Observations From First Games of the Season
 

The high school season is finally underway here. Some random thoughts and observations as we start the season:

- What is it with coaches wanting to sit or be outside of the dugouts?

It seems to be epidemic here. Coaches just seem to think that they can plant themselves outside of the dugouts, anywhere in live ball area that they see fit. If they've been around for any length of time, or if they've attended the mandatory state meetings where this has been a point of emphasis, they would have to know by now that this isn't acceptable.

Hardly a game goes by where I don't have to remind a coach that he needs to be in the dugout. My first games this year have been no exception. And why is it that when you tell them this, they act like you're being some kind of hard case and that they've never heard of it before?

Last year, one coach on a bucket was so adamant that he could plant himself anywhere he wanted that he argued it just up to the brink of ejection. I finally had to tell him that he had two choices. Either get in the dugout or he'd no longer be a participant in the game.

- Equally epidemic around here seems to be pitchers who step right onto the pitcher's plate with their hands together. Forget leaps and crow hops. This must be the most frequent illegal pitch that I see.

Same with coaches being out of the dugout, if you call this they are just astonished that it's being called. They've never heard of it before, it's never been called before, they don't understand what she's doing wrong.

So far this year I've seen four different pitchers and each one of them has had issues with not taking the signal with the hands separated.

- A question: Has anyone here ever been in the least bit fooled into thinking a player had the ball in her glove just because her glove had a little bit of green on it?

The glove rules are goofy enough as it is. Every sanctioning body has a different standard and just about all of them have changed or modified the rule several times in the past few years.

The new high school rule has been presented to the coaches in various meetings, covered in preseason literature and been covered as a point of emphasis. So far this year, I have had to address ten players with what NFHS now deems to be an illegal glove- and the season is young!

Fortunately havent had that many problems this year. I did have a game where twice I had to tell the coaches they had to get back in the dugout and keep the gates closed. Also had a coach ticked off because someone threw an out of play ball directly back to the pitcher, she switched balls and I made her switch them back. Coach complained her pitcher didnt like the ball and wanted to know where in the rule book it said she couldnt switch. Told her I couldnt quote the exact rule number but if she went home and read the pitching regulations she would find it.

Before the season started (and whether I agreed or not) the interpretation was very clear after reading the pre-season NFHS guide. For a month of scrimmages and games we 'warned' coaches about this new interpretation and the ramification of it. Then the 'State rules interpreter' came out with a clarification that this was not illegal unless 'the umpire felt it was a distraction to the batter'. So does this now only apply to the pitcher?????

the pre-season guide does not specify this. And I have seen in games where I was 'looking' for 'optic' on gloves during warm up, to warn coaches, when I thought a player had optic writing on the outer side of the glove only to see that it was the ball. So I do see the intent of the new interpretation.

but what are other states, local chapters doing?

Well, that's the thing about NFHS, each association can do whatever they please with the rules.

Personally, I think it is one of the dumbest rules I've heard. I love the people that think there is some major deception going on here, even moreso that people worry about folks being fooled as to whether the ball is in the glove or not. Huh? Does anyone rely on sneaking a peek between the fingers to determine if the player has the ball in the glove or not?

And a distraction? GMAFB! a player can wear an optic yellow uniform, but a small piece of green on the glove is going to provide a distraction. Sounds like this would come from the same people who want to have sunglasses declared illegal. :rolleyes:

My seasonstart here in the Neth's has been postponed for the 3th week in a row. Yesterday it was still snowing!
So how coaches and pitcher will act this year is a big surprise to me.

For that glove with the brands name on it in the same color as the ball written along the index-finger, the rule is clear! It is legal, however I've been fooled several years ago as well.
At one point I thought we had two ball's in the game. Miss Sumeru, F1 for the Dutch national team, has that glove. She knows what she can and may do. Had her glove on the chest and the ball in the bare hand. I saw clearly two balls! However it was the gloves name in optic yellow.

I think, rereading the rules, that stretching ISF rule 3, sec. 4b will forbid the use of this glove...

