| SOFTBALL TIPS |
|
|
|
| SITE STUFF |
|
|
|
|
ARCHIVES
|
| • |
June 26, 2005 |
| • |
July 03, 2005 |
| • |
July 10, 2005 |
| • |
July 17, 2005 |
| • |
July 24, 2005 |
| • |
July 31, 2005 |
| • |
August 07, 2005 |
| • |
August 14, 2005 |
| • |
August 21, 2005 |
| • |
August 28, 2005 |
| • |
September 11, 2005 |
| • |
October 02, 2005 |
| • |
October 09, 2005 |
| • |
October 23, 2005 |
| • |
October 30, 2005 |
| • |
November 06, 2005 |
| • |
November 13, 2005 |
| • |
December 04, 2005 |
| • |
December 18, 2005 |
| • |
December 25, 2005 |
| • |
January 08, 2006 |
| • |
January 15, 2006 |
| • |
January 29, 2006 |
| • |
February 05, 2006 |
| • |
February 12, 2006 |
| • |
February 19, 2006 |
| • |
February 26, 2006 |
| • |
March 05, 2006 |
| • |
March 12, 2006 |
| • |
March 19, 2006 |
| • |
March 26, 2006 |
| • |
April 02, 2006 |
| • |
April 09, 2006 |
| • |
April 16, 2006 |
| • |
April 23, 2006 |
| • |
April 30, 2006 |
| • |
May 07, 2006 |
| • |
May 14, 2006 |
| • |
May 21, 2006 |
| • |
May 28, 2006 |
| • |
June 04, 2006 |
| • |
June 11, 2006 |
| • |
June 18, 2006 |
| • |
June 25, 2006 |
| • |
July 09, 2006 |
| • |
July 16, 2006 |
| • |
July 23, 2006 |
| • |
July 30, 2006 |
| • |
August 13, 2006 |
| • |
August 20, 2006 |
| • |
September 03, 2006 |
| • |
September 10, 2006 |
| • |
September 17, 2006 |
| • |
September 24, 2006 |
| • |
October 01, 2006 |
| • |
October 08, 2006 |
| • |
October 15, 2006 |
| • |
October 22, 2006 |
| • |
November 12, 2006 |
| • |
November 26, 2006 |
| • |
December 31, 2006 |
| • |
January 14, 2007 |
| • |
January 21, 2007 |
| • |
January 28, 2007 |
| • |
February 04, 2007 |
| • |
February 11, 2007 |
| • |
February 18, 2007 |
| • |
February 25, 2007 |
| • |
March 04, 2007 |
| • |
March 11, 2007 |
| • |
March 18, 2007 |
| • |
April 01, 2007 |
| • |
April 08, 2007 |
| • |
April 15, 2007 |
| • |
April 22, 2007 |
| • |
April 29, 2007 |
| • |
May 06, 2007 |
| • |
May 13, 2007 |
| • |
May 20, 2007 |
| • |
May 27, 2007 |
| • |
June 03, 2007 |
| • |
June 10, 2007 |
| • |
June 17, 2007 |
| • |
June 24, 2007 |
| • |
July 01, 2007 |
| • |
July 22, 2007 |
| • |
July 29, 2007 |
| • |
August 12, 2007 |
| • |
August 19, 2007 |
| • |
September 02, 2007 |
| • |
September 16, 2007 |
| • |
September 30, 2007 |
| • |
October 07, 2007 |
| • |
October 14, 2007 |
| • |
October 21, 2007 |
| • |
November 04, 2007 |
| • |
November 18, 2007 |
| • |
November 25, 2007 |
| • |
December 02, 2007 |
| • |
December 09, 2007 |
| • |
December 16, 2007 |
| • |
January 13, 2008 |
| • |
February 17, 2008 |
| • |
February 24, 2008 |
| • |
March 02, 2008 |
| • |
March 09, 2008 |
| • |
March 30, 2008 |
| • |
April 06, 2008 |
| • |
April 13, 2008 |
| • |
April 20, 2008 |
| • |
April 27, 2008 |
| • |
May 04, 2008 |
| • |
May 11, 2008 |
| • |
May 18, 2008 |
| • |
May 25, 2008 |
| • |
June 01, 2008 |
| • |
June 15, 2008 |
| • |
June 22, 2008 |
| • |
June 29, 2008 |
| • |
July 06, 2008 |
| • |
July 13, 2008 |
| • |
July 20, 2008 |
| • |
August 03, 2008 |
| • |
August 10, 2008 |
| • |
August 17, 2008 |
| • |
August 24, 2008 |
| • |
August 31, 2008 |
| • |
September 07, 2008 |
| • |
September 14, 2008 |
| • |
September 21, 2008 |
| • |
September 28, 2008 |
| • |
October 05, 2008 |
| • |
October 12, 2008 |
| • |
October 19, 2008 |
| • |
October 26, 2008 |
| • |
November 02, 2008 |
| • |
November 09, 2008 |
| • |
November 16, 2008 |
| • |
November 30, 2008 |
| • |
December 07, 2008 |
| • |
December 21, 2008 |
| • |
December 28, 2008 |
| • |
February 15, 2009 |
| • |
February 22, 2009 |
| • |
April 12, 2009 |
| • |
April 19, 2009 |
| • |
April 26, 2009 |
| • |
May 03, 2009 |
| • |
May 10, 2009 |
| • |
May 17, 2009 |
| • |
May 24, 2009 |
| • |
May 31, 2009 |
| • |
June 07, 2009 |
| • |
