|
|||
No Change in ASA Bat Standards
__________________
The bat issue in softball is as much about liability, insurance and litigation as it is about competition, inflated egos and softball. |
|
|||
Quote:
Nothing has changed that much except they will be using the 52/300 ball exclusively, but will still be as 98mph max on BES. Not sure, but I think they are changing the replicated bat speed due to the numbers they discovered during last year's on field testing.
__________________
The bat issue in softball is as much about liability, insurance and litigation as it is about competition, inflated egos and softball. |
|
|||
thats what I got out of it as well. (a few 'hotter' bats may now pass the standard)
|
|
|||
The change (the way KR explained it in WAX when I asked why the new logo) is due to the bat swing speed being lowered from 85 mph to 80mph after extensive testing. The ball speed of 98 won't change, therefore the bats can be a tad hotter now to make up the difference.
Surprising to me as well that CC didn't pull the trigger. Perhaps for 2014...
__________________
We see with our eyes. Fans and parents see with their hearts. |
|
|||
Quote:
Quote:
However, that was a prospective date previously noted for potentionally going exclusively to the 52/300
__________________
The bat issue in softball is as much about liability, insurance and litigation as it is about competition, inflated egos and softball. |
|
|||
__________________
The bat issue in softball is as much about liability, insurance and litigation as it is about competition, inflated egos and softball. |
|
|||
Quote:
__________________
We see with our eyes. Fans and parents see with their hearts. |
|
|||
Quote:
For example, ASA does try to give manufacturer's an amount of time to sell down inventories. Contrary to some belief out there, the manufacturers are pretty much kept in the loop. If they ever say they got screwed by ASA, it was probably because someone wasn't listening. For example, when the discussion of the 52/275, 52/300 ball became serious in committee, one of the first questions was directed toward the mfg. reps as to how long it would take to exhaust their inventory of 44/375 to which a couple immediately responded "18 months". When that was stated, you could pretty much bet the house that the 52/300 would not be mandated for at least two years. Looks like it is going to be longer, but I understand that is because the ETCC wanted more "science" behind any move in that direction. OTOH, when facemasks became mandatory for batting helmets, on mfg. rep stood up in the ETCC meeting and stated that they wanted ASA to back off the mandate for a year because they were not ready. The chair asked other reps if their companies were prepared and all stated they were and some even had the NOCSAE approved masks on the shelf already. The rep then stated they needed more time because THEY wanted to manufacture their mask to a safety level higher than the standard. That didn't work and the ASA moved ahead with the rule. I can only think that the FP game is remaining the same because there will be no change in the ball. Meanwhile, maybe they are waiting to "pull the trigger" based upon how many 2000/2004 certified bats are being offered for the new testing. I believe under the plan, any model not offered for testing will be added to the non-approved list and that really doesn't need to be any longer than it is.
__________________
The bat issue in softball is as much about liability, insurance and litigation as it is about competition, inflated egos and softball. |
|
|||
Quote:
didn't KR mention something about Utrip bat standards making a huge change in 2013? Something like 'all utrip bats will have to have the 2013 utrip stamp, and that any older bats would not be legal or grandfathered in' Did I hear that correctly? (or was I dreaming of another 'Wild Bill' story! |
|
|||
Quote:
Except I'm sort of confused by the way the dates are noted on here.
__________________
The bat issue in softball is as much about liability, insurance and litigation as it is about competition, inflated egos and softball. Last edited by IRISHMAFIA; Sat Jul 07, 2012 at 09:03pm. |
|
|||
A lot of talk for something that DIDN'T change. It was good for ASA to give us a 1/2 notice for something that ISN'T changing. That way I can prep for the 2013 test...
__________________
Kill the Clones. Let God sort them out. No one likes an OOJ (Over-officious jerk). Realistic officiating does the sport good. |
Bookmarks |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Pole Vault standards set incorrectly | Altor | Track & Field | 4 | Mon May 31, 2010 08:40am |
Double Standards are Fun! | DonInKansas | Basketball | 7 | Tue Mar 11, 2008 09:55am |
4-15-4d change | just another ref | Basketball | 15 | Tue Sep 11, 2007 01:48am |
NF announces new referee uniform standards | Mark Padgett | Basketball | 6 | Mon Aug 25, 2003 01:16pm |
Low Standards | hab_in_exile | Football | 14 | Thu Feb 20, 2003 05:37pm |