The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Softball
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #16 (permalink)  
Old Thu Aug 26, 2010, 08:49am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Sherman, TX
Posts: 4,387
Quote:
Originally Posted by MigoP View Post
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.
__________________
Scott


It's a small world, but I wouldn't want to have to paint it.
Reply With Quote
  #17 (permalink)  
Old Thu Aug 26, 2010, 10:44am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skahtboi View Post
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.
Reply With Quote
  #18 (permalink)  
Old Fri Aug 27, 2010, 11:56pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 23
I don't see them changing it. They don't want good pitching in the game. They want good hitting. They've already moved the pitchers back, not they've done it for the younger levels of play. Giving any advantage to the pitcher does not fit into the direction they have pushed this sport to progress.
Reply With Quote
  #19 (permalink)  
Old Sat Aug 28, 2010, 08:57am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Fremont, NH
Posts: 1,352
I'd favor eliminating the leap as an illegal act. If the men are allowed to leap, the women should be as well.

I'm on the fence about stepping outside the 24" width. Maybe a 30" PP could allow some leeway.

Crowhop should remain an infraction as far as I'm concerned.

I can live either way with a base award. If it's the rule, call it.

I don't golf, but saw recently where someone "grounded his club" and got a penalty. Seemed overly harsh to me, but again I don't play and don't know all those rules. But if it's a rule, and violated, enforce the penalty.
__________________
Ted
USA & NFHS Softball
Reply With Quote
  #20 (permalink)  
Old Tue Aug 31, 2010, 11:16pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 242
Quote:
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


Quote:
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.
Reply With Quote
  #21 (permalink)  
Old Wed Sep 01, 2010, 06:07am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 318
Quote:
Originally Posted by DNTXUM P View Post
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.
Reply With Quote
  #22 (permalink)  
Old Wed Sep 01, 2010, 07:23am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: USA
Posts: 14,565
Quote:
Originally Posted by DNTXUM P View Post
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!

Quote:
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.
__________________
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
Reply

Bookmarks


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
Hypothetical NCAA OT penalty situation bearclause Football 6 Thu Oct 26, 2006 04:27pm
Changing Pitchers lds7199 Baseball 8 Tue May 23, 2006 11:31pm
NCAA PI Penalty Spot floray Football 15 Thu Sep 08, 2005 07:33pm
(NCAA) Penalty for Offensive Pass Interference Ed Hickland Football 3 Sun Sep 28, 2003 10:49am
TECHNICAL PENALTY NCAA rburn22281 Basketball 1 Mon Jan 28, 2002 12:22am


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:30pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1