June 14, 2009 |
| • |
June 21, 2009 |
| • |
July 05, 2009 |
| • |
July 12, 2009 |
| • |
July 19, 2009 |
| • |
August 02, 2009 |
| • |
August 30, 2009 |
| • |
September 06, 2009 |
| • |
September 20, 2009 |
| • |
October 04, 2009 |
| • |
October 11, 2009 |
| • |
October 18, 2009 |
| • |
November 08, 2009 |
| • |
November 15, 2009 |
| • |
November 22, 2009 |
| • |
November 29, 2009 |
| • |
December 27, 2009 |
| • |
January 03, 2010 |
| • |
January 10, 2010 |
| • |
January 17, 2010 |
| • |
January 24, 2010 |
| • |
January 31, 2010 |
| • |
March 14, 2010 |
| • |
March 21, 2010 |
| • |
March 28, 2010 |
| • |
April 04, 2010 |
| • |
April 18, 2010 |
| • |
April 25, 2010 |
|
|
| SOFTBALL LINKS |
|
|
|
Little League Rule Change?
by Dave
Thursday, May 01, 2008
Some of you may think I have absolutely no regard for Little League and that can never change. I do have some beefs with Little League rules but I'll be the first to admit that when they have the good sense to change them, I do appreciate it and they still have the opportunity to pull me over to their side.
I had a genuine dislike of Little League's age cutoff differences and this they rectified in the last couple of years. Now LL uses the same January 1 cutoff which had been used by other sanctioning bodies.
I really despised the rule requiring use of the 11 inch ball at ages up to 12 but this disappeared, I think, last year. Now LL uses the 12 inch ball in 12U ball and the 11 only for ages 10 and under. That was an important change, at least as far as I'm concerned. Of course it took place too late for me and my girls.
One of the rules which bugged me was the prohibition against playing other games for other teams once international tournament play has begun. This morning I received a message from Patrick in Florida wondering what my reaction to LL reversing "its ruling that girls could not participate in travel ball programs while participating in their LL All-Star tournaments. How do you think this will effect things in the future?"
Patrick had already deleted the original message but promised to get a copy to me as soon as he was able to. Rather than wait, I decided to crawl the web to see if I could find it. It was no easy task but ultimately I found the following on a blog called "The Little League Coach"
"The rule that prohibits players from participating in non-Little League programs (dual participation), once Little League tournament play has begun, has been rescinded at all levels of play for baseball and softball. However, the local Little League retains the right to dismiss a player from a tournament team if the player repeatedly misses games and practices."
Now, I cannot vouch for the authenticity of these purported rule change. I receive e-mails from LL but perhaps I missed this one or it never reached me. But for the sake of argument, I'll act as if I know this rule change to be fact.
First of all, the way the rule previously read was:
"Participation in Other Programs
Little League, 9-10 Year Old Division, 10-11 Year Old Division: A player may participate in other youth softball programs prior to the first scheduled game involving that player's team. Once play begins for a tournament team, players named on that team's tournament affidavit may not participate in any other youth softball program until that team is eliminated from tournament play. After tournament play has begun, players added to a team's affidavit may not have participated in another youth softball program since their team's first scheduled tournament game. Junior League, Senior League, Big League Division: Participation in other programs during the International Tournament is permitted, subject to the provisions of Regulation IV (a) Note 2."
