ASA 2015 Rule Changes
 

2015 Playing Rule Changes and Comments

Rule 1, Stealing A: Adds Junior Olympic Boys 18 and Under and Men’s 21 and Under
classification of play to those who can steal in Slow Pitch.
Comment: Allows Junior Olympic Boys 18U and Men 21U to steal in Slow Pitch.

Rule 2, Section 1: The pitching distance for Women’s Modified classification of play
shall be 43 feet.
Comment: Changes the pitching distance in Women’s Modified Pitch to 43 feet.

Rule 3, Section 3F [2]: EFFECTIVE 2016 The use of the yellow optic cover, red stitch
11-inch ball with a core of .520 or under and a compression of 300.0 lbs. for Women’s
Slow Pitch, Coed Slow Pitch (Women batters only), Women’s Seniors, Women’s
Masters and Boy’s and Girl’s Junior Olympic Slow Pitch.
Comment: Allows the use of the 52/300 11-inch ball in 2016 for all of the above
classifications of play.

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.

Rule 5, Section 5A [2] EXCEPTION: Removes Senior Slow Pitch classification of play
from those who have to run out home runs.
Comment: Allows for Senior’s to choose not to run the basses on a Home Run
or Four Base Award.

Rule 5, Section 9A [3]b: Senior Slow Pitch Run Ahead Rule will be – 20 after 4
innings and 15 after 5 innings.
Comment: Removes Run Ahead Rule after 3 innings and defines the new run
ahead rule for Senior’s Slow Pitch Classification of Play.

Rule 5, Section 10A Exception:

(Code310P) The Championship and “If” game in
Junior Olympic 10 and Under ASA/USA Championship will have a two hour time limit.
Comment: Allows for the Junior Olympic 10U ASA/USA only to have a 2 hour
time limit in the Championship and “IF” game.

Rule 7 Section 2E: (Fast Pitch) In Junior Olympic Pool Play only, teams have the
option of having all roster players present bat. The Shorthanded Rule that applies to
Fast Pitch will apply.

Rule 4, Section 1 [a-d] and 2 [a-g] Exception
Comment: Allows Junior Olympic Fast Pitch teams to bat everyone in pool play.

Rule 7 Section 3D: (Junior Olympic) After entering the batter’s box, the batter must
remain in the box with at least one foot between pitches and while taking signals and
practice swings.
Comment: Removes the requirement to keep one foot in the batter’s box for
Modified Pitch Classification of Play.

Andy, was there any discussion about the courtesy runner rule application if a team batted the roster in pool play? Obviously, teams that want to use the rule will be thinking the last out being able to run; while the absence of a rule means they don't have anyone eligible to run.

The courtesy runner was not brought up. The main discussion points centered around the shorthanded rule. The NUS indicated the if a team had 13 players and elected to bat all 13 and two became injured, the game would be a forfeit per the current shorthanded rule. The proposals were amended to adjust the shorthanded rule and passed.

My best guess is that the courtesy runner rule will remain unchanged. if a team wants to "bat the roster", they will not be able to use a courtesy runner.

Suppose I have 15 players in my dugout. Are my only options:

- Bat 9.

- Bat 15.

What I'm getting at is the new rule seems to say you can bat "everybody". Can you leave a couple on the bench and bat, say, 12 or 13? Is batting "everybody" all or nothing?

If the wording is what we have seen, good catch! :o
Presumably not the intent, but the rule as presented. :rolleyes:

The same questions was asked as the change was being debated...the intent is to allow the team to bat "up to" the entire roster.

Assumed, but will that be published.

So in Bret's scenario, if he has 15 at the game and decides to bat 12, and he loses one due to injury, he's not allowed to enter one of his three remaining bench players to replace her? And then if he loses a second starter due to injury, he has to forfeit due to the shorthanded rule?

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.

I'm sure that there will be some additional clarifications issued regarding this.

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

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.

