Girls Fastpitch Softball
Google
 
Web Girls-softball.com
A Guide to Girls Fastpitch Softball For Parents and Kids     
Gender

SOFTBALL TIPS
Rules
Hitting
Pitching
Defense
Parenting
Coaching
Team Directory
SITE STUFF
Girls Softball Home
Contact Us
Syndicate Our Content
About Us
Privacy Policy

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
Amateur Softball Association of America
International Softball Federation
National Fastpitch Coaches Association
Spy Softball
Fastpitch Recruiting
Little League
Protect Our Nation's Youth
FAST Sports
Kobata Skills Videos
Tightspin Pitching Trainer
 

And ... The Music Stops

by Dave
Thursday, August 28, 2008

These are anxious days, and not merely because school is about to begin.   For many, it has already begun.   Where I am, girls have been trying out for teams over the past month.   It is like a giant game of musical chairs.   But the music just stopped.

No, all the chairs have not been taken.   As in any game of musical chairs, 80% of the players sit down immediately.   Then there is a scuffle as a few fight over possession of some seats.   Then a bunch of girls, not having found seats yet, stand up, look around and realize there are still several left unoccupied.   They glance, calculate the opportunity, then sprint for one while remembering other unoccupied ones in case they don't win this one.   This secondary shuffle ends with several more seats taken, the recognition that a few weren't sought after, and another sprint by the remaining standers for the last couple of seats.   Finally, it is all over and somebody has lost, one player has not found a seat.   Now its time for round two of the game!

Round two involves players who don't like their seats getting up while those who do can remain in theirs.   Then there is the fight to occupy desired places, the secondary scuffle to sit anywhere and not be eliminated, etc.

This is an overly simplistic view of reality.   The truth is much more complicated than any silly game analogy.   The softball environment is a human endeavor and whenever many humans get involved in anything, chaos rules.

I can't say what it looks like where you are.   My only window onto most of the country comes via e-mails folks send to me.   Apparently every place is different depending on softball population density, the popularity of the sport, available facilities, coaches, organizations and teams, and several other considerations.   In some places, there are a few (maybe just one) elite programs and a bunch of secondary ones, possibly several layers.

The tryouts for elite programs are usually well attended and highly competitive.   Those for lesser ones, much less so.   Everywhere, parents and players look for situations which fit their circumstances, hopes and goals.   And the environment is almost always in motion.

Sometimes there are mass defections (including coaches) from one elite program to another.   Sometimes elite teams break apart and send their members out into the game with several players landing here, a few more there, a coach or two leaving the game entirely, one or more ending up in a new place.   It seems as if things are always rather untidy and someone always gets hurt.   But that's life!

It would be easy to proclaim that these things always go in cycles.   I'm not convinced yet that this is the case.   There are trends to be sure but I doubt any of us will be involved with the sport long enough to recognize actual cycles of growth and contraction.   The best we can do is examine the current situation and move towards a seat so as to not be shut out.

I suppose that in the beginning of time, there were a couple elite programs out there and everybody who desired to really play the game pursued them.   The best players found slots and many people were left without a place at the table.

Enough of these people got together to form new programs whose desire was to show the elite ones they can compete with them.   Some of these new programs succeeded and entered the elite fray.   Of course, this increased the number of tryouts and spread the talent pool thinner than it would have been otherwise.   But more girls got to play at a relatively high level.   More girls obtained better training than their rec programs provided, and did so during periods when softball was not typically and generally available, during the fall and winter months.

Many other teams failed to play at a level competitive with the old and new elite teams.   Sometimes these groups stayed together over multiple years, improved and joined the upper ranks.   Sometimes, perhaps more frequently, these teams split up and their members went their ways, sometimes qualifying for one of the old or new elite teams, and sometimes having to join lesser skilled ones.

Sometimes, a remnant of the old roster for a team failing to compete with the elite ones was left behind.   They sought new talent to add to their core.   Perhaps one or more of the old players on the old team were unhappy with the coaching, the schedule, or the results and decided to found their own new, aspiring team.   This sort of thing is good for the softball industry as more slots are available for girls who are unable to make the elite teams, more uniforms are needed, more equipment is purchased, and more composite bats are sold.   But this sort of trend further confuses the landscape.

As more and more teams form and aspire to "show" the elite teams they can compete with them, the talent pool gets stretched and stretched until several elite programs can no longer field the sort of team they once were able to.   A couple top players are no longer willing to drive an hour each way for practices 3 times a week.   Maybe these girls want to play with the girls from their own current or future high school so that team can be competitive.   Perhaps a parent or two believe they know more about the game than last year's coaching crew and want to head out on their own.   Some girls want to get more time in the circle, behind the plate, etc.   Rather than just give up on pitching, catching, etc. because they are fifth on their elite team's depth chart, they move on to teams which need them as a number one.

So it goes, year after year, until eventually, the number of players and teams no longer fit together.   To draw a weak analogy, the softball environment becomes like a jigsaw puzzle box which is missing some pieces and contains some from another puzzle or two.   Say there are 125 girls for 10 teams, made up of 12 players each, one year.   The next year there are 127 girls and 12 teams.   Many teams are going to have one or two open roster spots, a couple teams may have to fold and many girls left with no team, or maybe several teams are going to dip into the pool of rec players and attempt to suck up several girls who don't really aspire to play against the best possible competition.

The next year it gets even more messy.   A few more girls enter the scene.   A few of the ex-rec players decide they want to stay in travel.   There are now 159 players available to fill roster spots on 19 teams.

Maybe the elite teams can fill their rosters and maybe they can't because Sara is not satisfied with playing only two thirds of the innings or with pitching in the number 3 role.   She wants to be an ace, or her parents want her to be.   They can pull in five friends from rec, including a catcher, advertise tryouts, get a few bona fide travel players, and hopefully pull this thing together.   They didn't like that coach anyway.

As the numbers in this thing get really large in terms of girls and teams, things get more and more complicated, messy, and sometimes ugly.   Elite programs find they can field elite teams at just a few age groups.   Their 10s, 12s, or 14s are really bad and not indicative of the sort of teams they typically put onto the field.   Whole, intact teams leave organizations and join others over money, facilities, or one of many other possible reasons.

Organizations which once fielded complete arrays of high caliber teams find they have gaps in various age groups.   Two years ago they had two teams in every age group, last year they had one in the 16s, one in the 14s, nothing in the 12s and two in the 10s.   This year they have no 10s, one 12, no 14s and two 16s.   Tryouts for their 18s were sparsely attended and they've only pulled together 8 qualified kids.   They are going to form up in the hope that girls from other programs will contact them during the winter or that some of the 8-member team will be able to convince a few high school players to join.

During the winter, a few kids or their parents decide this is not what they wanted.   Maybe the coach told them it was going to be OK to miss Wednesday practices for flute lessons when they committed.   Then he kept harrassing them about trying to make one every once in a while.   Maybe the coach told the parents that the group would practice twice a week from October to March and then he or she realized that the group does not have adequate financing for such facilities and cut it back to one per week from December to March.   Maybe the group of kids who everyone thought was joining this team was not the actual final group because some of the better kids joined other teams and several lesser skilled kids were used to fill in the roster.   Ever heard or said this one: "Some of the better players seem to be missing from this practice, scrimmage, tournament?   But we've got 12 kids, so who is missing?"   I remember talking to someone at a scrimmage who told me the several good pitchers are missing today.   When I pointed out that 13 kids were and wondered how many they carried on their roster (16?), the answer was a blank stare.