I'll be honest, I never realized that the prohibition against travel play did not apply to levels above "Little League" (12U). I don't know that my daughters would have participated had I known but I can't say that they would not have. As it is, assuming this rule has been changed, I'm going to ask my 2009 12 year old if she wants to give it a go. I'm also going to ask her big sister if she wants to play rec ball with the potential opportunity of playing in the international tournament for (I guess they call them) seniors.
I have had a couple experiences in Pony and travel ball which were related to the LL prohibition against playing travel ball simultaneously. A few years back, we had a kid on our all-star team who continued to play travel ball. Everyone knew it but nobody acted to prevent her from participating on the LL tournament team. Honestly, I think she played one non-LL tournament day for her travel team and that was about it. She didn't flagrantly violate the rule. The kid was young and she wanted to play the LL tournament. But she was a good ball player and needed to play travel to improve her game. I can see why the parents would permit this to go on and I don't hold anything against them.
Last year we were involved in Pony State championships and faced what is usually a very difficult team in the elimination round. My stomach was sick as I drove to the fields that day. I was afraid my very young, inexperienced team would be experiencing what I like to call one of those "character building" days. We werre eliminated that day but we won the game against the usually very tough team. I was left speechless by that one ... at least until ... somebody explained what had happened. The day before, four or five girls had left the team to go join up with their LL tournament teams. They were gone for the duration of their LL team's participation in the international tournament.
On another occasion, we were playing in a Pony national qualifier hosted by our organization. My team went out early and everyone went home. I had to stay because I was the site director and would give the closing speech while also handing out the banner that goes with the bid to the winner. The final game was a great one and I wouldn't have missed it for the world. But the team which won the game, tournament and bid, had already won a bid to nationals so they relinquished it. I turned to the runners-up and told them they had earned a bid. They replied, rather sadly, that they would not be accepting it because this was their final game together. The team had voted to disband so girls could go play with their LL teams in the tournament. I understood what they were doing but what struck me was their sadness. These girls and their coaches really wanted to go to Pony nationals. They also wanted to participate in the LL tournament. Realizing they could only do both by breaking the rules, these folks decided the best course of action was to give up travel for the remainder of the summer.
So, my first reaction to Patrick is I think this development is great. It will avoid much sadness and allow girls to just play ball. Also, I suppose that had it been implemented one year sooner, my team might not have experienced that win! But kidding aside, I think this is a very positive development for Little League, for travel teams of all sorts, and most of all, for all the girls who are the core of all this jazz.
The whole schtick about playing travel is you get to play tons of games. When I was a kid, our rec league was something like 12 or 16 games. Fior several years there wasn't even an all-star team in my town. Then they got that going and we doubled our bounty of games. That was great but you know, if somebody had come to me and said, "kid, you can play 50-80 ball games per year if you want, but your life will be shortened by ten years," I would have said, "that's OK, I've got nothing planned that far into the future - play ball!"
The LL thing doesn't really get going until the ? end of May ? / ? beginning of June ? Most tournament teams have played about 5 or 6 tournaments by then. They are just beginning to gel at that point. It doesn't make much sense to form up a team in the fall, practice all winter and then fold up your tent in May when the team should just start getting serious. So girls are left with a huge decision about whether to play travel ball at all. That's not particularly fair.
I understand that what LL was after with this rule was preventing little kids from becoming softball machine who had nothing else in their lives. But what about those few kids who live for softball? I'm not talking about kids who have nothing else in their lives but there are some kids who, while doing well in school and participating in plenty of other activites, would like to spend every other waking hour doing something with a 12 inch yellow ball with red seams in one hand and a composite bat or glove in the other.
LL also wanted to limit sport-related injuries. But limiting the younger kids while permitting older ones to play as much as they like seems wrong-headed to me. In older age groups more injuries occur due to the higher intensity of play. Also, the LL tournament doesn;t involve the sort of play many girls are already used to. There's none of those 5-game days like the ones we have experienced. There's also no time limit which is more like the school games - that's a positive thing about playing LL.
