The Official Forum - NCAA considers changing IP penalty

The Official Forum (https://forum.officiating.com/)

- Softball (https://forum.officiating.com/softball/)

- - NCAA considers changing IP penalty (https://forum.officiating.com/softball/58894-ncaa-considers-changing-ip-penalty.html)

NCAA considers changing IP penalty

Interesting article.

Posted under Latest News at NCAA.org

Softball rules panel considers changing illegal-pitch penalty
By Greg Johnson
NCAA.org

The NCAA Softball Rules Committee used its annual meeting last month to discuss the possibly changing the penalties for illegal pitches.

The issue was in the limelight for most of the season but attracted even greater attention at the 2010 Women's College World Series when numerous illegal-pitch violations were called. Pitchers are not allowed to leap (have both feet off the ground) while delivering [a] pitch-and greater enforcement of the longstanding rule was apparent at all three softball national championships.

Currently, when an illegal pitch is called, a ball is called on the batter and any base runners advance one base. That is consistent among softball rules for international, collegiate, and recreational play.

The committee discussed lessening the penalty, though, by allowing base runners to advance only after the team's fifth illegal pitch of the game. The change could have unattended consequences, however, since the "leap" is only one of several ways a pitch can be ruled illegal.

"There was some concern that awarding a ball on the count and allowing a base to the runners was too much of a game changing effect," said Ken Eriksen, committee chair and softball coach at South Florida.

Since the WCWS is the pinnacle of the collegiate game-and the most widely publicized games because of ESPN's extensive coverage-the issue spawned varied opinions, from changing the penalty to ramping up enforcement and making that enforcement more consistent throughout the regular season.

"In certain parts of the country, the rule was called consistently," said Eriksen, who is an assistant coach for Team USA, which one its seventh straight world championship last week. 'We've given everyone an opportunity to change and we've told the coaches that it is time to change. But as it turned out, it appeared to come down heavier because people saw it called in the Women's College World Series.

"The bottom line is at all levels, we need to do a better job of teaching pitchers the correct mechanics."

I was told by my NFHS contacts that a similar discussion was held in June by the NFHS Softball Rules Committee. The considerations suggested that if the illegal pitch penalty was simply a ball on the batter, and no awarded bases to the baserunner(s), then 1) it would be a more appropriate penalty, since the baserunners were not deceived (compared to a baseball balk) and should not be rewarded by the pitcher's mistake, and 2) it might be called more regularly and consistently by umpires that might currently hesitate, afraid to make impact calls.

I wasn't advised how close that may have come to passing as a rule change; was simply advised it was discussed at substantial length.

Quote:

Originally Posted by KJUmp (Post 689554)

What a thought! Teaching the pitcher to pitch correctly instead of worrying about the penalty for getting caught cheating. What will this world come to next?

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

I have no problem changing the effect, but if an IP is an IP the first time out, what makes "5" a magic number?

How about just a ball on the batter, and upon the fifth called, the HC is ejected and on the 10th the game is forfeited?

Quote:

Originally Posted by AtlUmpSteve (Post 689558)

If I remember correctly, this isn't the first time the discussion about eliminating the base award has been raised.

Quote:

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA (Post 689561)

If I remember correctly, this isn't the first time the discussion about eliminating the base award has been raised.

Probably not; not sure about NFHS, but I believe it has been proposed (and roundly poo-poo'd) in ASA before.

I reminded my contact that similar "logic" was used years ago when NFHS realized their "automatic appeal" (umpires were to call out runners that left early on a caught fly ball or missed a base, without an appeal being made) was being ignored by a large number of umpires who refused to notice unless it was a gross miss. Those umpires (the ones that would admit it) theorized that it wasn't their responsibility to enforce a rule they didn't agree with, because 1) it should be an appeal by the defense, even if the NFHS rules said it wasn't, and 2) it would be an "impact call". The nonenforcement forced NFHS to make it an appeal again, as the only means to get any consistency.

Quote:

Originally Posted by AtlUmpSteve (Post 689566)

Same "logic" as to the Federation's automatic base award on an OBS call. Lot of young ladies got some seriously bruised legs blocking 1B when they figured out the umpires were not going to make the OBS call and give the runner a base unearned.

I agree with just a ball on the batter. It's not a balk where the pitcher is trying to decieve runner. I also agree with Irish,what makes 5 the number? Call them until they realize it's not going to be tolerated and a violation of the rules. If they want it changed let them duke it out with NCAA NFHS ASA.

Quote:

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA (Post 689560)

How about just a ball on the batter, and upon the fifth called, the HC is ejected and on the 10th the game is forfeited?

Hey, I could get some of my double headers over a lot quicker! :D

Quote:

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA (Post 689560)

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.

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.

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! :cool:

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by topper (Post 689919)

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?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crabby_Bob (Post 689989)

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.

Quote:

Originally Posted by topper (Post 689995)

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.