Maybe this team was supposed to be an older 14 team but when the final roster was set, there were 2 x 12s, 6 x 13s and 4 x 14s with one or two of the girls playing their first year of travel!   Maybe the coaches turned out to be completely disorganized or underqualified.   Maybe that good coach at tryouts was never planning on coaching this team.   Maybe he was very patient and calm at tryouts and turned out to have anger management issues in real practices and you don't wish to find out if he is able to control himself during games.

Whatever the reason and the possibilities are endless, the fact is kids end up leaving teams, joining others, or leaving the sport altogether every year, after rosters have been "set."   And a few kids who were actually ready for travel during fall tryouts never realized teams were forming up then.   They contact organizations, teams, coaches begging for a tryout.   They come to an indoor workout, get asked to join the team and then refuse to commit just yet!   Nothing seems to be all that settled during the fall and sometimes teams fall apart during the winter months.   Everything is always fluid.

It occurs to me that there is no neat conclusion to all of this.   It is a mess and it never gets any cleaner.   Yes a few girls will advance, move onto elite teams (ASA Gold and others) and stay where they are for years to come.   The rest of us have to hack our ways through an ever growing jungle of confusion.   We will invariably commit to teams and then learn the roster consists of 7 or 3, besides us, that the coach has left to join another team because that team has sought out his daughter, that the coaching is not quite what we thought it would be, the workout schedule is too heavy or too light, the facilities are too far and practices are scheduled so as to make the driving more difficult, practices are all scheduled at the same time as flute or pitching lessons, our daughters don't fit into the social fabric of the team we joined because she is at the young end of the age span, isn't as good as the other girls or maybe is older than most or by far the best player, or for whatever reason imaginable.

This confusion, anarchy and chaos is probably the last thing any of us needs.   We have other worries including academics, finances, a sick relative, other commitments, etc.   Softball was supposed to be fun.   It was supposed to fit neatly into the rest of our lives notwithstanding the rigors of an intense tournament schedule.   It was supposed to be something which it seems no longer to be.   Yes, practicing and playing were always work but this ridiculous game of musical chairs was never supposed to be part of the equation.   The only way off this crazy treadmill is to just get off it completely.   And, after all is said and done, all we really want is for our daughters to go and play some games.   If we stay in the game, they will.   So the best we can hope to do is do the best we can hope to do.

Best of luck to you.   Please take a seat ... NOW!

Labels: ,

Permanent Link:  And ... The Music Stops


Practicing To Make Great Plays

by Dave
Wednesday, August 27, 2008

I am a firm believer in doing repetitious, mundane plays in practice.   I like the concept of a player fielding 100 ordinary grounders every day.   I like throwing drills to all bases performed many times, over and over again.   This is a reaction sport in which a player does not want to stop and think in the middle of a play.   She needs to have performed each particular skill thousands of times in practice.   But if you (team or individual) want to stand out from the crowd, perhaps something more is required.

There are all sorts of mundane plays which any good player must execute properly in games.   Fielding balls to the right, left and right at you; making throws to the left, right, home, etc.; shuffle throws, crow hops, catching balls while on the run, these are all important skills which arise on everyday ordinary plays and must be made routinely, with a success rate, if one is to step up and be a player.   There are countless other plays which should be made too.   Some of these are slight variations of mundane plays and some of these are more advanced.   But we seldom see such things worked on in practice and I'm not sure why.

Before I get into this, many will see these plays and say, there's nothing extraordinary about them.   I make (my daughter makes / my team makes) plays like that routinely.   We practice those all the time.   That may be but not everyone thinks along those lines and few teams actually practice any of it.

The best example of a play which is just ouside the mundane happens when a shortstop goes to her knees on a ball up the middle.   That is considered to be routine by many a good shortstop.   But a 12U or 14U SS may not ever practice such a play.   The best do but most do not.

There are a couple aspects to making a play when diving to the grounder up the middle.   For one thing, there is the dive and making the judgment that I am going to get this ball if and only if I dive.   That takes experience.   I understand the need to field 100 balls in front, just to either side, etc.   But at some point, the quality SS needs to have enough repetitions on balls just outside her reach, unless she dives, to distinguish such plays.   You sometimes see infielders even at the highest levels fail to recognize quickly enough a ball they must dive for.   The more practice, the better!

The dive itself needs work in terms of posture, footwork, laying out, and getting the ball.   I won't give you a mechanical diagram for this - that's beyond my scope here.   You can handle this.   Watch a bunch of shortstops laying out for balls and copy their movements.

Now, our intrepid SS knows when to dive for a ball up the middle.   She is skilled at diving and makes the play on the ball most of the time.   But she hasn't got anyone out yet.   After the grounder is caught, she needs to get up and make the throw, or learn to throw from her knees.   That's simple enough but she needs to do it and repeat it so she gets the right feel.   This whole exercise requires repetition.   And the very best shortstops do this in practice.   They don't just jump out onto the field with all that natural talent and make spectacular plays.

Other similar drills need to be worked for all infield positions and it is nearly impossible to list them all here.   I'll just mention some of these because I know you are smart enough to identify important but nonmundane plays and then devise drills for them.

A similar drill to the above needs to be run for the second baseman who has to dive to her right on balls up the middle.   She'll also need drills for balls to her left which require a dive.   And she will possibly need to work on making throws from her knees and/or one knee.   The shortstop is going to need work on plays in the hole.   And lest I forget, they are going to need to make these plays followed by throws to each of the bases, including home.

It may seem counter-intuitive for a shortstop to need to go into the hole and then make a throw to home but comnsider a hard shot line-drive in which the SS dives and knocks down the ball while the runner from third retreats to avoid being doubled off and then breaks for home when the ball hits dirt.   A good throw needs to be made to nail her, a good practiced throw!

Similarly, the third baseman needs to be able to dive on hard smashes, retrieve the ball, and then make a throw to any of the bases or maybe get up and step on third.   We see these plays all the time.   We marvel at the athleticism of the fielder when she records an out as the result of some spectacular diving stab.   But when she gets up and throws the ball over the first baseman's head or fails to make any play recording an out, we yawn and think, "that was a nice play but...."   Throws from the dirt on good plays must be followed by a putout in order to really gain notice!   And like any other throw, these should be practiced.

There are two kindred plays a third baseman can make to stand out from the crowd.   One involves the ball that nagging slapper bounces into the dirt.   She pounds the ball so hard that it doesn't come down to earth in time for you to even attempt a throw.   Well, she does have 1.3 speed (I'm making that up) and the ball was in the air for 1.5 seconds!   But most of the time, you could get that ball in time to just barely make a play, if you practice it.   And practicing it could benefit you when the batter is a more realistic 2.9 runner or is some other hitter who accidently does the same thing.

