2012-13 NCAA Rule Changes

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by Skahtboi

RULES CHANGES FOR 2012-13 SOFTBALL

Rule 2.1 Backstop. A backstop is required. …When the backstop is wood, cement or brick, it is strongly recommended that it be padded from dugout to dugout beginning no higher than one foot off the ground and extending to the top of the wood, cement or brick or six feet from the ground, whichever is shorter. Padding is required by the 2016 season.

ationale: Student-athlete safety. Padding is important because play often occurs at or near the backstop.

Still do not understand why if this is a safety issue, any school would need five years to get pads on their fences/backstops/walls

3.2. Ball. (Affects 15.6 also.)

3.2.2 The home host team shall be responsible for providing a minimum of five twelve game balls of the same specifications and manufacturer. Each game shall begin with two new game balls (one rubbed by each team, so the manufacturer’s gloss is removed) and three ten additional (new or game quality) balls.

Rationale: Expedite time for ball to be returned to play because more are available.

I suspect there is some punctuation missing here, but if they are going to offer a range, why note a "minimum".

Note 2 Uniformed team personnel (including players) may not be outside team areas for scouting purposes.

So what is to stop a team from carrying someone not in uniform for this purpose? While I agree with the issue, they probably could have done without the "uniformed" part assuming A/V personnel are not considered "team personnel".

6.8 Delayed Dead Ball. (Affects 12.20 also.)

New 6.8.6 Base runner leaving a base prior to release of the pitch.

Rationale: Changes the effect from immediate dead ball to delayed dead ball in order to advantage the defense.

12.20 Leading Off Base.

EFFECT—The ball is dead, "No Pitch" is declared, and the offending base runner(s) is out. Each other base runner must return to the base legally occupied at the time of the pitch. Delayed dead ball is signaled. At the conclusion of the play, the coach of the defensive team shall have the option of taking the result of the play or "No Pitch" is declared and the batter is returned to the batter’s box. In addition, the offending base runner(s) is out, each other base runner must return to the base occupied at the time of the pitch.

Rationale: Allows the offended team to choose whether or not to take the results of the play or the traditional result for leaving a base early.

Still not big on this change, but someone needs to explain the wording to me. The effect is dead ball with "No Pitch" and the offending runner(S) is out. Then it notes it is DDB and an option being offered.

To start, is seems there is an insinuation that more than one runner may be called out. That would be interesting.

Maybe they need to drop the first two sentences. And, just out of curiosity, how will a coach differentiate the call from an IP or OBS?

9.4.2 Fielder Obstruction.

New 9.4.2.3

A fielder shall not position herself in the runner’s line of vision to intentionally prohibit her from seeing the first touch of a fly ball.

Rationale- Relocation of current rule (9.4.2.5) with more appropriate effect to increase the penalty from a warning to potential of an awarded base.

It should be interesting to see how the umpire determines intent here. I can see some OOO assuming an IF heading toward the OF on a fly ball to be doing this intentionally. Of course, this shouldn't happen if the umpire pays attention to the direction which will probably be offered. OTOH, the base runner has a minimum of two coaches to offer direction.

11.16 Hit Batter.

New 11.16.1

Note 1 If the pitch is in the batter’s box, the batter is not required to make an attempt to get out of the way.

11.16.2.1 The batter made no attempt to avoid the pitch or obviously tried to get hit by the pitch.

Rationale: Penalizes the pitcher whose pitch is in the batter’s box when it hits the batter by removing the requirement that the batter attempt to avoid the pitch

Don Baylor and Ron Hunt just filed lawsuits against the NCAA for gender descrimination and insist on being allowed to play some college softball.

[Skahtboi]

6.8 and 12.20 are totally messed up if you ask me. The whole concept. What they have done is now do exactly what rules are meant to keep happening, and that is giving one team an advantage over the other.

Frequently, leaving the base early is a misstep in timing. Rather than just punishing the infraction, now, we are punishing potentially the offender and other player or two.

Furthermore, did the NCAA rule gurus consider the fact that many pitchers can change up their arm speed, or delivery style, in an attempt to fool the runners and gain multiple outs via this rule where in the past they would have just gotten one? This shows, IMO, a lack of foresight by the rule makers.

