Watching 10U - BR to 3rd!

[KJUmp]

OK, in agreement that ASA 8.3 does not tell us specifically what is the legal order of touching bases as does NCAA and FED, and would have been wrong in applying it to mb's sitch in the OP.

That being the case, what instance would we call a runner out (under 8.3.D) for running the bases in reverse order to either....(1) confuse the defense
or (2) make a travesty of the game?

[txtrooper]

George Hancock and every softball player after him knew or knows that softball bases are ran in order of 1ST, 2ND, 3RD and then home plate. In the referenced post, running to third could be judged a travesty or ridiculous representation of what a runner is supposed to do after becoming a batter runner. I would apply it to the situation under the referenced rule.

IRISH, as Umpires, do we not have a liability to insure the safety of the game? I would be willing to bet that any reasonable umpire would not allow a infielder to participate in a fastpitch softball game without a glove. I would reference Rule 10.1 and state that if ASA intends for us to enforce the helmet chin strap rule, then they would support an umpire’s decision to not allow an infielder to play w/o a glove.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by txtrooper

George Hancock and every softball player after him knew or knows that softball bases are ran in order of 1ST, 2ND, 3RD and then home plate. In the referenced post, running to third could be judged a travesty or ridiculous representation of what a runner is supposed to do after becoming a batter runner. I would apply it to the situation under the referenced rule.

As previously stated, I understand and agree that the correct order is 1,2,3,4 and all ruling should take that in consideration.

IRISH, as Umpires, do we not have a liability to insure the safety of the game? I would be willing to bet that any reasonable umpire would not allow a infielder to participate in a fastpitch softball game without a glove. I would reference Rule 10.1 and state that if ASA intends for us to enforce the helmet chin strap rule, then they would support an umpire’s decision to not allow an infielder to play w/o a glove.

And you are going to lose the subsequent protest. You are there to officiate the game under the rules to which the teams agreed to play. As noted, this and the helmet strap rule are specifically covered in the rules which negates the umpires ability to use the god rule.

[txtrooper]

The first paragraph of my last post was for KJ.

ASA Rule 3, Sec 4 states: A glove/mitt may be worn by any player (within prescribed dimensions). It further states that the pitchers glove may be solid or multicolored as long as it is not the color of the ball.

I would argue that the foreword slash between glove/mitt means one or the other. This rule allows for the option of wearing a glove or mitt, not that the glove is optional.

Wilkipedia.org states that the most common use of the slash is to replace the hyphen or en dash to make clear a strong joint between words or phrases, such as "the Hemingway/Faulkner generation". It is used to represent the concept "or", especially in instruction books. This is my final resting case on the glove issue.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by txtrooper

The first paragraph of my last post was for KJ.

ASA Rule 3, Sec 4 states: A glove/mitt may be worn by any player (within prescribed dimensions). It further states that the pitchers glove may be solid or multicolored as long as it is not the color of the ball.

I would argue that the foreword slash between glove/mitt means one or the other. This rule allows for the option of wearing a glove or mitt, not that the glove is optional.

The rules clearly state when any piece of equipment is required. A glove is not one of them, slash, backslash or even a colon.

And, yes, it is a no brainer, but so is wearing a mask when catching. Yet that is not only required by rule, but the specific type of mask is defined.

Wilkipedia.org states that the most common use of the slash is to replace the hyphen or en dash to make clear a strong joint between words or phrases, such as "the Hemingway/Faulkner generation". It is used to represent the concept "or", especially in instruction books. This is my final resting case on the glove issue.

Citing Wikipedia is not an advantage to any argument

[txtrooper]

The glove size is also specified in the rules. Page 169 of the safety awareness guide clearly says glove or mitt. The reason it is written as it is was to eliminate any confusion between the glove and mitt, which was previously illegal to wear. The safety guide says the ASA glove rule now allows any player to wear a glove or mitt at any position. The guide says the glove shall not exceed specifications within the rule, which indicates that the glove shall be worn. Am I getting anywhere with this or has this horse been beet to death on here before?

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by txtrooper

The glove size is also specified in the rules. Page 169 of the safety awareness guide clearly says glove or mitt. The reason it is written as it is was to eliminate any confusion between the glove and mitt, which was previously illegal to wear. The safety guide says the ASA glove rule now allows any player to wear a glove or mitt at any position. The guide says the glove shall not exceed specifications within the rule, which indicates that the glove shall be worn. Am I getting anywhere with this or has this horse been beet to death on here before?

It has been beaten to death, but there is no indication the glove "SHALL" be worn anywhere within the ASA rules.

My posts have all been accurate. You can try to justify this all you want, but the rules simply do not support your stance. It seems you are attempting to force the allowance of a mitt or glove at any defensive position into a mandate that a glove be worn.

[celebur]

Originally Posted by txtrooper

ASA Rule 3, Sec 4 states: A glove/mitt may be worn by any player (within prescribed dimensions). It further states that the pitchers glove may be solid or multicolored as long as it is not the color of the ball.

I would argue that the foreword slash between glove/mitt means one or the other. This rule allows for the option of wearing a glove or mitt, not that the glove is optional.

I would agree with "/" meaning "or", but the sentence still doesn't mean what you say it does. Compare:

A glove or mitt may be worn by any player.

A glove or mitt must be worn by any player.

You seem to be interpreting "may" as "must".

[txtrooper]

Originally Posted by celebur

I would agree with "/" meaning "or", but the sentence still doesn't mean what you say it does. Compare:

A glove or mitt may be worn by any player.

A glove or mitt must be worn by any player.

You seem to be interpreting "may" as "must".

So what would you do if a the catcher comes to the catchers box w/o a glove or the pitcher to the pitchers plate w/o a glove?

Review page 169 of your ASA Manuel. The Safety Awarness Guide. The top of the page says:

Basic Softball Equipment an Recomendations. Within the first paragraph of this section it states. The following provides a general outline of ASA's official rules concerning mandatory equipment to be used in ASA championship play. Glove is one of those pieces of equipment covered under this section. I would question any umpire who does not take the entire game and rule set into consideration, along with the ability to apply good old common sense.

[celebur]

Originally Posted by txtrooper

So what would you do if a the catcher comes to the catchers box w/o a glove or the pitcher to the pitchers plate w/o a glove?

Review page 169 of your ASA Manuel. The Safety Awarness Guide. The top of the page says:

Basic Softball Equipment an Recomendations. Within the first paragraph of this section it states. The following provides a general outline of ASA's official rules concerning mandatory equipment to be used in ASA championship play. Glove is one of those pieces of equipment covered under this section. I would question any umpire who does not take the entire game and rule set into consideration, along with the ability to apply good old common sense.

This is completely irrelevant to the point that the literal wording of the rule does not require the wearing of a glove/mitt.

[KJUmp]

Originally Posted by KJUmp

OK, in agreement that ASA 8.3 does not tell us specifically what is the legal order of touching bases as does NCAA and FED, and would have been wrong in applying it to mb's sitch in the OP.

That being the case, what instance would we call a runner out (under 8.3.D) for running the bases in reverse order to either....(1) confuse the defense
or (2) make a travesty of the game?

So again, I'll ask the question, under what circumstances would/could a runner be called out under (8.3.D) for running the bases in reverse order?

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by KJUmp

So again, I'll ask the question, under what circumstances would/could a runner be called out under (8.3.D) for running the bases in reverse order?

The rule was put into baseball's code after a player stole second, and then on the next pitch stole first, and then stole 2nd again later. There was no rule to call him out for that, but they decided it was a mockery of the game, and added the rule. I'm assuming softball inherited that rule from them.