Many travel teams don't want LL kids on their rosters because of the potential mid-season disruption this can cause when they leave for their LL tournament teams. Many LL tournament teams don't want the kids who play travel on their rosters because they know they will be available for fewer practices, may sometimes be late for games, or possibly put the entire team in jeopardy by playing travel tournaments after the LL international thing has started. The net effect has been that kids had to choose which kind of play they would sign up for. The result was kids got to play less than they wanted.
I don't know how my kids will react to this news. They've been playing travel, PONY, FAST, NSA and ASA for so long, they may not care. But I sort of hope they do care and want to sign up for LL rec ball next year. There are other problems with rec ball generally but maybe we can overcome those in order to get a shot to play the LL tournament. Well, I'll leave the final decision up to them. It's their game.
I applaud Little League for making a sensible rule change. My thoughts on it are all positive, Patrick. Now if they can only get rid of the grass infields and the pitching limitations which exist nowhere else!Labels: little league, Travel vs. Recreational, youth tournament teams
Permanent Link: Little League Rule Change?
 
No Evil
by Dave
Tuesday, April 29, 2008
Do you know the classic image of the three monkeys, one with hands over eyes, a second with hands over ears, and the third with hands covering mouth? I'll add an additional one but I'm just taking poetic license. I believe that whether you are a fan, a player or a coach, you must think umpires:
A) don't know the rules (hear no evil);
B) know the rules but do not see these things as infractions (see no evil);
C) know the rules and see the infractions but are reluctant to make these calls because nobody among their cohort is calling them (speak no evil); or
D) know the rules, see the infractions, are perfectly willing to make the calls, but interpret the rules as intending players to not take an advantage and absent any such advantage, see no reason to make the calls (think no evil).
What I'm getting at is the rules regarding the pitcher's feet. My take on this is selection D. I believe umpires know the rules well, can generally see fine, are never unwilling to make a call where they see an infraction, but do not see pitchers gaining an advantage. The bottom line is they aren't making the calls.
In my corner of the world, most people aren't all that knowledgeable or sure about the overall rules concerning pitching but they seem to feel comfortable about those regarding the pitcher's feet. They see pitchers doing something in games and they cry foul. When nothing is done about it, they first blame umpires for not making the call. Then they reason that just the pitchers in our state do these evil things. They sometimes go so far as to claim that once our pitchers travel outside the state, they'll get caught by the real umpires enforcing the real rules and these pitchers will fail, fail, fail. They act so superior and claim that the reason why softball from our state doesn't have a better reputation has something to do with the failure of local pitchers to pitch legally and umpires to call them in such cases. But the facts remain our pitchers do travel outside the state, don't seem to get called an inordinate amount of times for illegal pitches, and a good portion of them are successful at high levels.
Let me explain a little bit more about the issue I am looking at. In general, a pitcher must stand on the rubber with both feet before taking a signal from the catcher. In Pony and some other sanctioning bodies, one foot (the pivot foot) on the rubber is OK but the landing foot must be behind the rubber. In NCAA play, the pitcher must keep one half of her pivot foot in contact with the rubber when taking the signal. Then the pitcher must keep her feet in contact with the rubber until she begins the pitch. Many pitchers, particularly NCAA pitchers, drag their pivot foot in from the edge of the rubber to a point closer to the center or all the way over to their landing foot before stepping off and striding. During the stride, obviously the pitcher can take her landing foot off the rubber as she steps forward. At this point, the pitcher's pivot foot is supposed to remain "in contact with the rubber" but this is ruled to be the case when she drags the pivot foot away from the rubber after pushing off and before release.
If a pitcher lifts her pivot foot off the rubber during her windup (when she might be dragging it along the rubber), this is illegal since she did not keep in contact with the rubber. If she pushes off with the pivot foot and it leaves the ground (does not drag), this is called a leap and is illegal. If she pushes off with the pivot foot, it goes into the air and re-lands to a new point of impetus - she pushes off from the new spot, this is called a crow hop and it is also expressly illegal. Another related infraction along these same lines occurs when the pitcher takes a slight step forward with the pivot foot before striding and gains a point of impetus in front of the rubber. This isn't a crow hop but it is illegal since the pitcher did not remain in contact with the rubber and has gained a new point of impetus that is not in contact with the rubber.