[Skahtboi]

I can also see the change to 9.4.2 being problematic, as you have already pointed out, Mike.

[CecilOne]

Just posting to bring this topic back to the top.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by CecilOne

Just posting to bring this topic back to the top.

Okay, now that you have brought this back to the top, what are you going to do with it?

[NCASAUmp]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Okay, now that you have brought this back to the top, what are you going to do with it?

That's what she said?


Sorry, I couldn't resist! Too easy!

[IRISHMAFIA]

11.16 Hit Batter.
New 11.16.1

Note 1 If the pitch is in the batter’s box, the batter is not required to make an attempt to get out of the way.

11.16.2.1 The batter made no attempt to avoid the pitch or obviously tried to get hit by the pitch.

Rationale: Penalizes the pitcher whose pitch is in the batter’s box when it hits the batter by removing the requirement that the batter attempt to avoid the pitch

Thinking about this, I guess what they are saying is that the BB belongs to the batter and the pitcher shouldn't throw the ball into it.

Well, if that is the case, shouldn't the area between the batter's boxes over the plate belong to the pitcher? And if the pitch is not allowed to hit the batter in the box, shouldn't the batter not be allowed to hit the pitch over the plate?

[txtrooper]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Thinking about this, I guess what they are saying is that the BB belongs to the batter and the pitcher shouldn't throw the ball into it.

Well, if that is the case, shouldn't the area between the batter's boxes over the plate belong to the pitcher? And it the pitch is not allowed to hit the batter in the box, shouldn't the batter not be allowed to hit the pitch over the plate?

Irish, that is a proposal for next year!

[Andy]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Thinking about this, I guess what they are saying is that the BB belongs to the batter and the pitcher shouldn't throw the ball into it.

Well, if that is the case, shouldn't the area between the batter's boxes over the plate belong to the pitcher? And if the pitch is not allowed to hit the batter in the box, shouldn't the batter not be allowed to hit the pitch over the plate?

SHHHHH! You know that NCAA rules are made by the coaches and one of them may see this and think it makes sense!

[CecilOne]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Okay, now that you have brought this back to the top, what are you going to do with it?

I guess I don't have to answer any more, but partly for the above responses and partly so I could find quickly to refresh my memory.

[KJUmp]

Originally Posted by Skahtboi

6.8 and 12.20 are totally messed up if you ask me. The whole concept. What they have done is now do exactly what rules are meant to keep happening, and that is giving one team an advantage over the other.

Frequently, leaving the base early is a misstep in timing. Rather than just punishing the infraction, now, we are punishing potentially the offender and other player or two.

Furthermore, did the NCAA rule gurus consider the fact that many pitchers can change up their arm speed, or delivery style, in an attempt to fool the runners and gain multiple outs via this rule where in the past they would have just gotten one? This shows, IMO, a lack of foresight by the rule makers.

They can't, defense is not going to get one out for LBR and a second out via the batter making an out on the same play.
12.20.2 Notes, P.151.

[EsqUmp]

Originally Posted by KJUmp

They can't, defense is not going to get one out for LBR and a second out via the batter making an out on the same play.
12.20.2 Notes, P.151.

The defense will decline the penalty and take the result of the play if the batter hits into a double play, for example.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by EsqUmp

The defense will decline the penalty and take the result of the play if the batter hits into a double play, for example.

That will be the interesting part. Taking the deuce is most likely, but not absolute. If a run scores on the play, especially after 6.5 innings, accepting the traditional penalty may be more prudent depending on the game and circumstance.

[KJUmp]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

That will be the interesting part. Taking the deuce is most likely, but not absolute. If a run scores on the play, especially after 6.5 innings, accepting the traditional penalty may be more prudent depending on the game and circumstance.

Agree. I can think of any number of game situations where factors such as inning, score, runners on base, who the offense has at bat, etc. affect the DC's decision to accept the result of the play or the traditional penalty.

[CecilOne]

Originally Posted by KJUmp

Agree. I can think of any number of game situations where factors such as inning, score, runners on base, who the offense has at bat, etc. affect the DC's decision to accept the result of the play or the traditional penalty.

And that's why it's an option rather than a prescribed alternative.