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.

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! :rolleyes:

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.

Some, unfortunately. :eek: :( :(

ditto, ditto, ditto ! ! !

Andy, I'll admit I was a bit confused by the icon. I wasn't sure where the sarcasm was directed.

Coaches at almost every level eventually need to make a decision about trying to win the game or letting everyone play (in) the game.

A church league we work had a similar discussion regarding how their rosters were generated. Some are very diligent about only allowing members of the church (and however that is defined) to be on the roster. Others use some different tactics and call it outreach brotherhood programs or some such.

At the games, their bylaws allow for batting the entire roster, and some teams do that. Other teams hold back several players and only enter them when it is strategically advantageous to do so, even if it's only a pinch-hitting appearance.

Tournament JO games are also telling. Some girls don't get in a game at all. Some may only enter as a CR for pitcher/catcher.

I mostly played prior to re-entry rules. As a player/coach, I'd always try to have a player on the bench available in the event someone was hurt or tossed. Often times, it wasn't an option as we had just enough to play.

If the JO rule goes thru, it may not be long before all age groups follow suit. Many league bylaws already allow for it.

There is no "if", it's a done deal.

But I'm with Andy. At some point, it has to become about pure competition and not about participation. They play so many tournaments a year, plus league and HS play and fall ball, I cannot see what the big deal about playing ONE tournament to win. Otherwise, calling it a national championship is as ludicrous as calling the NCAA tournament a world series

Oh no, you had to push that button. :rolleyes:

Of course, I do agree. :cool:

Here is the official interpretation released from ASA:




This year the ASA/USA Council passed a new rule for 2015 allowing for up to all players on the roster present to be able to bat in all Junior Olympic Classifications of Play during Pool Play. The rule passed added a clause for how the shorthanded rule would be handled. The new rules as listed in the 2015 ASA Participant Manual reads as follows:

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.

Rule 7 Section 2F: (Fast Pitch) In Junior Olympic Pool Play only, teams have the option of having up to all players on the roster present bat. The Shorthanded Rule that applies to Junior Olympic Fast Pitch will apply. Rule 4, Section 1 [a-d] and 2 [a-g] Exception
This new rule did not address all the other aspects of our rules like Substitutes and Courtesy Runners. Based on the intent of the rule being that all players may bat and those over the 9 starters in the batting order could be substitutes and based on our Courtesy Runner rule as defined we have the following interpretation on how this rule should be administered during Junior Olympic Pool Play.
• Batting Order: All players on the roster up to the total amount of players present on the roster may bat. Whatever number you start with must remain the same unless you lose players as mentioned in the rule. EXAMPLE: If you start with 12 batters you cannot increase to 13 batters or decrease to 11 batters.






• Shorthanded Rule: 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. If a team loses a player from the batting order due to an ejection the game would end in a forfeit. EXAMPLE: If a team bat’s 15 and all they have are 15, no subs, and they lose one batter due to ejection, the game would end in a forfeit.
• When using a DP/FLEX: If a team uses the DP/FLEX rule the flex will still be listed at the end of the batting order. If a team decides to bat the FLEX they may do so. However, the FLEX may only bat for the DP in the DP’s batting position. Then DP would be then considered out of the game and may re-enter one time. EXAMPLE: A team is batting 12 and using the DP/FLEX. They would list their 12 batters with the DP being in one of the first nine positions and the FLEX listed in the 13th spot.
• 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.
• 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.
• Courtesy Runner: No player starting in the batting order may be used as a Courtesy Runner for the pitcher and or catcher. In order to be a Courtesy Runner a player cannot have participated in the game in any fashion. EXAMPLE: If a team has 15 players and wants two Courtesy Runners they can only bat 13 players.
We hope this addresses any and all issues in regard to batting all players in Junior Olympic Pool Play. If other situations arise we will use the same thinking to try and resolve them.