Another though somewhat unrelated common infraction occurs when a pitcher takes the signal from behind the rubber and then walks into the pitch. You usually see this in early age groups like 10U or 12U. You don't normally see anything like this in ASA ball since it is mighty difficult to walk into a pitch and begin your wind-up with two feet on the rubber! Some girls continue to take signals from behind the rubber as they age but generally umpires do a good job of preventing pitchers from walking into the pitch since this provides an obvious advantage - pitchers throw somewhat harder when they are allowed to walk into a pitch. And as girls get older and play ASA ball, they must stop taking signals from behind the rubber and walking into the pitch or they must give up pitching because it will almost always be called illegal.
The rules infractions I am looking at today are only concerned with leaping, actual crow hopping, and deliveries in which the pitcher pushes off from a point slightly in front of the rubber. Also, when I talk about umpires not calling these infractions, I mean all umpires. Pitching rules in high school can be different from those in college, ASA and ISA. But as far as crow hopping and leaping are concerned, they are pretty much identical. Yet you almost never see an ump call illegal pitch for something the pitcher is doing with her feet.
As I said, many near me claim that this is because only pitchers in our state are doing this. I beg to differ. I have made a close examination of numerous NCAA pitchers as well as the entire Team USA pitching staff. I defy anyone to closely examine Jennie Finch, Cat Osterman, Monica Abbott or similar caliber pitchers and show me a full game's worth of pitches in which all are fully legal in terms of their feet. I say I defy anyone because I have clearly seen these Olympic pitchers and the replacement players who did not make the team roster all make repeated infractions.
It would be akin to picking low hanging fruit to say they stride outside the 8 foot pitcher's circle. Most of them do but not on every pitch. It would be equally easy to say they do not stay within the two foot corridor between the pitcher's plate (rubber) and homeplate. I've yet to see a top level pitcher throw a screwball while keeping within the two foot corridor.
I have watched, I think, three of the Team USA games against NCAA opponents. In those games, I have observed at least one pitcher who: 1) lifted her pivot foot off the rubber during the "drag" before push off, 2) replanted the pivot foot in front of the rubber before releasing the ball, or 3) performed what is commonly called a leap - did not drag the pivot foot after push off. I have seen each of the Team USA pitchers (as well as each of the replacement players who are pitchers) commit one of these infractions on multiple occasions. I haven't seen one called for it yet.
I have watched about a dozen and a half NCAA games in two of the divisions, both in person and via television, and while I have seen plenty of pitchers who commit none of these infractions, I have seen quite a few who do but are never called for them. I have watched several dozen high school games this year, seen numerous infractions and one call for an illegal pitch. The one call I witnessed involved a coach from one team complaining to the ump about it, the ump demanding her to show him "where in the rules it says that," and then, after a ten minute discussion of the rules in which the coach in fact showed the ump the rulebook, he made the call just once after which the pitcher continued to commit the infraction. Ironically, the pitcher for the coach who raised the stink also arguably commits some foot fouls in her delivery!
One local HS pitcher was photographed in the midst of her delivery with both feet quite obviously off the ground. Tha photograph made the front page of the local newspaper. The pundits went absolutely berserk about the illegal pitch! They claimed the girl's pitching coach was to blame for the infraction. They claimed the pitching coach had pretty much taught every pitcher in the state who hops or leaps to do it. They stopped short of blaming the pitching coach for the high price of gasoline and pasta but everything else that was wrong with the world was, I believe, ultimately traceable to this particular pitching coach! The truth is the guy does not tolerate any such infractions from his students. When he sees them, he corrects them. I know because my daughters go to him and one of them developed a very slight leap when she was 10. We worked for weeks to eliminate that. So the charges have been dropped and he will not be brought before the UN for his alleged crimes against humanity.
Now, I told you that many in my area do not have that firm of a grasp upon pitching rules. They also do not seem to understand the limitations of umpires eyesight and attention. There are often complaints about the feet of the pitcher during preliminary tournament games in which there is but one lonely, single umpire. It is not commonly understood that a plate umpire cannot watch the pitcher's hands and feet while also calling balls and strikes. Generally a solitary umpire will focus on the pitcher's hands and the strike zone since both are within a normal human being's line of vision. When there are two umpires, the plate ump usually still maintains his interest in the hands of the pitcher and it is the field ump who might be concerned with her feet. It should be noted, however, that even when you have two umps, the field ump is more concerned with baserunners' feet not leaving the base before release than he is with the pitcher's feet. Still coaches go to the plate ump for discussions about feet and the field ump for questions about her hands. It's absurd but I have seen this repeatedly done by people who should know better.
