ASA 2015 Rule Changes

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by Andy

The intent of the change was to allow a team to bat "up to" the total number of players on their roster. The NUS immediately pointed out that the shorthanded rule states that if a team drops below one less than what they started the game with, the game is forfeited. The author of the rule change then amended the rule change proposal to indicate that the shorthanded rule would not come into effect unless a team dropped below 8 players.

If a team has 15 players, bats 12, then the other three players are legal substitutes. The shorthanded rule would not come into effect until that team could not provide 8 batters in the lineup.

Don't think that is correct.

The shorthanded rule should apply at all times. The team can NEVER drop below 8 players.

As noted in OP:

Rule 4, Section 1D[2A] Exception: In all Junior Olympic Fast Pitch Pool Play Only; When a team elects to bat more than nine batters the game will continue with the skipped batter being recorded as an out whenever a player leaves the game for any reason other than an ejection. Teams cannot play with less than 8 players.
Comment: Defines the shorthanded rule when batting more than 9 batters in all Junior Olympic Fast Pitch pool play.

[Andy]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Don't think that is correct.

The shorthanded rule should apply at all times. The team can NEVER drop below 8 players.

As noted in OP:

Rule 4, Section 1D[2A] Exception: In all Junior Olympic Fast Pitch Pool Play Only; When a team elects to bat more than nine batters the game will continue with the skipped batter being recorded as an out whenever a player leaves the game for any reason other than an ejection. Teams cannot play with less than 8 players.
Comment: Defines the shorthanded rule when batting more than 9 batters in all Junior Olympic Fast Pitch pool play.

I'm confused....what do you think is incorrect?

Here was the original scenario when the rule change was first proposed:

Team has 13 players and elects to bat them all.
Two players are injured and cannot continue in the game.
Per the shorthanded rule (4-2-D), this game would be a forfeit, even though the team still had 11 players in the batting lineup and could field a full team on defense. The shorthanded rule goes into effect when a team drops below one less than they started with in the batting lineup.

The rule change to allow a team to bat up to the number of players on the roster carries a provision that the shorthanded rule will not go into effect until a team cannot bat 8 players

[CecilOne]

Is the confusion from terminology of the rule change explanation?

A team could "play shorthanded" if someone leaves regardless of how many in the lineup, so the shorthanded rule "applies".

The forfeit provision that has applied in the past would cause a forfeit if the team was "short" more than one player, based on the original requirement of max. 9 batters. That math meant playing with 8 batting was ok, less than 8 was a forfeit.

The new "rule" (or lack of it) to allow multiple extra batters then allows multiple short hands down to a minimum of 8.
That implies the possibility of multiple shorthanded outs in the lineup, perhaps an entire inning.

.................................................. .............
Comments:
It would be better to stick with limiting shorthanded to one short.

LRAMBF

Soccer minimum is 7.

[Manny A]

Originally Posted by CecilOne

The new "rule" (or lack of it) to allow multiple extra batters then allows multiple short hands down to a minimum of 8.
That implies the possibility of multiple shorthanded outs in the lineup, perhaps an entire inning.

That's the other thing I thought about last night that made me wonder about the benefit of the rule. A team has 14 players, and wants to bat them all. They could lose five of them and still play shorthanded, but they would give up five outs each time through the line-up. That makes no sense to me.

Yes, I realize the likelihood of that happening is pretty slim. But why couldn't they just leave well enough alone?

[Andy]

Originally Posted by Manny A

That's the other thing I thought about last night that made me wonder about the benefit of the rule. A team has 14 players, and wants to bat them all. They could lose five of them and still play shorthanded, but they would give up five outs each time through the line-up. That makes no sense to me.

Yes, I realize the likelihood of that happening is pretty slim. But why couldn't they just leave well enough alone?

Two words....college exposure!

[Tru_in_Blu]

Originally Posted by Andy

Two words....college exposure!

Realistically, do you think most teams have college material at batting order numbers 6 through n?

Even teams playing at the national level have a lot of "holes" in the lineup. Occasionally you may see a team that is loaded with talent, but they are the exception and not the rule.

Several years ago our intramural modified league allowed for the 10 players in the field and 1 or 2 extra hitters at the coach's discretion. If the coach played 10, 11, or 12, and a player left the game for something other than ejection and there was no available sub, an out was recorded in that slot. That carried through until there were less than 8 players. Maybe a couple of times someone had to leave and an out was taken. It was pretty rare.

[Andy]

Originally Posted by Tru_in_Blu

Realistically, do you think most teams have college material at batting order numbers 6 through n?

Even teams playing at the national level have a lot of "holes" in the lineup. Occasionally you may see a team that is loaded with talent, but they are the exception and not the rule.

Several years ago our intramural modified league allowed for the 10 players in the field and 1 or 2 extra hitters at the coach's discretion. If the coach played 10, 11, or 12, and a player left the game for something other than ejection and there was no available sub, an out was recorded in that slot. That carried through until there were less than 8 players. Maybe a couple of times someone had to leave and an out was taken. It was pretty rare.

Doesn't look like you got the point of my rolling eyes smiley.....

"More opportunities for college exposure" was the primary reason cited for wanting this rule change. As if 16u and 18u do almost nothing but showcase for the entire season and try to get college scholarships for their players.

My argument against this change was that at ASA National Tournaments, the teams are playing for a championship...let's play the game right!

Too much focus on "college exposure" and not enough on competing on the softball field.

[gsf23]

Originally Posted by Andy

Two words....college exposure!

Code for "whiney assed parents"

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by Andy

I'm confused....what do you think is incorrect?

Here was the original scenario when the rule change was first proposed:

Team has 13 players and elects to bat them all.
Two players are injured and cannot continue in the game.
Per the shorthanded rule (4-2-D), this game would be a forfeit, even though the team still had 11 players in the batting lineup and could field a full team on defense. The shorthanded rule goes into effect when a team drops below one less than they started with in the batting lineup.

The rule change to allow a team to bat up to the number of players on the roster carries a provision that the shorthanded rule will not go into effect until a team cannot bat 8 players

Well, really it give the minimum number of players necessary to continue the game. The new rule clearly states the shorthanded rule is in effect when a player must leave the BO for any reason other than ejection.