This is going to be a mess... and to make it even more fun it's a mess that we're only going to see in championship play which means that we won't be at all ready for it. And so it'll all get made up on the fly.
They better make a ruling for what happens when the girl due up is on base and they better make a rule for when you can pull her off base to solve that situation. For example, B10 is on base when B9 strikes out. If B10 is to be skipped can they then put B11 in for B10 or is it too late for that? Same question if B10 is to be out.
Now when they put B15 in for B10 has B10 left the game. By the logic above B10 wasn't in the game so how can she leave the game? Or can one only pinch run for the starting nine?

Editing to add one more: 15 players available, 14 listed on the lineup. B14 reaches 1st. S15 replaces B14. S15 steals Second and Third and then B1 reaches on a single scoring S15. S15 now pinch runs for B1. Legal?

This is ridiculous. How can you have left the game if you are still batting? The re-entry rule IS and always has been based upon the offensive line-up. WTF, why not just bat whoever, whenever and let any 9 play defense. After all, if you are going to screw something up, you just as well screw it up real good


Too late :)

There is already a precedent for such a rule. It is in 8.9.C.2. This will probably be the ruling for such a situation.

Sort of, the problem is that you can't buy yourself out of a 8.9.C.2 out by courtesy running for your courtesy runner (because of 8.9.C.4 which is what justifies the latter part of C2). But you could get yourself out of a substitution problem with a switch if you did it before the out. But what about right when that spot is due up.

POOL-PLAY !!!!! Championship Play is Book Rule.

Seems like Championship Play becomes the exception now.

Like it or note, Pool Play is championship play

Pool Play are the games you play to get seeded for elimination games ��. 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 by not winning on purpose. Then as Mr. Irish said they are playing elimination Games. Game On Then Book Rule. Really not a big deal, at the better Tournaments Teams only have at most 10 or 11 players. And I do Like it ��

:confused:

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.

Code for "whiney assed parents"

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

:)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.

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....

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. :)

Shorthanded Rule: 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. If a team loses a player from the batting order due to an ejection the game would end in a forfeit. EXAMPLE: If a team bat’s 15 and all they have are 15, no subs, and they lose one batter due to ejection, the game would end in a forfeit.

Any update?

With the National UIC clinic this weekend in OKC, you could expect to hear next week. Those attending are already there.

For anyone there who is reading the forum:

My comments:

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."
………………………………………………………………………………………………..

Batting Order: All players on the roster up to the total amount of players present on the roster may bat. Whatever number you start with must remain the same unless you lose players as mentioned in the rule. EXAMPLE: If you start with 12 batters you cannot increase to 13 batters or decrease to 11 batters

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.
……………………………………………………………………………………………..

• 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.

Still catching up from vacation :rolleyes:, posting to keep near top. :)

This change to the rules was discussed extensively at the UIC Clinic this past weekend.

Here are the highlights:

• A team may bat up to the total number of players they have available
  
• The first nine players listed are considered the "starters" and must have a defensive position listed on the lineup
  
• A team may use the DP/FLEX with more than nine batters, if so, the FLEX is always listed in the last position in the lineup and must have a defensive position listed. The DP must be one of the first nine batters
  
• Any batters in the batting order beyond nine are considered "substitutes"
  
• Any substitute (whether batting or not) may pinch run for any starter. The batting order DOES NOT change. Example: B4 reaches base and B12 enters to pinch run. This is legal. B4 has left the game, but is still part of the batting order. B4 would only use her re-entry when she is put back in the game on DEFENSE
  
• If a substitute in the batting order is entered to run for a starter and the substitute is due to bat while she is on base, an out is declared for that batting position. She cannot be subbed for or the starter re-entered to allow the substitute to bat
  
• The courtesy runner rule is not affected. Any player in the batting order is not eligible to be a courtesy runner. If a team is batting all players present, they will not have the option of using a courtesy runner

Many questions were asked and much conversation was generated. Personally, I still think there are loopholes and situations that have not been thought of.