Rule 3 Sec. 4. GLOVES & MITTS.
Any player may wear a glove, but only the catcher and first baseman may use mitts.
a. No top lacing, webbing, or other device between the thumb and body of the glove or mitt worn by a first baseman or catcher or a glove worn by any fielder, shall be more than 12.7cm (5 in) in length.
b. Gloves worn by any player may be any combination of colors, provided none of the colors (including the lacing) are the color of the ball.
c. Gloves with white, gray, or yellow optic circles on the outside, giving the appearance of a ball, are illegal for all players. (SEE APPENDIX 5 FOR DRAWING AND SPECIFICATIONS)

This is the ISF rule correct?

Here is NFHS and ASA

NFHS Rule 1 section 4 ART. 1 . Gloves/mitts shall:

a. Be a maximum of two colors excluding lacing and manufacturer's logo
colors. Lacing shall not be the color of the ball.

b. Not be entirely optic in color.

c. Not have an optic-colored marking 0n the outside or inside that gives the appearance of the ball.

d. Be permitted to have one American flag not to exceed 2 inches by 3 inches.
e. Not be judged as distracting by the umpire.

ASA Rule 3 section 4 Glove/Mitt

A Glove / Mitt may be worn by any player. The dimensions of any glove / mitt used by any fielder shall not exceed the specifications set forth below ( see drawing and specifications). (Fast Pitch) The Pitcher's glove may be of one solid color or Multicolored as long as the color(s) are not of the ball being used in the game.

Point concerning the gloves
 

The rules involving the coloring of gloves had not changed that much other than to allow for the optic yellow ball.

The manufacturers have KNOWN since day one that placing a color of the ball on the glove was an issue with, just about if not every, softball rules organizations in existence. Yet they continue to manufacture and market gloves that violate the rule and then act stupid, well, let's assume it's an act, when the issue is raised by the consumer.

When this issue comes up on the field and is addressed with the coaches and parents, that needs to be said by someone. I've heard parents complain about how ASA, NFHS, whoever is ruining the game by not allowing certain gloves in the game when, in fact, it is the manufacturers that are blatantly taking advantage of the situation.

And, of course, we all know the real response to the customer is that they purchased a baseball glove for a softball game. :rolleyes:

Yes it is. Here in Holland we play them. There's only one federation, for FP softball, baseball, beeball (a sort of T-ball) and we 're starting with co-ed SP softball.
So when ever I use a rule it's ISF. Most bodies rule-sets are more or less similar.

Strict ball rotation is a good way to upset both the pitcher and coach over what should be a non-issue in most cases. I don't know how far the ball went out of play in this case or how long it took to get it back in; but, most of the time if it just goes out of play or comes back in quickly, I'm not giving the pitcher a new ball so quickly.

Though still applicable to fast-pitch, I believe that ball rotation is a result of slow-pitch, where there is more gamesmanship going on.

Other than making sure that a new ball gets used to start the bottom of the 1st inning if it hadn't already been used, give the pitcher the ball she wants. That's the ball she is more likely to throw strikes with. There is enough to argue over without ball rotation being one of them.

Unless Federation changed the rule, it actually only addresses using the ball until it goes out of play. It doesn't say that the same ball can't still be used after it goes out of play.

With respect to ASA, it is a rules supplement, not even a rule.

You may want to check your rule book.

FED 6-5-2 The pitcher may request the other ball before throwing a warm up pitch by giving the ball in her posession to the plate umpire, the pitcher has now made a choice and must pitch that ball until such time as the ball goes out of play or becomes blocked.

As for ASA it may be a rules supplement but it specifies this is the ball rotation procedure used in championship play. I have always been instructed at any clinic and national clinic to use the ASA ball rotation procedure in any ASA play.

I am fairly strict about ball rotation, even reminding coaches at pre-game not to allow spectators to throw a ball into the field (usually happens anyway :rolleyes: because they don't tell them, until repeated out loud).

The biggest nuisance new rule is reporting subs to the head coach. :(
I'm hoping the interpretation is "if he/she should have heard" and the scorekeeper or assistant being a communicator to the head coach. :rolleyes:

That's an easy one to me. I announce all subs verbally and loud by saying Coach ( I look to score keeper to make sure they are looking) # -- for # -- again # -- for # -- I do this announcement for every sub. I do not move more than a few step towards the team I am announcing changes to. The only change for me is that I don't say Scorekeeper any more.So far no problems.