If you just stand there and wait for the ball to come down, then snag it with your glove, reach in and grab it with your throwing hand, hop into position, and then throw, you probably aren't going to get even the 3.8 runner out.   The third baseman on a chopper needs to do a bit more.   This could involve a jump for the ball but that's probably relatively inefficient - it looks good but accomplishes nothing.   This could involve barehanding the ball immediately into a throw.   That involves working on the footwork required to set up while simultaneously charging the ball and practicing barehanding choppers.   A coach could help a third baseman by initially soft tossing balls into the air in front of her, having her charge, grab and throw to first or shuffle to home for those bases loaded situations.   Then assuming the practice infield is hard enough, a coach, with some practice, could learn to hit some good choppers for her to work the skill.

The second play for a third baseman to work in order to stand out from the crowd is similar to the shortstop's play.   She dives to grab the smash hit to her right, just barely in fair ground, gets up and throws to first in time to nail the runner.   An important variation of this is, again, when bases are loaded, to dive for the ball and come up throwing from her knees to home.   I've seen this oplay accomplished and the crowd expresses their delight.   I;ve also seen three quarters of the play get executed and then be followed by an errant throw.   These skills need work with respect to footwork and throwing from knees when necessary.   If you never work them in practice, I'll lay odds against these plays ever culminating in an out during a game.

Another play which a good softball player should make but which sometimes doesn't happen is the low pop-up behind first base.   Many first and second basemen make an attempt to field this ball but they fail by a step or because they didn't dive for the ball.   They missed it by a step because they didn't recognize the opportunity, didn't turn quickly enough, took bad steps to the ball, or otherwise just didn't have enough practice at this.

I strongly suggest going over the footsteps needed to make such a play and then repeating them, over and over again.   Then I suggest running a drill for first basemen in which a coach tosses the ball behind first base, into both fair and foul ground.   The player should try to make the catch and the coach should try to throw the ball just out of range.   The player should be encouraged to dive when necessary - its opretty soft back there, isn't it?   The coach should not take the approach that if he or she throws it out of the player's range, an adjustment into the range should be made.

The same play is important for second basemen.   That is, sometimes the ball will be struck badly but fly beyond the potential reach of the first baseman, well beyond the possible retrieval by the rightfielder, and into "no man's land."   In softball, these types of hits usually happen in the late innings with runner on third and two outs!   If the second baseman can get there and make that catch, games can be turned from losses to victories.   But the 2B has to know how to take a good route to the ball and when to dive.   This can only be accomplished, other than in times of great luck, by practicing the play.   These plays can be practiced the same way those for the first baseman can.   Actually, it would be great to practice pop-ups into no man's land with 1B, 2B and RF all involved so the three fielders can get used to each other's abilities and ranges in order to avoid collisions.   The SS and LF have a similar play in "no man's land."   These could also involve the third baseman though most of the time, she's up so far that it seems unlikely that she'll get into that position.

A related play which could be worked in practice occurs when there is a gifted slapper up and she pops one into no man's land on either side of the field.   These are really low, soft linedrives more than popups but they take basically the same route to the ball by fielders.   If you've got a slapper defense set up, the outfielders are probably closer in.   Maybe the SS is in tighter too, though somebody need to be situated so as to be able to go after balls hit right behind third.   Some slapper D's I have seen put the 3B back by the bag and in those circumstances she can handle these plays.   But when you have that gifted slapper who can lift the ball out beyond the infielder's reach down along the lines, your outfielders need to be able to make diving plays.   And they need to practice these.   I have often seen good slappers do this but I've never seen a team practice to defense it.

There are other diving plays for outfielders though the situations when diving is an acceptable strategy are important to go over.   And teaching outfielders how to dive so as to be able to block the ball should they not succeed in catching it is equally important.   The best outfielders are aggressive going after short liners.   They often dive for them.   But when the ball lands short of their reach, the best outfielders do not lay mired in their defeat.   Instead, they tend to block the ball and keep it in front of them.

Catchers and other players have plays outside routine they can work on but I hesitate to call anything the catcher sees nonroutine.   Still, many catchers practice throws to bases from a standing position but fail to work on them from their knees.   I like to perform a drill in which a coach throws balls in the dirt to a catcher stationed in her regular catching position.   Those are great to develop the necessary muscle memory for blocking low pitches.   But why not add a throw, especially to third and also to second, from the down in the dirt blocking position?   There are many occassions in which this play is necessary but if this is never practiced, a catcher is not going to throw out the runner as often as she might if they were.

Pitchers often get short shrift in infield drills.   I've told you I like to run the drill where the pitcher throws a pitch to a catcher and a coach stationed just off the plate hits grounders at her feet, the pitcher fields them and throws to the various bases.   I don't want to get into the habit of trying to really drill balls right back at her.   These can result in injuries.   I don't want to send three pitchers to the emergency room two days before a tournament.   But the coach could hit fairly hard smashes using softees.   I should note that these kinds of plays are probably more reliant upon the underlying athleticism of the pitcher than they are on any kind of practice.   The more important aspect than fielding the balls is making the throw.

You have heard many people talk about the infielder's "internal clock."   That is a developed sense of how much time she really has to make a play on the runner.   This is displayed in all sorts of circumstances but never more so than in the type of plays we are talking about today.   If the shortstop goes into the hole, dives, retrieves the ball and then makes a throw to first a full second after the runner gets there, thereby allowing the runner moving to second to proceed easily to third, that's a bad play.   She has to develop the sense of when to hold the ball and when to make a throw.   That sense can only be developed through repetition.   So any of the drills we are talking about here could and should be performed with baserunners involved.   That will help fielders develop that internal clock and avoid turning great plays into really bad ones.

There are other types of drills which can be worked into a practice which develop the skills needed to make great plays.   We do some of these but altering a few elemtns of other drills can help build the extraordinary skills we seek.   In softball the ground ball double play is a rarity.   Yet, we run this in our ordinary infield practice because we recognize that the skills can be important in various circumstances.

When there is arunner on second and the batter drills a ball straight at the 2B or SS, most often the runner at second will find herself 5 steps from the back and off balance.   She staggers, stops, and then returns as quickly as possible to the bag to avoid being doubled off.   Most often, when this happens, the other middle infielder is off shooting craps or texting her girl friends.   Everyone looks at the fielder who caught the ball, then to the runner trying to regain her balance, then over to the vacant bag.   The opportunity for a double play is lost.   And then we all look to the other middle infielder who stands there with an blank stare in her eyes and egg of her face.   Sometimes, the other middle infielder has good instincts and runs to cover, arriving just before the baserunner.   But the girl with the ball is waiting for her arrival before making the throw.   The fielder beats the runner but the throw comes in well after she has returned.

If we practice this situation, it is just possible that we'll build a reaction which happens automatically in games.   The two middle infielders are positioned properly and a coach hits light liners to short or second from a position around the pitcher's plate.   One fielder makes the catch while the other races to cover the bag.   The fielder with the ball leads the one covering the bag so she can catch the ball in full stride and double up the runner.   These drills use the various types of throws one middle infielder might make to the other, overhand, dart, underhand, shuffle.   The more we work this, the higher the likelihood we'll see one of those very convenient double plays when the score is tied 0-0 and we're trying to get an out in ITB.