Just to add another point. Expanding on the shaded point above, B12 "enters" the game for B4 as a runner. This would also make B12 a defensive player in the next half inning unless B4 re-enters. Suppose B4 does re-enter and B12 once again runs for B4. Now B4 can no longer play defense BUT she will still continue to bat in the 4th batting position.

Key point: B12 can "enter" for B4 on offense as a runner only; those two will always bat in the 4th and 12th spots, respectively, even if they do not have "entry" into the game (in essence, being removed from the defense twice).

I struggled with the concepts until I drew out a line up. Becomes easy when see it written down.

The short handed rule will come into effect when a player leaves due to injury or disqualification, not because they have use their one re-entry. Ejection still requires a legal sub (one not listed in the original batting order). As Andy stated, DP/Flex relationship still applies, as does the ability to have a CR ("one who has not participated" - being listed in the batting order is participation).

BS - Thanks....that helps.

Some further questions that I came up with that I intend to get additional clarifications on:

It seems as if we will need to track defensive positions if a team is batting more than 9 and uses a sub in the batting order for a starter.

If a starter is removed for a pinch runner in another spot in the batting order, must the starter be reported when she takes the field on defense?

I did see you at the clinic this weekend, just didn't get over to you to shake hands and say hi. Hope you enjoyed it....probably the best I have attended in spite of the different hotel accommodations, which were not as much of an issue as I had anticipated or our friend from Delaware believes!

Yes, and subject to appeal (and appropriate penalty) as an unreported sub. Kevin did state that we need to track all changes.

We did talk, on two occasions (one being about this rule - you were standing! right behind me). I concur with your assessment about the clinic (although there was too much hate being thrown at my employer), it just seemed like everyone "scattered" when not in session. Ah, to only throw the shuffleboard at Chisom's one more time.

Congrats on your award.

And tell that little buddy of yours to quit wearing plate pants on the bases. :)

They can turn this any which way they choose, but IMO this does not belong in championship play.

I told anybody that would listen to me at council meeting in Reno that this was not a good idea.

Not only a bad idea, a worse implementation. Ugly.

Been there, done that. Frustrating as hell, isn't it.

And if you really want to break this down, think to whom the ultimate advantage belongs.

JO organizations can now carry an additions 3/4 players on the roster as they will be allowed to take part up until the DE. That is 3/4 additional players which will pay to be on the team.

As wild as that may seem, think of how diluted some levels of this game has become all in the name of getting Lil' Susie on the field and seen by the scouts. IMO, this will dilute the level of play that much more while creating a financial benefit to the team.

Just thinking aloud :)

Well not only are those believing this was a bad idea unhappy it passed, but I can pretty much guarantee that those that wanted the change are equally unhappy. Because they surely didn't get what they wanted, either, they got an aborted miscarriage version of anyone's idea of what they wanted (to amplify what Crabby Bob said).

I am willing to bet ANYTHING they simply wanted the pool games, which have no bearing on the championship play, to be exactly what most showcases do; bat as many as you wish, free substitution on defense while maintaining the batting order, and courtesy runners for any pitcher or catcher with anyone available (sub, last out, whatever). That would have been so simple; it works all the time in friendlies and showcases, whereever the game result isn't the priority, but letting the girls play, is. Whether they want exposure for college coaches, or simply to make sure that everyone on the roster has some measurable participation, isn't the concern; let them play was the goal.

But, in the apparent interest of making it as absurd as possible, so maybe it would be eliminated next year (do you think??), you get the rule implemented as stated above.

Anyone still wondering why the prevailing opinion among the teams/coaches/parents is that ASA simply doesn't get it, if they ever did??

Maybe I'm missing something, but as I read the code, there are still some situations where pool play does determine bracket draw. Granted it is a long way away from where it used to be, but I'm still curious as to why they bother.