Follow
Donate to HeyBucket.com - Amount:

Welcome Anonymous !

Your Fastpitch Softball Bible
 

Fastpitch Discussions

Time for rule change?

What's on your mind?

by Mark H » Mon Apr 20, 2015 3:20 pm

PDad wrote:I have no sympathy for a high-level player that can't pitch legally - there's no excuse for it. Period. .
Agreed.

PDad wrote:I think you're making a mountain out of a zit regarding it's impact on the sport and/or viewership with the WCWS. I think the amount of intentional fouling at the end of basketball games is ridiculous and takes away from that game, but it's doing very well despite it..


So it's a zit we should keep.

PDad wrote:Legalize leaping and something else will become an issue. Legalize that and it will be something else. How far down that rabbithole are you willing to go?.
Continuous improvement.

PDad wrote:The point of the leap rule is the pitcher is supposed step/stride while delivering the pitch..
I think they are supposed to do what the rules say. If we changed the rules then what they are supposed to do would change. Seems a circular argument?

PDad wrote: Nobody is suggesting going back to grandma's days where the pitcher's pivot foot hardly left the plate. I don't want to see it become a broadjump competition with a gymnastics element. I think there would be even more injuries if leaping wasn't restricted because they'd jump higher and farther which would mean having to withstand more forces when they land.
Yeah, that's what I heard about why the rule was in there for women and not men. The old folks on the rule committee felt women shouldn't be allowed to be too athletic as it wouldn't be good for their female parts. Can't say it's true but it sounds like you are repeating it. For myself, I say let women be athletes.

I'll ask on UCS and see if anyone can come up with a darn good reason to keep the leap rule. I've drifted into my tendency to be annoying when talking about a pet peeve. Adios.
Mark H
 
Posts: 318
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2012 7:08 pm

by PDad » Mon Apr 20, 2015 4:11 pm

Mark H wrote:
PDad wrote:Legalize leaping and something else will become an issue. Legalize that and it will be something else. How far down that rabbithole are you willing to go?.
Continuous improvement.
Removing rules so infractions aren't called isn't improvement. You probably have the same philosophy with criminal law - too many murders, so let's legalize it.

PDad wrote:The point of the leap rule is the pitcher is supposed step/stride while delivering the pitch..
I think they are supposed to do what the rules say. If we changed the rules then what they are supposed to do would change. Seems a circular argument?
No, you want to change the rules because they aren't doing what the rules say. You ask why and then don't want to hear any answers. smh

PDad wrote: Nobody is suggesting going back to grandma's days where the pitcher's pivot foot hardly left the plate. I don't want to see it become a broadjump competition with a gymnastics element. I think there would be even more injuries if leaping wasn't restricted because they'd jump higher and farther which would mean having to withstand more forces when they land.
Yeah, that's what I heard about why the rule was in there for women and not men. The old folks on the rule committee felt women shouldn't be allowed to be too athletic as it wouldn't be good for their female parts. Can't say it's true but it sounds like you are repeating it. For myself, I say let women be athletes.
I mainly don't want the game to morph into something else. You obviously don't care about the well being of the players. Pitchers have enough trouble avoiding serious and chronic injuries due to being overworked as it is. When did men ever pitch as often or as much? I'm not willing to subject them to more injuries just because you don't like IP calls. I also don't want the women's game to suffer the same fate as the men's game.

I'll ask on UCS and see if anyone can come up with a darn good reason to keep the leap rule. I've drifted into my tendency to be annoying when talking about a pet peeve. Adios.

Drifted?
User avatar
PDad
Premium Member
Premium Member
 
Posts: 3439
Joined: Sun Mar 29, 2009 4:52 pm

by Mark H » Wed Apr 22, 2015 6:37 pm

PDad wrote:
Mark H wrote:
PDad wrote:Legalize leaping and something else will become an issue. Legalize that and it will be something else. How far down that rabbithole are you willing to go?.
Continuous improvement.
Removing rules so infractions aren't called isn't improvement. You probably have the same philosophy with criminal law - too many murders, so let's legalize it.
Harsh. Guess I really did annoy you. My problem with the rule is a concern for the best interests of the game. Best interests that I don't think are served by IP's on national tv. BUT, if there's a corresponding benefit the sport gets from keeping the rule then that must be considered.





