because the many umpires who are afraid to call IPs that advance runners or score runs will have less to be afraid of.

Very good answer. She doesn't get chances, she continues to violate until she complies with the rule. There are no limits on the amount of rule violations you can commit. Do as many as you like, but understand we will call them all. Most umps won't make the call because of the ramifacations not just from the coaches, but from their fellow umpires who are afraid to make the call. Too many old school umps still consider FP softball a girls rec sport. It's not and it's coming of age with more TV exposure. Softball umpires will now start to be scrutinized more heavily as their counterparts in baseball are. Softball is growing in leaps and bounds now. We better be ready to take on the challenge of changing the mentality of the sport from 10 years ago. Slow pitch is gone, fast pitch is here to stay.

[Skahtboi]

Originally Posted by MigoP

Very good answer. She doesn't get chances, she continues to violate until she complies with the rule. There are no limits on the amount of rule violations you can commit. Do as many as you like, but understand we will call them all. Most umps won't make the call because of the ramifacations not just from the coaches, but from their fellow umpires who are afraid to make the call. Too many old school umps still consider FP softball a girls rec sport. It's not and it's coming of age with more TV exposure. Softball umpires will now start to be scrutinized more heavily as their counterparts in baseball are. Softball is growing in leaps and bounds now. We better be ready to take on the challenge of changing the mentality of the sport from 10 years ago. Slow pitch is gone, fast pitch is here to stay.

10 years ago??? Son, I have been calling FP for a couple of decades now, and believe me, there was the same emphasis on calling IP's back then as there are now. Odd that the NCAA decides to make a POE on calling IP's, and suddenly the weak minded believe that there is a new movement taking place. This "movement" is as old as the hills.

I have been an advocate of making women's and JO softball pitching rules more in line with men's. This would go a long way in eliminating much of the controversy. However, if a coach driven rule set like NCAA's is going to try to water down the IP rule, then they should just abolish it as it is written altogether. Allow the leap. Allow a step outside of the 24 inch lane. (Oh...but wait. That would ruin those cute little lines the coaches demanded just a couple of years ago.) Allow anything that doesn't technically deceive the batter. That, or leave things as they are and allow us to enforce the rule without a lot of media controversy when it is done. IMO, this past year, there were many IP's that could have been called that weren't.

While I cannot speak for the rest of the country, it appeared that around here NCAA officials were doing a good job of focusing on the IP as per the SUIP directive. Now that the coaches have started to realize just how often their pitcher's are illegal, they once again want to change the rule. I find it odd that one rule can cause such controversy.

[MigoP]

Originally Posted by Skahtboi

10 years ago??? Son, I have been calling FP for a couple of decades now, and believe me, there was the same emphasis on calling IP's back then as there are now. Odd that the NCAA decides to make a POE on calling IP's, and suddenly the weak minded believe that there is a new movement taking place. This "movement" is as old as the hills.

I have been an advocate of making women's and JO softball pitching rules more in line with men's. This would go a long way in eliminating much of the controversy. However, if a coach driven rule set like NCAA's is going to try to water down the IP rule, then they should just abolish it as it is written altogether. Allow the leap. Allow a step outside of the 24 inch lane. (Oh...but wait. That would ruin those cute little lines the coaches demanded just a couple of years ago.) Allow anything that doesn't technically deceive the batter. That, or leave things as they are and allow us to enforce the rule without a lot of media controversy when it is done. IMO, this past year, there were many IP's that could have been called that weren't.

While I cannot speak for the rest of the country, it appeared that around here NCAA officials were doing a good job of focusing on the IP as per the SUIP directive. Now that the coaches have started to realize just how often their pitcher's are illegal, they once again want to change the rule. I find it odd that one rule can cause such controversy.

Can't disagree with that one. But it does bring a question to mind. If the same emphasis was put on IP's decades ago, does that mean umpires have ignored it for decades? Or is it the scrutiny now being put on the situation causing umps to start making the call? If it's been emphasized for 20 years and umpires still aren't making the call you have to wonder how hard it was emphasized, or were umps ignoring the emphasis and calling their own versions. Hmm.

[DNTXUM P]

Changing the penalty to just a ball on the batter works for me. As long as the coaches know that they can expect more IPs called per game.

Coaches should not expect to have more IPs called than before. They should be called the same. Having a lesser penalty should not be a reason to now start calling IPs now

Because the many umpires who are afraid to call IPs that advance runners or score runs will have less to be afraid of

If they are afraid to call IPs, they should not be calling NCAA ball.

[topper]

Originally Posted by DNTXUM P

If they are afraid to call IPs, they should not be calling NCAA ball.

You know I agree, but I think you also know the sad reality.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by DNTXUM P

Coaches should not expect to have more IPs called than before. They should be called the same. Having a lesser penalty should not be a reason to now start calling IPs now

Of course, they should expect more to be called since the purpose of the exercise of reducing the penalty was initiated because umpires would not call every IP because they did not want to incur the wrath of the coach who definitely has more pull via AD with an assignor than does the umpire.

Should it have been that way to start? No, but it is no different than when NFHS changed their OBS rules and appeal procedures.

Rant on!

Look what happened this year when the umpires did start to call the IPs and I'll bet you my last dollar that all still were not called. The result was quite positive in many areas because most pitchers easily adjusted. In the televised regionals, the majority of pitchers were legal and still performed well.

I don't hesitate in my belief that the "big time" NCAA coaches were putting on a show to attempt to intimiate officials and umpires. It may have worked.

Why is it the majority of pitchers could stay legal, and the few who could not seem to be carrying the attention? Did you hear the coaches' complaints? I didn't hear or read of one who claimed the umpires were wrong in their assessment of the pitch, but that they were actually calling it. But the "show" was unbelievable. In interviews, coaches and pitchers were whining about why "all of a sudden" these are called when they weren't all season. What? They expect people to buy that when published game statistics showed many of these comments to be outright lies. The sorry part is that fans suck this **** right up in spite of the facts and, of course, everyone is wrong, but those poor girls on their favorite team.

Even the TH noted how illegal some pitchers were, but bemoaned the fact that the umpires were enforcing the rules. Wow, people employed to officiate a game to maintain a level playing field actually enforcing the predetermined game rules, what a concept!

Rant off!

If they are afraid to call IPs, they should not be calling NCAA ball.

Apparently, with some schools and coaches, that was a job requirement.