You might be able to make any or all of these plays without ever having practiced them.   Maybe you are just a great athlete who makes these sorts of non-routine plays routinely.   Maybe you are a natural.   Maybe you are just that good and your team all has ESP.   They can read each other's thoughts, motions and body language immediately.   They know when they don't have to go after a ball because Sally is going to get it.   They can make double plays blind folded.   Then again, even if you are that good, I have to wonder why practicing these things would hurt you.


Tom writes in to discuss something for the pitcher which I'll include here and in another place I mention defensive drills for pitchers:

"One of the more important drills that I've seen involve teaching pitchers to defend themselves from batted balls.   A fielded ball can result in an out and a missed ball can take out your pitcher for the season.   The most effective practice that I have discovered uses the lite-flite Jugs ball.   They look like softballs and throw like softballs but don't break anything.   When the pitcher is in her workout, the coach throws lit-flites back at her to defend as she pitches to the catcher, starting easy and moving to more difficult.   We work with her trying to deflect the ball with her glove and not using her throwing throwing hand.   Pitchers tend to try to catch with the bare hand which can cause a season ending injury)   We work with her to get into a defensive position as soon as possible after delivering the pitch.   Again this is practiced with the emphasis on safety and NOT on making a play.   I can get the next out but I can't replace an injured pitcher easily.   This changes her focus and quite frankly her overall fielding improves as her confidence increases."

Labels: ,

Permanent Link:  Practicing To Make Great Plays


Tidbits

by Dave
Wednesday, August 27, 2008

I received a question today to which I gave a very brief answer.   I recieve a lot of these, many of the same questions are asked multiple times, and I thought I would share a few since they often involve somewhat arcane questions which, taken as a whole, are likely to arise sometime during the course of a season.
  1. Infield Fly Rule Overturned

    One reader wrote in about an instance in which a pop fly was dropped by the second baseman after the plate umpire had invoked the infield fly rule.   The umpires met and decided to overturn the infield fly rule because the ball actually went out beyond the infield dirt and fell in the outfield grass.

    This should never happen.   First of all, the infield fly rule occurs when, in the umpire's judgment, a fair pop-up can be caught by an infielder with ordinary effort, there are no or one outs, and runners are on first and second (or bases loaded).   When called, the batter is automatically out and runners advance at their own risk.   If the ball is caught, runners must tag up.   If it is dropped, they need not return to base and instead can proceed to the next base if they wish.

    The only circumstance which would change an initial infield fly ruling occurs when the pop-up drifts into foul ground.   If, say, an infield fly drifts into foul ground and the ball is dropped, the batter gets new life - she is not automatically out.   Because the invocation of the infield fly rule changes runners and fielders actions, it should never be overturned.

  2. When To Tag up

    I received a question about a fly ball on which a runner tagged up.   The complexity in the question occurred because the ball was initially tipped back into the air by one fielder and then caught by another.   The runner tagged on the initial tip and proceeded to the next base.   The fielder who caught the ball proceeded to throw to the base previously occupied in an attempt to lodge an appeal that the runner had left early.   Umpires called her out because she had not tagged up after the ball was caught.

    I am unaware of any rulebooks which diverge from the following though that is possible.   The proper time to tag up occurs when the flyball is first touched.   That is, a circus catch involving multiple players who in turn tip the ball in the air does not impact the appropriate time at which the runner must go back to the base and tag up.   As soon as the flyball is initially touched, she can return to and then leave the base occupied.

  3. Pitcher's feet

    Another question I get fairly frequently involves something about the pitcher's feet.   These consist of several related and some unrelated issues.   Here are the most frequent ones:

    (A) Leap vs. Crowhop

    Rather than give you the question since there are various iterations, here's my understanding of the two terms.   A leap occurs when the pitcher's pivot foot leaves the ground.   Most rulebooks have a requirement that the pivot foot remain in contact with the pitcher's plate until ball release.   This requirement is met when she drags away from the rubber and maintains contact with the ground.   Yes, that's an odd way of putting it but I believe that is the rule in almost every case.

    A crowhop basically consists of a leap followed by obtaining a new point of impetus for the pivot foot.   That is, the pitcher pushes off from the rubber, both feet are in the air, and she lands with the back foot before releasing the ball while also gaining a new pushoff point.   These two are obviously somewhat related but are not the same thing sonce leaping involves and airborn foot and crowhopping involves a new pushoff point.   The result, however, when called, is the same, illegal pitch.

    (B) Two Feet on Pitcher's Plate / Backward Step

    Several readers have written to inquire about whether the pitcher needs to begin with two feet on the rubber and/or whether she can take a backward step "before going into her wind-up."   The answer is, it depends!

    Basically, there are different pitching rules depending on the type of play.   I don;t know all the rules by sanctioning body but I do know that some organizations allow pitchers to begin with one foot on the rubber and others require both feet to be on it.

    High school rules can vary though I'm not entirely clear whether these vary from state to state.   I believe they do.   So any high school pitcher or coach ought to consult with their state's rulebook before proceeding.   In my state, pitchers can start with one foot on the rubber and I have never seen an umpire call a pitcher for a badckward step.

    Little League and Pony also permit a pitcher to start with one foot on the rubber but to my knowledge, Pony does not permit a pitcher to take any sort of backward step.   I'm not sure about Little League.

    Most other sanctioning bodies require a pitcher to start with both feet in contact with the rubber.   I am not aware of any of these which tolerate a backward step.   The NCAA is stricter than most, requiring half of each foot to be on the rubber.   I have never seen a college pitcher take a backward step.   I have observed many college pitchers slide their pivot foot across the rubber before striding and never seen an illegal pitch called for this.   But from what I have observed, a pitcher who drags her foot across the rubber almost never keeps half the foot in contact during the drag.

    (C) Walking into the pitch

    Several folks have, over the years, written to complain about pitchers walking into their pitch.   That would seem to be impossible when two feet are required to be on the rubber.   In those instances in which only a single foot is required to be in contact with the rubber, I believe that foot must be the pivot foot.   And I believe, walking into the pitch is usually prohibited.   Yet I have seen this done many times in Pony and other play without there ever being a warning, let alone a call.   I have seen it called in certain kinds of play but I have gone multiple tournaments with every pitcher walking in and not so much as a yawn from any umpire.

    (D) Taking signs off rubber

    Pitchers are supposed to either take a sign or mimick such an act before beginning the pitch.   On some occassions, pitchers on my team have developed the habit of taking the sign behind the rubber, then stepping onto it, and then going into their windup.   On some occassions, umpires have approached me privately and asked me to instruct our pitchers to take the sign from the rubber.   Usually this is no big deal and nothing ever comes of it.   But next game or tournament, our pitcher is again taking the sign from in back of the rubber!   I would guess that I've seen more pitchers do this than take the sign on the actual rubber.   And I've never seen an illegal pitch call due to this.

    (E) Illegal Pitch!!!!

    By far, the most frequent comment/question I receive involves someone seeing frequent bona fide illegal pitches not called.   Often the writer sees one or two such illegal pitches called but could swear that every pitch thrown was illegal.   I cannot account for this.   That's been my experience as well.   One reader noted that every pitcher on Team USA does something illegal on just about every pitch, gets called for the specific infraction on occassion, but does not repeatedly get called even though she does the same thing on every pitch.   I can;t say that I saw the specific event every time somebody writes to me but I do understand what they are talking about.   It is strange and I'm unclear what the meaning of this is.   I think we've seen games in which the first several pitches or any particular string of pitches are called illegal in succession.   I can't say that the pitcher ever changed the illegal aspect to the delivery.   But for whatever reason, umpires have never in my experience continued to repeatedly call a pitcher for illegals until she changed or was removed.   Draw your own conclusions.

