ASA 2015 Rule Changes

[CecilOne]

Originally Posted by xtremeump

Pool Play are the games that seat you for Championship Play ��. Pool play is what this Rule is for, when you go to a Tournament where there are 60 (16)U teams playing, some teams try to beat the system. Then as Mr. Irish said they are playing elimination Championship Games. Game On Then. Really not a big deal, at the better Tournaments Teams only have at most 10 or 11 players. And I do Like it ��

[xtremeump]

It looks like you may have a question ? �� Irish commented that Pool Play is Championship play "Like it or not" ? I was commenting on my experience with Tournament Play. Did I answer Cecil ? You can not win a game in Pool play and still win the Championship Game. I hope this helps.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by xtremeump

It looks like you may have a question ? �� Irish commented that Pool Play is Championship play "Like it or not" ? I was commenting on my experience with Tournament Play. Did I answer Cecil ? You can not win a game in Pool play and still win the Championship Game. I hope this helps.

Pool play is required and in certain levels used to seed the team into the double elimination. It is part of the championship tournament.

[gsf23]

Originally Posted by Andy

Two words....college exposure!

Code for "whiney assed parents"

[xtremeump]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Pool play is required and in certain levels used to seed the team into the double elimination. It is part of the championship tournament.

I was trying to say this rule is only used in Pool Play, yes it is required to play in pool play to make it to elimination games where the rule changes back to Book Rule. Some tournaments are also single elimination. Like it or not !!

[AtlUmpSteve]

Originally Posted by xtremeump

I was trying to say this rule is only used in Pool Play, yes it is required to play in pool play to make it to elimination games where the rule changes back to Book Rule. Some tournaments are also single elimination. Like it or not !!

It could be just me, but I think the problem stems from you misusing words, attempting to use colloquiolisms you think are appropriate when they are defined words that mean something other than what you are trying to say.

Championship play is defined in the ASA Code; it is all of (including Pool Play) the tournaments stated in the definition. If you had used "elimination games", you would be separating the pool games from the rest of the tournament(s).

Just as you now misuse "Book Rule". Since these rule changes were adopted and will be part of the book, they ALSO will be "Book Rule". Just different rules to be used in different circumstances.

[xtremeump]

Originally Posted by AtlUmpSteve

It could be just me, but I think the problem stems from you misusing words, attempting to use colloquiolisms you think are appropriate when they are defined words that mean something other than what you are trying to say.

Championship play is defined in the ASA Code; it is all of (including Pool Play) the tournaments stated in the definition. If you had used "elimination games", you would be separating the pool games from the rest of the tournament(s).

Just as you now misuse "Book Rule". Since these rule changes were adopted and will be part of the book, they ALSO will be "Book Rule". Just different rules to be used in different circumstances.

I agree, I do not speak the language of proper colloquialisms. It did change the post and in my opinion people understood what the Interpretation of the new Rule is ? Maybe when I have 3000 posts on here I can correct their language ? There are people on this Forum that pick on language rather than attempting to help understand the purpose and intent of Rules. I am an Umpire not a colloquial Language interpreter. I hope someone gets something positive from your Post, I sure did.

[CecilOne]

Whatever number you start with must remain the same unless you lose players as mentioned in the rule.

This should say
"Whatever number OF BATTING POSITIONS STARTED WITH",
not
"Whatever number you start with"
.................................................. ...............

EXAMPLE: If you start with 12 batters you cannot increase to 13 batters or decrease to 11 batters.

This should say
"batting positions" not "batters"
to avoid confusion with the shorthanded rule and possibly with DP/FLEX.

[CecilOne]

Originally Posted by Andy

• Defensive Substitutes: Players not listed as a starting player or DP/FLEX, first 9 spot in the batting order, may be used as a substitute on defense. The batting order will not be changed and the re-entry rule would still be in effect. EXAMPLE: Batter number 11 goes in to play defense at shortstop for batter 3. Batter 11 has now entered the game and batter 3 has left the game. They still bat in the 3 and 11 positions as they originally did. Re-entry rule still in effect
• Offensive Substitutes: Players not listed as a starting player, first 9 spot in the batting order, may be used as a substitute on offense like a pinch runner. The batting order will not be changed and the re-entry rule would still be in effect. EXAMPLE: Batter number 4 gets a hit and batter 12 goes in to pinch run. Batter 4 has left the game and batter 12 has entered the game. They still bat in positions 4 and 12 as they originally did. Re-entry rule still in effect.

Besides this being a bad idea,
the wording first say "first 9 spot(s?) ... may be used;
then uses the 11th and 12th positions as examples.

[Tru_in_Blu]

Why make this more difficult than it needs to be. If this issue is about participation, then just let 'em play.

If coach wants to bat 13 and have 2 not in the game, fine. But let everybody in the batting order be free to play defense anywhere, anytime. The DP can go in on defense - aren't batters 10 through n similar in that respect?

Why confuse things with "has left the game" and/or re-entry applies?

Too screwy.

[CecilOne]

Originally Posted by Andy

• Pinch Hitters: No player listed in the batting order may pinch hit for any of the first nine players listed or anyone else listed in the batting order. They must stay in the batting order position they started in. The only players allowed to pinch hit are those players not listed in the batting order.

This makes sense and is how the rule should stand.

Allowing batters from other batting positions to run for a batter in another batting position makes no sense at all and ignores a basic rule in all games that a player can only play in one batting position in a particular game.
See "Offensive Substitutes" above. " EXAMPLE: Batter number 4 gets a hit and batter 12 goes in to pinch run."


Although as I said (12/15 6:30 PM), that whole paragraph is a mess.

[CecilOne]

Originally Posted by Andy

Here is the official interpretation released from ASA:


.

Please help me find this on the ASA web site.

[Andy]

Originally Posted by CecilOne

Please help me find this on the ASA web site.

I received this as a forward of an email sent by KR to the umpire chain of command....I did a quick search of the ASA site and could not find this....

[Tru_in_Blu]

Question on batting the entire roster in pool play. If one player gets ejected, game is a forfeit?

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by Tru_in_Blu

Question on batting the entire roster in pool play. If one player gets ejected, game is a forfeit?

That is what I understand.

Wait and see what happens when the parents begin to realize that if a team bats 12, it is possible some players will only get one AB.