The most egregiously ridiculous thing I have seen a coach do with respect to the legality or illegality of a pitcher's delivery happened in a 10U game which was being played generally under ASA rules but which allowed the pitcher to place "one or two feet" on the rubber before delivery and made no point about enforcing leaping or hopping rules due to the age of the participants. The first base coach of what was essentially a local all-star team didn't like what he saw. What he saw was a pitcher who, while basically legal, might have been hopping off the rubber due to poor conditions in and around the rubber. It is rather difficult for anyone to push off the rubber and maintain contact with the ground when there is a 6-9 inch hole in front of it, more so when the kid's foot is only 9 inches long!
This coach complained to the lone ump behind the plate. Then when illegal pitch was not called, he again approached the ump who, rather unsure of himself, instructed the pitcher to not leap. But he made no illegal pitch call. The next time the coach approached the ump, he decided he'd had enough and told the coach to go back to the coach's box (basically, shut up and let's get on with this). The coach not knowing what else to do, began to yell "BALK" on every delivery. He strategically yelled this as the girl began the last 25% of her arm circle and before she released the pitch. The poor girl didn't know what to do and she began to cry. At this point, she somehow managed to finish the inning without missing the strike zone too badly and the jackass went back to his team's dugout.
Interestingly, when he came out again, he began to yell at every pitch again and then it turned ugly. People from the other side began yelling back and threats were exchanged. Finally the guy began to shut up. If I'm not mistaken, one of the other coaches replaced him at first base in subsequent innings. Then they guy's kid came out to pitch late in the game. If you want to see the picture of an illegal 10U pitcher who should go back to taking lessons for 6 months before entering the circle again, this guy's kid fit the bill. Enough about an imbecile who should learn to keep his mouth shut. I know I'll never forget the guy. Neither will some "well connected people" who were involved with another team he pulled the same stunt on. The guy is marked and many now know him. I hope this doesn't effect his kid's future but I know if I ever see his kid, I won't have her on my team. And I'm not alone.
The point is, people just don't seem to know the pitching rules and recognize when they really ought to be applied. By the way, there is no such thing as a "BALK" in girls fastpitch softball. There are situations in which the ruling would be similar to a balk. But balk is a baseball term. It applies only to situations where there are runners on base. It involves the requirement that the pitcher come to a set position and then either throw to a base or deliver a pitch. Balks are called to prevent the pitcher from taking an unfair advantage when he tries to pick a runner off base. These rules do not apply to fastpitch in which there is no leading and there is no "set position." Yet I have heard many people exclaim "BALK" at softball games. Some rec leagues have a rule concerning balks but this is ridiculous and usually proceeds from fathers who played baseball and don't have time to understand why it is inapplicable to fastpitch. Most likely they have a poor understanding of the baseball balk rules!
These rules concerning the pitcher's feet are apparently made in order to prevent the pitcher from gaining an unfair advantage. It seems pretty clear that any rule prohibiting a pitcher from doing X or Y must be in the realm of obtaining an unfair advantage. Otherwise it would be merely arbitrary and capricious - there's no other valid reason for rules governing a pitcher's behavior. If there is, please point it out to me.
It is pretty clear to me that most umpires understand pitching rules pretty well. I've talked to many of them in passing and I've yet to find one who is completely ignorant about them. That's probably because these rules have not varied that widely over the years and, when something major has changed, it is usually discussed ad nauseum. I don't get invited to many umpire BBQs but I do know a couple of the fellows and they usually like to talk.
In the NCAA, there has been some recent effort to make sure the umpires know the rules with regards to footwork. Spy softball included in its April 1 update a publication the NCAA distributed to umpires which exhaustively goes over "the pitcher's feet." If you don't understand my explanation of these issues, please take a look at the publication because it makes the rules extremely clear. Any umpire receiving this information and actually reading it should not have any questions whatsoever about what is legal and what is illegal footwork. Still, you don't see frequent calls on this and that isn't because pitchers aren't leaping and hopping.