    (F) Single Ump

    As a final comment about pitching rule enforcement, I am often confronted with questions about why an umpire did not call illegal pitch for some girl who was "obviously crowhopping."   Often I ask the questioner whether there were one or two umps at the game.   Most often there was one.   To me, this calls into question the judgment of the questioner.

    If you want to see the game from a single umpire's position, try it out.   How would you like to be back there with some kid whipping the heavy ball at speeds requiring high school baseball reaction times, perhaps at a catcher of suspect ability, while also trying to call balls and strikes, get out to see close plays in the field, fielding various complaints from both dugouts, not to mention the peanut gallery, on some 100 degree day, for several hours at a time?   Now with all that responsibility, the ump is supposed to also closely observe the pitcher's hands and feet?   And make sure the two or three runners on the bases don;t leave early?   Get real!

    In general, if you have two umps officiating a game, the plate ump will usually keep his eyes on the pitcher's hands.   The field ump will usually watch her feet.   Unless something happens in which the pitcher makes some sort of mistake with her hands (brings them together twice or not at all), most illegal pitch calls will come from the field ump.   Don't scream at a single plate ump even once because in your judgment the pitcher is crow hopping.   Use a little common sense.

  4. Walked runner proceeds to second base?

    One of my most embarrassing moments coaching softball occurred when one of my batters was struck by a pitch, jogged down to first, and I told her to go to second.   We had a runner on third and when my runner took off, the catcher threw the ball to second.   I started screaming at our runner on third to go.   the umpire, barely maintaining his temper and sanity exclaimed, "coach, you can't do that on a hit batter."   He was, of course, right.   When the ball hits a batter, it's dead.   I guess I had a mental hickup or something.   I proceeded to dig a hole in the dirt and crawled into it.

    Many folks starting out in travel ball or rec all-star play are initially unfamiliar with something called the "continuation play."   basically, when a batter is struck with a pitch, yes, the ball is dead.   But after a walk, everything remains live.   So a walked batter can "continue" on to second base after a walk, with liability to be put out.   This is often done in lower level, young play because, if the runner proceeding to second can induce a throw from the pitcher or catcher, the offensive team may be able to score a runner from third.   I have seen this attempted at levels up to high school and 16U travel.   But as girls arms become stronger and more reliable, it is a less common occurrence.

    A friend once told a funny anecdote about one of the parents on a high school team.   The fellow was one of those know-it-all types.   When, during the course of a game, a batter was walked and she proceeded to second base, he began to shout, "she can't do that - the ball was already in the circle.   That's not a proper interpretation and the umpire did not call her out.   The father continued to shout until someone pulled him aside and explained the rule.   He wasn't comfortable but at least stopped shouting!

    Basically, when the ball is live and ends up in the circle, runners are permitted to continue to the next base without stopping or hesitation.   If, after a walk for example, the ball arrives in the circle, it is still live but you can't get to first, jump off, and then begin juking in an attempt to get the pitcher to make a play on you.   A runner can reach first base and immediately proceed to second.   If the pitcher makes a play on her, all bets are off - the ball is now live.   But if she ignores the continuation and does not make any sort of play, the runner on third cannot jump off again and begin juking.   She should be called out for leaving base early.

    The pitcher "making a play" includes any action which seems like she is making a play - specifically lifting the ball out of the glove into the throwing hand in a motion - that looks like she plans to make or fake a throw.   In practice, if she does anything aside from lifting the ball into throwing position, including jumping around to position her body to make the throw, you will never see an umpire interpret this as making a play.

  5. Runner didn't turn to the right

    I remember when I first got involved with fastpitch at any level, the coaches instructed girls to overrun first on grounders and then turn to their right so they couldn't be tagged out.   That's technically wrong but really a minor error.

    Some coaches want girls to run through the bag and then turn towards the fence to see if the throw got away.   Many coaches want the runner to reach first and then immediately break down so as to proceed quickly to second if the ball gets away.   They don't need the runner to see the ball hitting the fence - that's what base coaches are for.   Instead, they want runners ready to advance should the opportunity arise.   That seems entirely more reasonable to me.   But that's besides the initial point.

    A runner does not need to turn to the right to avoid being tagged out.   No such rule exists.   The rules require a runner overrunning first only to not make a motion towards second to avoid subjecting herself to liability to be put out.   If she makes such a motion towards second, all bets are off.   She is now liable to be put out and must get herself to some base.

    I suppose that the misunderstanding about turning to the right or left involves some misinterpretation of a runner being put out.   She motioned to second and got caught in a pickle or was otherwise put out.   Somebody thought she had "turned the wrong way" and that's why they got her.   But that's not what happened.   What happened was she, in the umpire's judgment motioned as if going to second.   There is no right way or wrong way to turn after overrunning first.


I think that's enough for one day.   Have a great one!

Labels:

Permanent Link:  Tidbits


Rule In A Pickle!

by Dave
Monday, August 25, 2008

Substantially revised 8/26

Ed writes in to ask a question about a questionable ruling his team suffered recently as follows:
"Runner on 3B.   After the pitch, she draws a throw from catcher to 3B.   Runner breaks for home, and is caught in pickle.   She heads backs to 3B, then home.   On her way home, catcher is about 5 feet up the line, and in basepath, and doesn't have the ball.   The ball arrives to the catcher a split second before runner runs into catcher, and the runner knocks the ball lose.   Umpire calls runner out for making contact, and tells us she has to slide.

What should the runner do in this situation?   If a) she slides she'll never reach home; b) she runs around the catcher, she's out of the basepath; and c) she runs into the catcher, she's out for interference.

These are 14 y/o girls, playing ISA rules."


Before we begin looking at this, I want to address an issue contained in Ed's question.   One of the alternatives Ed proposes is "b) she runs around the catcher, she's out of the basepath."   I know we've discussed this before but, in case you missed it, running in the basepaths is not a golden rule - all runners do not need to always be in the basepaths.   The only time one should be called out for failing to remain in the basepaths occurs when a runner leaves the paths in order to avoid a tag.

In practice, this rule can cause you trouble, particularly in pickles (run downs).   I have never seen an instance in which a pickled runner leaves the basepath and in which she was not called out specifically for that reason.   I've never seen an instance in which the ump called her safe after she left the basepaths and then, when the defensive team argued the call, the ump told them she left the basepaths in order to avoid contact.   So, I do not believe this is an effective alternative.   Still, what else are we left with?   If she slides, she will never reach home and definitely be out.   So let's look at what did happen and how the rules should be applied.

The ISA rulebook is available online here: ISA rulebook, pdf file.

To begin with, as a general softball matter, fielders are not allowed to stand in baselines, blocking oncoming runners, unless they are in actual possession of the ball in most kinds of play including Pony, NSA, ASA, etc.   That constitutes obstruction.   However, ISA seems to be a little different than other bodies in regards to this issue.