I always prefered to walk up to whoever was keeping the book and give them the subs in a normal conversational tone. I also prefer that the coach giving me his subs comes to me in the same fashion. It just seems like this has less chance of something getting misunderstood or confused compared to yelling at each other across the field from a distance.

Now, if we go directly to the coach to report a sub, who's to say if whatever I told him is going to be accurately relayed to his scorekeeper.

I haven't had to personally deal with this yet- my high school games have been on the bases, so far. I guess that my options will be:

- Yell loudly toward the dugouts from a distance and hope that everyone who is supposed to hear me does and that they hear it correctly. (Saves time, but the possibility of miscommunication increases.)

- Go to just the coach, as the rule requires, tell him, then hope that he relays the correct info to his scorekeeper. (Saves time, possible miscommunication from coach to scorekeeper.)

- Report subs to the scorekeeper as I always have, making sure that they have it right, then verbally give the same changes to the coach when I track him down somewhere else on the field. (Takes a little longer, but less chance of miscommunication.)

- If they're in the same vicinity, call the coach over to the scorekeeper and give the subs to both of them at one time. (Saves time and less chance of miscommunication.)

I'm not bothering to do that. Quite often when a pitching change or other defensive substitution takes place, the offensive head coach is in the third base coach's box and his/her scorekeeper is in the first base-side dugout. I'd have to yell out from the top of my lungs what those changes are so both could hear. And that doesn't guarantee that the scorekeeper, who often is a fellow student, is paying attention.

If there's a significant separation between the two, I'll go to the scorekeeper first to make sure he/she gets it right in the book. And then I'll inform the coach with just a quick "18 for 22, coach" to meet the requirement. I think it's more important to make sure the book is informed.

Your state interpreter is wrong, IMO. The preseason guide doesn't limit the restriction to pitchers and to umpire judgement on distraction of batters.

In my neck, we are enforcing it for all players, regardless of position.

That said, Yes, I think it's a bogus rule. Who cares that the right fielder has an optic yellow "Mizuno" on her glove?

If they want to be specific about the head coach, maybe s/he should be required to be in a certain location in the dugout or wear an orange hat, or optic yellow vest.

I will get the attention of a coach from the appropriate team that is in or near the dugout, and give that individual the change. I will be sure I am within a distance a normal speaking voice will be sufficient and will wait for acknowledgment. I'm NOT chasing down or holding up a game waiting on a head coach to finish whatever it is they may be doing to give them a change. Like umpires, they have many other duties involving the game and players that are far more important than acknowledging a change for the other team.

While I don't disagree, a state interpreter cannot be wrong when instructing umpires within his/her area of responsibility. NFHS rules are suggestions which can or cannot, in whole or in part, be utilized by the local associations as they elect.

On the NFHS glove rule...

Gloves/mitts shall not have an optic-colored marking on the outside or inside that gives the appearance of the ball.

So, do we as umpires get to decide if whatever bit of green on the glove gives the appearance of the ball or not? As this rule reads, it doesn't necessarily ban any and all optic-colored markings, only those that could be mistaken for the ball.

Some of the gloves I've addressed have looked like the example in the NFHS Preseason Guide, with a big optic logo running up the middle finger that maybe possibly might look like a sliver of the ball peeking through the space between the fingers.

Others only had a small optic logo on the velcro wrist strap.

Suppose I see a kid with an optic-colored logo on her glove but, in my judgment, it does not give the appearance of the ball?

Or, do we just remove the element of judgment (which is often the FED way of doing things) and toss all gloves with any optic color on them?

Maybe they should come out with a glove list. :D

Really? I never realized that. I thought the rules as written had to be strictly complied with, except where state adoptions are allowed. Learned something new...

Ahhh, yes. Another opportunity for umpires to rule differently on the same issue. :p

OK, let's clarify.

To IrishMafia, who relates to ASA structure, a local association equals an NFHS State Association. Each State can adopt their own rules, can interpret their own rules differently; even if it varies from the NFHS official ruling.

Read the preamble regarding state associations may make modifications, and the final block just before the rules start, that all requests for interpretations and clarifications be forwarded to the state association.