It is also pretty clear to me that many pitchers offend the letter of the rules concerning leaping and hopping in such a manner that it cannot be missed by umps. As I said, I observed one HS ump call it after being badgered by a coach. But he called it just the one time though I did see him watching the pitcher later and her infractions were pretty obvious. By the way, I have seen ASA Gold level college prospects leap and hop on numerous occasions. These girls are from all over the country. And I've seen a good number of them do this when they played games in front of big time college coaches they wanted to impress. Still, I have seen no calls from the ASA umps and a good portion of these girls end up filling the rosters of top 25 Div I schools. So I suspect it isn't quite the big deal many make it out to be and it certainly isn't isolated to my state.
It is very easy to observe illegal footwork on TV, relatively simple when watching a game from the sidelines and quite another thing entirely to do so on the field when you are trying to call a game. The other night we were watching a televised game and my wife turned to me and asked, "did you see her hop?" I hadn't so we rewound the game via our DVR. It was pretty obvious. Similarly, we attended a game recently in which a pitcher was obviously hopping. Another time we saw a pitcher who replanted her foot about 6 inches in front of the rubber. And I have seen too many leapers to count. I'm obviously unconcerned with making sure I call the right outs on plays in the field since I'm comfortably along the sidelines but these infractions were pretty darn obvious to me. There's no way an umpire could have missed every infraction. I can see it a few times when there are runners on base or other things going on but there's no way these infractions could be missed over an entire game. They see the evil and know it when they see it.
The third option I gave you above was the umps were reluctant to make the call because none of their buddies make it. As I said, I've known a few umps here and there and I can't say that these guys and gals were ever reluctant to give their opinion on any subject whatsoever, even if everyone disagreed with that opinion. I've yet to meet an ump who I would expect to be afraid of voicing his opinion on the feet of a pitcher because none of his cohort is currently making the call. I just cannot see that sort of thing happening. I've seen umps make all sorts of calls on arcane rules nobody else was familiar with and none of their cohort had called recently.
The only thing I am left with is the notion that umps know the rules, see the potential infractions, and would be perfectly willing to make the call if they thought the pitcher were obtaining an unfair advantage. I believe many of these fellows would also make the call in age group ball if they felt there was any chance they were helping the pitcher's career. What I mean is most of these guys and gals are out there for love of the game. They generally have a very high regard for the young girls who play it. Most of them dream that one day they'll see this or that girl play high school or college ball. And they really appreciate young pitchers. If any of the umps I know saw something badly illegal, they would work hard to try to help the girl overcome the issue. They might talk at length to the coach or even approach the parents after the game to at least discuss what they observed. I have had this happen and I have observed it happen to others. These people take their jobs very seriously and most see helping a kid get better at the game to be an integral part of the responsibility they sign up for.
Finally, it is my belief that the reason we don't see illegal pitch called often is because the umpires see what I see. That is, they and I do not see any advantage gained by the questionable foot work. I may be wrong about this and I welcome any sort of inquiry or comments by umps but from what I can see, leapers do not get an advantage. And crow hoppers may appear to get an advantage but when you put a hopper next to a legal pitcher and watch the degree to which the hop helps or hinders her, what you are left with is the idea that a hopper loses something on her pitches as a result of the hop.
Hoppers really get no closer to the batter than draggers. They do not gain anything by the new point of impetus. That's because their normal forward momentum would be greater if they didn't re-land and push off. You come off that rubber about as fast as you can explode. If you re-land and then push again, you have lost a good deal of forward momentum. To see what I mean, try it for yourself. Go into a wind-up, leap, land and push off again. Its pretty awkward. And most importantly, you are moving faster during the leap than you are after the push off from a new point of impetus. I just don't see any real advantage but maybe you do. Aside from this possible explanation, I cannot otherwise explain why you almost never see illegal pitch called on a leaper or hopper.
I also think many of us would be better served if we focused on something besides the pitchers leap or hop. We can yell all we want from the sidelines or dugout. We can even eat into the game by constantly going out to go over the rulebook with umps. But that's not going to put runners on base or make our hitters hit the ball. In the end, the rules are what they are, the umps call whatever they call, and the game continues. If you want to win, do so by putting the ball into play.Labels: pitching, rules, umpiring
Permanent Link: No Evil
|
|
|