ISA rules state:

"RULE 7 - BATTER-RUNNER AND RUNNER

Section 6 - Runners Are Entitled To Advance Without Liability To Be Put Out.

B. When a fielder, not in possession of the ball, not in the act of fielding a batted ball impedes the progress of a runner or batter-runner who is legally running the bases."

There is no precise discussion of fielders and runners involved in a pickle or a fielder in the act of catching a thrown ball being allowed to block a base here.   Essentially, if a fielder impedes a baserunner while not in possession of the ball, it looks like she committed obstruction.

However, Rule 7-6, B(4) states:

"If a defensive player is fielding a thrown ball and the flight carries or draws them into the path of the base runner, then it would not be constituted as obstruction."

So, while a fielder apparently has no right to stand in the path of the baserunner while not in actual possession of the ball, should the throw cause her to get into the baserunner's path and cause her to impede the baserunner while trying to catch the ball, that is an exception to the general rule.   In this case, it would seem that the catcher is in the runner's basepath, impeding her, while trying to catch a throw.   The throw didn't draw her into the baseline.   She was there anyway.   But, it can be argued, the throw drew her into the basepath.   That's the way the umpire would probably see it.   But in this case, it turns out that doesn't matter either with respect to the call the ump did make.

A further examination of obstruction rules reveals something else.   There used to be a provision in almost every rulebook which stated that a fielder "in the act of catching a throw" could not be obstructing a baserunner.   Many, if not most, rulebooks did away with this a while ago.   These rules were changed to require the fielder to be in possession of the ball or risk being called for obstruction.

I remember sitting in a Pony Nationals manager's meeting maybe a year or two ago and being told to go back to our hotels and discuss obstruction with our players.   The UIC told us that a fielder must have actual possession of the ball or would be called for obstruction.   He noted that the rule no longer contained anything about "in the act of catching a throw."   He insisted this change would be rigidly enforced.   Of course, the next day, that precise situation occurred and our runner was called out!

But ISA rules regarding obstruction contain the following:

"Rule 8 Base Running

Section 5 Base runners are entitled to advance without liability to be put
out:

B. When a fielder obstructs a base runner from making a base, unless the fielder is trying to field a batted ball, has the ball ready for a tag or is about to receive a thrown ball."

This provision is obviously inconsistent with what I just said and permits the catcher to be exactly where she was.

(Let me give proper credit here.   When I first wrote the piece, I missed this aspect.   I thought ISA had adopted the rule change to remove the "in the act of catching a throw" exception to the obstruction rule.   My error was pointed out by Jeff who often writes to discuss points with me.   Thanks Jeff.)

So, if the catcher was allowed to be in the baseline, if she couldn't be called for obstruction, because she was "about to receive a thrown ball," then I suppose we would have to look further and then ascertain whether the runner should maybe be called out.

In this case, the umpire claimed that the runner was out because "she didn't slide."   It is fair to say that most of us have seen this call many times.   I get confused by it however when I look to the rules.   The general concept is what is known as the "collision rule."   ISA rules on the issue are:

"Rule 8, Section 8 - The base runner is out:

T. When a defensive player has the ball and is waiting for the runner and the runner remains on their feet and deliberately, with great force, crashes into the defensive player; the runner is declared out.   EFFECT: The ball is dead and all other runners must return to the last base touched at the time of the collision ..."

In the case we are examining, the umpire called the runner out because she didn't slide.   The "runner remains on their feet" clause is the only place you are going to see any implied or other reference to a requirement to slide.

I get annoyed when umps invoke a "requirement to slide."   It is always applied against me and never invoked in my team's favor!

I have heard the requirement to slide expressed many times.   I have asked a number of umps about it and never received an adequate reply.   Off the field, after games, what many of them will tell me is that sliding creates a presumption that the baserunner has done everything in her power to avoid contact - the collision rule does not operate then.   They may refer to the rule noted above or another like it, depending on the type of play, and claim that it is their judgment whether the runner would have been out but for the collision.   When you point out that the "on her feet" rule only applies when she is obviously out, you usually get shrugs and/or a desire to end the conversation.   I have rarely seen a consistent application of this particular aspect of the collision rule.   And, as I said, it semes like it is always applied against me, never for me.

A few years back, we had an argument with ASA umps on a force play at home.   Bases were loaded, a grounder was dribbled back to the pitcher who fielded it, bobbled the ball slightly and then made a shuffle-pass to the catcher standing on the plate.   The runner collided with the catcher who dropped the ball, possibly as long as half a second, maybe a little less, after she had caught and held it.   The umpire called the girl safe at home.   Somebody yelled, "she has to slide."   That raised the hair on my arms and the back of my neck but not as much as the response from the baserunner who yelled to the crowd, "I don't slide!"   This was a 16 or 17 year old girl who was a decent high school player and had at least 5 years of ASA tournament experience under her belt.   The umpire had actually been a guy who had previously told me that runners have to slide always!   Presumably they don't have to slide on force plays?   Contact is permitted on those?   Even when the runner is obviously out?

Clearly when the ball arrives to the base before the runner, is held, however briefly, by the fielder, and is dislodged as a result of the contact, the runner must be called out.   That is precisely what the rules envision.   Runners are not allowed to purposely dislodge balls.   She would have (obvious to anyone besides the ump) been out but for the collision.

But I digress.   The bottom line is the typical major league play in which the big guy rounds third, heads for home, the catcher awaits his arrival with ball in hands, and teeth gritted, is something we try to avoid in softball, something prohibited by the rules of the game.   It may be great theatre in baseball but there are so many injuries caused by it, sometimes career threatening, that we should leave this sort of thing to other sports like roller derby.   In fastpitch softball, you can't run down a catcher who is holding onto the ball long before you arrive.

However, more to the circumstances in the initial question, ISA rules also contain the following provision:

"Rule 7-6, B(5) If the ball, runner and the defensive player all arrive at the same time and contact is made, the umpire should not make the collision rule [interference or obstruction].   This is merely incidental contact."

Based on that, it seems pretty clear the umpire's ruling was erroneous.   The phrase, when a runner is obviously going to be out and makes contact "while remaining on their feet," implies that a slide is necessary (though only when she is obviously going to be out).   And in a pickle situation, it is hard for me to see that she would "obviously" have been out.   "Obvious out" is in the eye of the beholder.   Most umps fail to apply this conjunctive part of the rule.   They want runners to slide, period.

Still, pickles should be different especially when fielders block the basepaths and umps are going to call runners out the moment they step outside the basepath.   It is one thing if the throw arrives and the runner drives into her in an apparent attempt to knock the ball out.   But when there is incidental contact, the collision rule should not apply.

In retrospect, not being at the particular game, I would guess the umpire in his or her judgment made the ruling based upon the runner staying on her feet reagrdless of the ball arriving at about the same time.   He or she applied the rule different than it is expressed in the actual rulebook.   But, I suppose that arguing the call, with rulebook in hand ,would not change the outcome except, perhaps, by making you observe the remainder of the game from the parking lot.   I doubt if any dispassionate further analysis would have persuaded him or her to Ed's way of seeing things.   Many umpires, regardless of the rules under which a contest is played, insist that there is always a requirement to slide.

