ASA Wooden Bats
 

During your pre-game equipment inspection, the team presents a wooden bat that they say they would like to use. It appears to be brand new, and it meets all of the requirements of Rule 3-1 with one exception: no 2000 or 2004 stamp.

Do you allow it?

NCASAUmp:

Why wouldn't you allow it?

MTD, Sr.

Yep. Don't think I've seen any wood bats on the banned bat list. If it says "OFFICIAL SOFTBALL" on it, I'm letting them swing away. I also don't think ASA certifies wood bats so there wouldn't be a stamp on it anyways.

edit to add: Rule 3 -1 makes an exception for wood bats. They don't need an ASA approval stamp to be used.

ASA does, in fact, certify wood bats.

And the 2010 rule book does not state that there are any exceptions to wood bats.

I was going on memory. Apparently they've removed the exception wording in that rule. I still don't think I'm going to stop anybody from using a wood bat if it says "OFFICIAL SOFTBALL" on it.

Perhaps you were thinking of the NFHS exception?

1-5-1-d
...Bats made entirely of wood are permitted and need not bear an ASA mark.

My thoughts on the matter:

I don't think wood bats are any more dangerous than an approved Freak 98. In fact, I think that their performance is typically just above that of an Easton Hammer.

However, the letter of the rule is clear: all bats, regardless of whether they're composite, metal or wood, must meet the qualifications of ASA Rule 3-1. If I think it's pre-2000, it doesn't need the stamp. Otherwise, it must have the stamp.

And since ASA is certifying wooden bats (such as the Viper), I believe that further reinforces the argument that ASA does not view wood bats any differently than composite or metal bats.

I've never done NFHS so I'm not thinking of their rule. I did find where I read it pertaining to ASA rules. http://downloads.asasoftball.com/abo...dated_FAQs.pdf

I came across that same document while looking up something else about bat testing, and that's exactly why I bring this up.

I understand if ASA does not want us to become too concerned with wooden bats, but the rule, as written, does not give us that leeway to make that decision.

I'll also note that this document was last updated in 2003.

I saw that also.

While working a slow pitch tournament a few weeks ago (being played under E class rules for HR purposes), two teams brought the same model wooden bat, model name is Chicago 16" and does have "official softball." Just one slight problem . . . the barrel is 2 5/8.

After a quick web search, it is made by Louisville Slugger, seems they make a 35" and 36" model.

Well, despite the fact that ASA now prohibits the use of bats with dents, that doesn't mean we should stop ringing the bats during the pre-game inspections.

You'd be amazed at what you can still find when you ring the bats these days. Might discover the next Picasso. :D

Hi folks,

I just got back from Prague, where I've worked an ESF (European Softball Fed.) male cup tournament. On monday we had the "bat-control", before competition started. One team showed up with two complete identical bats, however one did not have the requiered stamps from ASA and/or ISF. The other one did actually have them. This was probally due to the fact that the bats were just allowed by ASA and sold longer before they got the certificate. Since in our book the stamps on the bat are requiered, one bat was not allowed, the other was...

If a bat has the stamps, is not on the banned-list, not alltered and is in good shape then there is nothing why it should be banned. Otherwise; confiscate the bat and return it to the team after the competition...

June 2011 ASA Plays & Clarifications
 

Wood Bats:
The question was asked if a wood bat needs to have the ASA certification stamp on it. Rule 3 Section 1A… The official bat…. Must bear either the ASA 2000 Certification Mark or the ASA 2004 Certification Mark…. Rule 3 Section 1A makes no mention of materials so in Championship play a wood bat must have the ASA Certification mark on the bat.

I think it should be noted that they accidentally omitted one important section of the rule. If, in the sole opinion and discretion of the umpire, the wood bat was manufactured prior to 2000 and if tested, would comply with the ASA Bat Performance Standard, it may be allowed.

Again, I'll reiterate my personal opinion that the performance of wood bats is certainly no more dangerous than any other ASA-approved bat. I wonder if ASA will make an exception in November.