Toss no gloves. 1) Use common sense judgment (like the state interpretor telling you it doesn't matter in any case but the pitcher, 2) at worst, say that glove cannot be used as-is by the pitcher, 3) let them cover or change the color of any marking you deem offensive (sharpies do well), 4) use common sense, and 5) did I say use common sense?

Reporting subs has always been something you were to tell the head coach; after all, hasn't that always been the person defined as responsible for all communications? That head coach can delegate that to an assistant or scorekeeper, but we were always supposed to "announce immediately the change(s) to the opposing team." There has never been a responsibility in NFHS to tell a scorekeeper, and I, for one, don't care if the coach tells the scorekeeper, if they get it right. The only thing that matters is the PU official lineup, and what it says.

As a practical matter, it is easy enough to go half way, get their attention, announce in their general direction. If they ignore you, who cares? You recorded, you announced; no longer your problem. And going all the way to them only drags out the game, and gives them another chance to take a private shot, if they are so inclined.

Now, if you can do it all in one clean shot, fine. If they want you to do anything else, your responsibility is to tell the head coach; period. "Coach, we have 5, Johnson, for 7, Smith, in the 5 hole". Done.

Well in ESF we have since last year a good one! The coach making a substitutian give PU a sheet with suitnumbers and positions of the out going and in coming players. The PU holds up the sheet to the scorekeepers until they give a sign that the sub is on the sheets, then the PU has to make sure it is also in his linesheet. We can't talk to the coach or scorlekeepers. This is a speed up rule... ... ...

I used "toss" more or less as a shorthanded way of saying, "Tell the player or her coach that the glove either has to be replaced or corrected".

Our state interpretor is telling us exactly the same thing that the FED rule book and point of emphasis says: This rule applies to ALL players.

I don't necessarily disagree that it should only be a possible issue with the pitcher's glove, but if we don't address it uniformly for all players then we are going against what we've been instructed.

Naturally. That is a common fix and can bring the glove into compliance.

Common sense isn't always so common. My own personal notion of common sense is that the rule is ticky-tacky, unnecessary and that no little swatch of green cloth on the outside of a glove is going to make me think that a player has the ball inside of her glove. I would also say that neon green isn't the same color as optic yellow.

Absent a more precise definition or guideline, one man's illegal glove will be another man's legal glove. That will lead to uneven enforcement of the rule.That's the kind of thing that can make teams think the umpires don't know what they're doing or lead to agruments.

That addresses two different issues at two different times.

"The pitcher may request the other ball before throwing a warm up pitch." That addresses the start of the inning.

"The pitcher must pitch that ball until such time as the ball goes out of play." That does not say that she can't continue to pitch the ball AFTER it goes out of play. It just says she has to use it UNTIL it goes out of play.

Have you every asked a pitcher why she wants a new ball? Maybe the one you have has a nick in it you didn't see, she can't grip it as well or a ball got returned to you that looked like the game ball but really wasn't.

I want pitchers to throw strikes, so I give the pitcher a ball that she is comfortable with. It's not a protestable issue. It's really just a mechanic/procedure. I think we have bigger fish to fry than that.

So you are choosing to ignore a rule then? If the ball is truly unplayable, the pitcher can throw it in for you to inspect, and then yes you remove it from play and replace it. If after throwing a pitch, the pitcher just decides she wants another ball for no reason and you give it to her, you are violating the ball rotation rule. And any ball that goes out of play is not suppose to be put back into play until it has been inspected by the umpire. How do you know somone hasnt snuck in a ball that isnt legal? Wouldnt be the first time I have heard about mush balls being thrown back into a game.

I'm not ignoring a rule. You are misapplying the "rule" in Federation and it isn't a rule in ASA. It is a procedure covered under the R/S.

What is the problem with getting the ball back from the pitcher, tossing out a new one and rubbing the old one up a bit and putting it back in the ball bag? And if Federation and ASA are so big on ball rotation, why doesn't it say that the umpire must inspect every ball that goes out of play? If the ball rolls an inch over the dead ball line, will you not allow that ball back in? If the ball hits equipment and becomes blocked, are you switching that ball? If the defender intentionally or unintentionally carries a ball out of play, are you changing that ball too?

