NFHS acts to slow down games

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by Dakota

Apparently, NFHS disagrees. A substitute may now only be accepted when the player is running out on defense, trotting to a base as a PR, or carrying a bat into the batter's box.

Only if they are as stupid as I have accused them of being over the years

My statement meets the proposed rule change. All changes are effective immediately and those who are entering are now participating in the game.

I cannot help it if an organization representing the athletic side of an educational institution are not smart enough to word is properly.

[CecilOne]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

the athletic side of an educational institution .

I thought we gave up that hope long ago.

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Only if they are as stupid as I have accused them of being over the years

My statement meets the proposed rule change. All changes are effective immediately and those who are entering are now participating in the game.

I cannot help it if an organization representing the athletic side of an educational institution are not smart enough to word is properly.

Well, draw your own conclusions. This is from the actual comments on the rule change from the NFHS web site (this part was somewhat enhanced in my sarcastic re-write ):

...there are situations where coaches attempt to make multiple substitutions on offense that may not happen immediately. This is an inappropriate practice on offense because players can only be substituted prior to their immediate scheduled at-bat. Therefore, coaches may only substitute for the immediate player at bat.

(bold and underline added).

(I wonder if they realize that their commentary seems to say that a pinch runner is no longer allowed... )

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Only if they are as stupid as I have accused them of being over the years

My statement meets the proposed rule change. All changes are effective immediately and those who are entering are now participating in the game.

I cannot help it if an organization representing the athletic side of an educational institution are not smart enough to word is properly.

I think we all understand your POV on this. However, NFHS has been pretty clear that your interpretation is not THEIR interpretation. Their rule "change" (I would say it's a clarification) is that your statement does not meet the way they want it done.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

I think we all understand your POV on this. However, NFHS has been pretty clear that your interpretation is not THEIR interpretation. Their rule "change" (I would say it's a clarification) is that your statement does not meet the way they want it done.

My point of view? How about the view of the way it has been for decades by a majority of rule sets?

[b]Rule 2-57-4 has been added because there are situations where coaches attempt to make multiple substitutions on offense that may not happen immediately. This is an inappropriate practice on offense because players can only be substituted prior to their immediate scheduled at-bat. Therefore, coaches may only substitute for the immediate player at bat.

The practice of "projected" subs includes changes the coach d0es not want to occur until some point in the future. As has been for decades, any change offered occurs immediately. It is a change involving a player in the line-up, not positions in the field or at bat.

IMO, NFHS is over-reaching in an effort to make their point and has come up with wording that is of no benefit to the teams, umpires or the game.

What happens if you have a player ejected while on offense? Are you not going to immediately ask for a substitute? If there are no substitutes, will you allow a team to continue shorthanded when it is not allowed simply because you are told not to accept an offensive substitute until that player is due to bat?

Is that a TWP scenario? Could be, maybe not.

[Big Slick]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

What happens if you have a player ejected while on offense? Are you not going to immediately ask for a substitute? If there are no substitutes, will you allow a team to continue shorthanded when it is not allowed simply because you are told not to accept an offensive substitute until that player is due to bat? Is that a TWP scenario? Could be, maybe not.

Actually, Mike, in Fed play, you are not required to get a replacement for the ejected player right away. Furthermore, Fed allows you to play short handed due to ejection (unlike ASA).

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by Big Slick

Actually, Mike, in Fed play, you are not required to get a replacement for the ejected player right away. Furthermore, Fed allows you to play short handed due to ejection (unlike ASA).

Well, you got me.

Still absurd and have to wonder what type of minds actually allowed such a thing to get to the point of discussion.

I find it amazing how the simplest rules, procedures and mechanics seem to cause the most issues. But why should softball lag behind the dummying down of everything else in this country

[Big Slick]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Well, you got me.

What? HOLY S%$T! A large cheer rises from Hess Fields (FYI, we now have a new complex and Hess is used as an alternate site)

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Still absurd and have to wonder what type of minds actually allowed such a thing to get to the point of discussion.

I find it amazing how the simplest rules, procedures and mechanics seem to cause the most issues. But why should softball lag behind the dummying down of everything else in this country

I know some of those "minds" and I'm not amazed. I'm amazed that (at your age) you are still amazed. I quit being amazed at the age of 35 . . . you know, last year .

I still have not received answer to my inquiries raised in post #4.