When an ump invokes the rule where the runner is too far from home (or another base) to be expected to reasonably slide and still make it to that base, this really bothers me.   And when such a ruling is made in a kind of play which specifically makes the collision rule inapplicable due to everybody coming together simultaneously, that really gets me juiced.

Labels: , , ,

Permanent Link:  Rule In A Pickle!


Temperments - Chemistry

by Dave
Sunday, August 24, 2008

MLB manager, Joe Torre, claims there is nothing to "team chemistry."   He says winning takes care of chemistry.   If a team wins, chemistry appears to be in place but if the same team loses, you have personalty issues.   I may be wrong about this but I totally disagree.

I have been proven wrong many times before and I'll be proven wrong many times in the future.   With these Olympic games which come to an end tonight, I suppose you can find many ways in which I am wrong.   To me many of these sports need tweakings, need to be changed slightly in order to make them better.   For instance, I am disappointed by the diving competition.   I don't like that, in the finals, perhaps the top 6 are determined with the first or first two dives, the top three are evident after 3 or 4, and the top 3 or 4 are really the only ones who have a shot at earning a medal.   Not only that, each of the top divers performs basically the same dive and the one who is just slightly better usually wins.   I'd like to see diving become more dynamic, more like a backyard contest.   I think diving would be improved if everyone had a shot at a medal if they were able to suddenly pull off something unique.

If say the diver in last place were able to perform something nobody else was even willing to attempt, a 4 or 5 rotation flip on his or her last dive, he or she should be able to stun the crowd and steal the gold by the feat.   This would result in at least 6 of the divers trying something that has never been done before and push the sport.   There would be at least 4 or 5 divers landing awkwardly and needing to be helped from the pool with completely reddened side or stomachs, writhing in pain though no real damage has been done.   It would be more like impromptu contests in your backyard in which Jimmy seeks to outclass Joey, who just did a perfect one and a half, by attempting a two and a half but missing the dive rather completely.

Further, I am somewhat bored when the gold, silver and bronze medalists at say 400 meters run in one four person track relay in which they have to run the same distance.   I'd like to see modifications in which a bunch of runners line up for the first hand-off and the guy in the lead gets to pick who he wants to hand the thing off to.   This would, of course, result in all sorts of controversy with guys and gals from varying nations making secret pacts.   It would also cause commotion on the podium as multiple national anthems would have to be played for the winning team made up, perhaps, of runners from four different nations.   But you have to admit it would make things more interesting.

I wouldn't mind it if the games could come to a close with an event like a large contest of tug of war in which all nations would together teams (both genders, multiple disciplines) trying to win the final gold medal.   The losers would, obviously, suffer the indignity of getting covered with mud while the winners would remain clean.   The podium would be great entertainment and the closing parade would require that participants in the tug of war come as they are, covered with mud if they didn't win the gold, though toweling off their faces would be allowed.

Further, I would like to see track or the Olympic games in their entirety create a true medley relay.   It might involve runners, pole vaulters and javelin throwers who must complete basically a full course before claiming victory.   Better yet, I would like to see a running relay event in which teams would have to use athletes from a choice of different disciplines.   It might be OK to use a track star as anchor leg but you'd have to have one runner from the sports of badminton, table tennis, or fencing as one leg, another from one of the pool sports (divers and swimmers are notoriously slow runners) and perhaps somebody from another batch of sports like boxing, wrestling, etc..   The devil may be in the details, and somebody else can work these things out, but the idea would be at least 3 of 4 (perhaps 7 of 8) runners would have to come from disciplines which do not produce fast runners.   The event could cap the games in a manner which cannot be duplicated by pre-filmed fireworks, actors lip-sinking songs by others, or a parade of professional athletes who won gold medals in events they have worked at for 30 years.   What I want to see, what I'm willing to pay for, is an event in which contestancs might potentially look foolish, where the team in last through 70% of the event could reasonably expect to place first because they have a bunch of rank amateurs who worked at something unfamiliar or pulled off soemthing nobody has ever even attempted before.

But, like I said, I have been wrong before, will be wrong in the future and may be wrong now.   I've found difficulty locating anyone who agrees with my thoughts on diving.   Some have laughed at the other prospective events I propose.   Nobody really agrees with me on any of this and that's OK.   I suppose I just see things differently.   Now back to my ideas on team chemistry.

It amuses me when I read about a "blue ribbon panel" working together to solve some problem.   The panel is usually made up of a bunch of "leaders" in some field who are expected to get together and do what they've always done, find the best solution.   But these panels don't usually have any workhorses.   Everyone is used to holding the reins.   And often the work product of such a "blue ribbon" panel is what we call a "horse designed by a committee."

A horse designed by a committee is called a camel, a nasty beast which spits and bites while refusing to submit to most riders.   Its back has a hump on which a sadle does not fit.   It is a great pack animal - I've got nothing against camels per se - but a camel is not a horse - the west would not have been won were it not for the horse, if only camels were around!   A "horse designed by a committee" in US parlance, is generally characterized by the lack of a unifying vision.

If you read much about softball recruiting, you get the overwhelming impression that college coaches are looking for entire teams made up of strong leaders.   They want only girls who take charge, on the field and off, and push their teammates to be better.   I can understand that concept but on the other hand, if someone is going to take the lead in any pursuit, somebody (or somebodies) is (are) going to have to submit to being led.

To me, the head coach is usually the general.   His or her assistant coaches are the lieutenants and captains.   The on-field leaders are really sergeants and the rest of the crew is typically privates of varying grades.   The sergeant is probably the most interesting person in any military setting since he or she is supposed to both lead, sometimes harshly, while simultaneously submitting completely to being led by superior officers.

The sergeant must lead a small band to accomplish precisely what others have commanded to be done.   The superiors have the overall vision.   The sergeant must accomplish a small piece of that vision and he or she may not even know what the vision is.   The sergeant must answer the question posed by grunts, "why are we doing this," swiftly and masterfully while obtaining total submission and getting the thing done in accordance with orders.

To me, what anyone putting together a team would be looking for is sergeants.   Perhaps it is more complex than that - I want privates who, after gaining experience will be suitable for the role as sergeant, sergeants who will rise in grade over time, and perhaps one or two sergeants who aspire to one day becoming lieutenants, captains and even generals.   But they must be willing to work initially as privates, earn the sergeant role, be willing to step into the role of lieutenant should the need arise, and respect that the general has earned his or her right to command.

"Leaders" are not always incapable of being led but the worst disagreements occur between two leaders who have slightly different visions to go with their large egoes.   You do not often see big disagreements between a leader and the one submitting to being led.   There may be skirmishes but these are usually resolved quickly.   The biggest brawls, the wars, the bloodiest battles, occur where you have two seeking to prove they are top dog, two seeking to prove that their vision is the best one, two unwielding alpha males or females.   And in nature, the alphas are willing to put the very existence of the pride at risk in order to secure and maintain alpha status.

This phenomenon is evident in every facet of nature - the alpha male or female is challenged by the rising star who either is defeated, leaving the alpha in his or her place, or wins the day, thereby becoming the new alpha.   So has it been through the millenia in all things natural and all things human.   So let it be written, so let it be done, so let it be recognized by everyone that this is human nature.   Let it be acknowledged by all that this is as much a natural law as gravity.   Someone must lead but that presupposes that someone must be led.