Not only do I inspect all balls that go out of play (I mean way out of play, not those that barely enter a dugout and are immediately retrieved, etc.), I also inspect balls that are sharply fouled off of backstop fencing and dugouts. In fact, I inspect balls that smack off the catcher's mask, but that's really to give the catcher time to recover.

Any ball which leaves the umpire's sight should come back into play through the umpire's hands.

If a ball goes out of play, the ball in my bag is often in the catcher's hands before the batted ball stops rolling. Do not wait for a ball to come back. If it gets thrown back onto the field, I ask for that ball before it gets to the pitcher.

And unless it is the only ball available, if it goes out of play, it does not immediately return to play. Why? Basically, because it is the prescribed procedure and if consistent, the fairest manner in which the umpire can maintain order in the game.

What do you think "out of play" means? :(

I knew we had been over this before, and not all that long ago either.

http://forum.officiating.com/softbal...-rotation.html

Good question, what do YOU think it means? Does it only mean (to you) left the park and gone forever, never to be seen again?

Given that we're discussing FED and ASA rules, most of us expect to get that ball back at some point ... sometimes immediately.

I was just making the point, by facetious question to one poster, that out of play means not being used.

I guess I missed your facetiousness, given that out of play actually means out of play - not being used means not being used.

I find this whole ball rotation discussion fascinating. I wonder what's the history behind it?

If a pitcher doesn't like the "feel" of the hole in front of the pitcher's plate, and asks for Time to have it fixed, aren't you going to take the time to help her out, perhaps even bringing the grounds crew in to do some repair work? But if that pitcher throws 7-8 balls in a row out of the strikezone, and she wants another ball, why the heck does ASA and FED tell me I can't give it to her?

I'm sure I'll be accused of not actually being at the table in the 1930s when the book was first written, but common sense says that it was implemented to prevent the pitcher from constantly asking for a new ball for the purpose of delaying the game. It also ensured that teams weren't throwing in "dead" balls while keeping the more juiced ones in the dugout. The issue with getting the new ball in in the bottom half of the second is just to make sure a new ball doesn't first enter the game in the 7th inning.

Abiding by strict ball rotation is ridiculous. Those who tend to do it don't properly interpret the rule, as is evident by others' posts. There is no remedy for not abiding by it. It isn't something that could be protested. Even if someone was dumb enough to protest it and someone else even dumber to uphold the protest, there is no remedy. What are you going to do, go back to the point of the protest and resume play from there with....hmmm....which ball do we use now....?

It's ridiculous to keep the playing field level? It's ridiculous to keep the game moving? It's ridiculous to insure the ball entering the field is legal and undamaged?

I have never had a problem with it and it doesn't become a problem because I do strictly adhere to it. And the teams expect it especially when they intentionally get rid of a ball because they do not like it. And there is nothing to protest, as you said, it isn't a rule, just a Rule Supplement. You may get a nice talking to by the UIC, but that's about it.

But these kinds of shenanigans can be taken care of through routine game management. The pitcher asks for a new ball once, no problem. She asks for another so shortly afterward, sorry; there's nothing wrong with the one I just gave you, let's play on. We do the same when a batter repeatedly requests Time from the box, or the catcher repeatedly requests Time to talk to the pitcher.

When I do baseball games, I give the pitcher a different ball whenever he requests one. I do the same when the ball is fouled off and stays within the fences, or the ball gets by the catcher to the backstop during between-inning warm-ups and even during the game (with no baserunners, obviously). The reason we do that is that the field is much bigger, and waiting for the catcher to get a ball from the backstop, or an outfielder to retrieve a foul ball in the corner, can disrupt the flow of the game. Teams usually know to have the on-deck batter or someone from the dugout to chase those down.

Oh well, like I said, fascinating.

:rolleyes::rolleyes:This paragraph on a softball discussion board from a guy who was complaining about an accurate descriptipn of a foul tip that may have been a little redundant???? :rolleyes:

(sorry, it must be one of those pick on Manny days):D

Trust me, I live many of those days...

I thought that was your UIC's job.....

I agree 100%. Use common sense. Keep the pitcher happy. Keep the game moving.

What about the batter? You going to keep him/her happy when the request for another ball comes from the batter?

And when the pitcher complains that s/he doesn't like the grip on that ball......yada, yada, yada......