Further to the discussion, in any complex endeavor, there are specialized skills required to accomplish different subsets of the whole.   A guy who can draw a picture of what a building is supposed to look like or diagram the plumbing, cooling or electrical systems may not be able to hit a nail in straight, lay out rebar, weld steel beams together or carry bricks up a ramp.   Take the cooks out of the kitchen, have them serve tables while the wait staff does the cooking and what you get is a disaster.   Place an investigator in charge of directing traffic through the crime scene area and we're all going to have to endure a horrendous traffic jam.

Society has been based on specialization for the entirety of its existence.   Somebody was better at piercing the woolly mammoth with his spear.   Somebody was better at carving out the edible parts than he was at bringing the thing down.   Somebody was better at recognizing that we need to eat veggies with all that meat, or we're headed for severe irregularity, and then finding the veggies somewhere in the wild.   Somebody said, "hey, I can make something out of the beast's skins and tusks that will keep us warm and help us on future hunts."   Somebody built the shelter or led others to put the thing together.   In all of human history and prehistory, a few were better at this or that than others and naturally they took on roles associated with their skill set.

Softball is almost as complicated a matter or project as anything else in human society.   That's why we have coaches.   That's why some of the coaches work with the infield or outfield, the catchers or pitchers.   That is why we have girls who mostly play outfield, infield, pitch or catch.   The skill set of the shortstop, while certainly compatible with that of other positions, is not always nearly identical.   Third basemen don't necessarily play centerfield with as much skill as they do their regular spot.   Catchers don't often sub at short or second.   Our first baseman doesn't head out to center to fill a gap after injury.   The pitcher doesn't usually go behind the plate when she's not pitching, the catcher doesn't usually take of her gear and relief pitch - indeed we discourage pitchers and catchers from pursuing the opposite number in youth ball because we see the two positions as somewhat incompatible.

Our leadoff hitter isn't usually ready to fill the clean-up role.   We don't usually pinch hit the power hitter for the kid with high OBA when we need baserunners.   We style our benches so we have flexibility and can offer up "different looks" when we need to.

Even within positions, we recognize that certain players bring different things to the table.   We might have someone who can really hit playing the outfield while a weaker hitting, better fielding person sits the bench.   We don't often do that with key defensive positions such as short or center.   In the best of all possible worlds we would want our shortstop and outfielders to all be the best bats and gloves they can be.   But when push comes to shove, we are willing to compromise one skill for another so as to have the best mix of players on the field.   This is why, for example, in MLB, we see a .254 great defensive catcher remain in the big leagues while a .270 hitting outfielder gets sent down to the minors.

The more complicated and advanced a particular pursuit becomes, the greater the specialization.   Baseball on the professional level is arguably much more advanced (specialized) than fastpitch.   There are possibly more players in the minor leagues of baseball than there are playing college softball.   And in baseball, we see pitchers who never hit, pitchers who only get the last 3-6 outs of any game, hitters who never play the field, etc.   We can see the development of softball in the way that, as time progresses, fewer and fewer pitchers hit, fewer and fewer aces pitch every inning of three games against one team.   There is slightly greater specialization with each passing year in this sport.

And when we put together entire rosters, we need to mix up the overall skill set, even at individual positions, in order to create the best, most balanced team we can.   We might have one fireballing pitcher whose movement is weaker than the other kid who can bend the ball around a batter's head.   We try to find up-pitchers, down-pitchers, screwballers, curveballers, lefties and righties, etc., in order to be able to show different looks should the need arise.   More and more, there are pitching staffs rather than ace pitchers who throw every inning.   And that development is how it should be.   That development demonstrates the growth of the sport.

We want slappers, power hitters, contact hitters, good sacrifice bunters, draggers, those who thrive with runners on, those who set the table, in order to put together a good overall offense.   It is extremely rare for a team to put up 9 batters who all can and often do hit the ball over the fence.   It would be unusual for a team to have 9 slappers in the lineup.   A far more frequent occurrence on a good team happens when a couple kids have high on base percentages but can't hit the ball far and a few kids can drive the ball but hit for lower averages or are too aggressive to walk much, and maybe hit for higher averages when anybody is on base than they do leading off innings.

Every sport, particularly team sport, that has been around long enough, experiences a growth in the specialization of its athletes.   The more complex a game is, the more susceptible to specialization of its participants.   The more complex a game is, the greater the number of players in the contest, the more the make-up of participants needs to be a complex mix not only of mechanical skills but also of leadership and other psychologically-based skills.

The occassion of this writing has something to do with the US softball team's loss in the gold medal game.   I find that I'm not as upset by the loss as many other US-based softball purists I know.   Personally, I don't like a contest in which possibility of loss does not exist.   Right now, I guess the only team which has a reasonable chance to beat the US is Japan.   Obviously, there were only 8 teams in the whole tourney and I think that maybe a mistake since all but those participant nations would be disinclined to watch any of the competition.   Knowing that softball is no longer an Olympic game, hopefully just for the time being, I think, should it re-emerge, it could be changed for the better.

I would be offended if say the Ethiopian team were to make it to the medal game because they used a high-arc pitcher able to drop the ball into the strike zone from 35 feet up.   But on the other hand, it would be interesting to see some sort of ambidextrous pitcher with a wicked curveball from either side who would switch her mitt in accordance to the batter.   But that's all pretty much nonsensical rambling.   What would make gold medals in softball more valuable to me is the possibility of any of several nations winning the thing and I believe that's the direction the sport will hopefully go.

A final observation, really the thing which got me going on this, is aside from it being OK to me for the US to have lost the gold, is it seems as if there wasn't quite enough diversity on Team USA's roster.   I'm not talking racial, religious or other sociological diversity.   What I'm referring to is leadership and skill set diversity.

Again, I could be wrong about this but I don't think the US pitching staff was emotionally diverse enough.   We can all look to NCAA championships and recognize that when things got really tense, Cat Osterman has a proven tendency to get over-adrenalized and then overthrow her breaking stuff.   I think we all know fully well that she needs to be in the 58-62 mph range.   And when she gets up to 65, she is far more hittable.   Further, when Abbott gets over-adrenalized, she can lose the plate or, worse, get called for taking too much time between pitches.   I'm not sure where Jennie Finch fits into this.   And I'm not sure any of it matters in the loss.   But I do think the US pitching staff might have been composed differently, more diversely.   And I think that also applies to the team as a whole.   I believe there were too many leaders, not enough followers.   I believe these things sometimes are only evident in the worst circumstances, the final contest.   I believe any team relies upon chemistry in the final analysis.   Chemistry is not disclosed when winning is happening as readily as oxygen is consumed.   But when the air gets really thin, when the going gets almost impossible, then chemistry is revealed, and only the best put together machine or building can withstand the stress.   And that's my quirky thought for the day.

Labels: , , ,

Permanent Link:  Temperments - Chemistry


Softball Sales

The Sports Authority

Shop for
Sporting Goods
at Modells.com

SPONSORS

Gender


Shop for
Sporting Goods
at Modells.com


Powered by Blogger

All Contents Copyright © 2005-2008, Girls-Softball.com, All Rights Reserved