PDad wrote:
PDad wrote:The point of the leap rule is the pitcher is supposed step/stride while delivering the pitch..
I think they are supposed to do what the rules say. If we changed the rules then what they are supposed to do would change. Seems a circular argument?
No, you want to change the rules because they aren't doing what the rules say. You ask why and then don't want to hear any answers. smh
Tell me what benefit the sport gets from keeping the rule again? I missed it.





PDad wrote:
PDad wrote: Nobody is suggesting going back to grandma's days where the pitcher's pivot foot hardly left the plate. I don't want to see it become a broadjump competition with a gymnastics element. I think there would be even more injuries if leaping wasn't restricted because they'd jump higher and farther which would mean having to withstand more forces when they land.
Yeah, that's what I heard about why the rule was in there for women and not men. The old folks on the rule committee felt women shouldn't be allowed to be too athletic as it wouldn't be good for their female parts. Can't say it's true but it sounds like you are repeating it. For myself, I say let women be athletes.
I mainly don't want the game to morph into something else. You obviously don't care about the well being of the players. Pitchers have enough trouble avoiding serious and chronic injuries due to being overworked as it is. When did men ever pitch as often or as much? I'm not willing to subject them to more injuries just because you don't like IP calls. I also don't want the women's game to suffer the same fate as the men's game.
Well that makes sense. You want to protect the girls. Setting aside the lack of any proof the rule protects them, is a wash or perhaps is even a detriment to their health, I suggest we should let athletes be athletes regardless of their sex.





PDad wrote:I'll ask on UCS and see if anyone can come up with a darn good reason to keep the leap rule. I've drifted into my tendency to be annoying when talking about a pet peeve. Adios.

Drifted?


Fair.
Mark H
 
Posts: 318
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2012 7:08 pm

by PDad » Wed Apr 22, 2015 8:15 pm

@Mark H - I thought you were going to ask on UCS? I haven't seen it there. I'd really like to see the responses you'd get.

Just as well, because you need to make up your mind between dumping the leap rule or adopting the men's rules, because they're not the same thing.

Adopting the men's rule won't achieve your goal of eliminating IP calls for leaping - it would only complicate calling them because of the additional element (i.e. orientation of pivot foot). It would be restricted leaping.

Dumping the leap rule would obviously achieve your goal of eliminating IP calls for leaping. However, you cannot liken what pitchers would do with unrestricted leaping to what the men do under their restricted leaping rule.

Regardless of which you choose, you'll still have other IP calls. Right now, the crowhop/replant is fairly rare because it is just the little ones where the pivot foot comes off the plate before the stride. From what an umpire posted, the mid-stride replant would increase with liberalized leaping like it has in the men's game. Additionally, ASA issued a clarification on mid-stride replants and their position is it's only feasible with leaping.

Pick one - don't dodge my question again.
User avatar
PDad
Premium Member
Premium Member
 
Posts: 3439
Joined: Sun Mar 29, 2009 4:52 pm

by Mark H » Wed Apr 22, 2015 10:55 pm

I'll choose my answers and thoughts from among my answers and thoughts rather than your offered options.

I'm open to being talked into or out of pretty much any idea that works toward these goals:

1. Reduction in ip's

2. Treat female athletes the same as male athletes rather than treating them like delicate flowers

3. Let athletes perform a natural athletic movement to the greatest extent possible.

I'm attracted to going with the men's rules given they have already been tried. I could be talked into a lot of things if they move the above three goals forward.
Mark H
 
Posts: 318
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2012 7:08 pm

by PDad » Thu Apr 23, 2015 2:32 pm

Mark H wrote:I'm open to being talked into or out of pretty much any idea that works toward these goals:

1. Reduction in ip's
Pitchers will push the rules as far as it is worth the risk of being called for it, so completely overhaul all pitching rules to the barest minimum with little-to-no advantage to be gained in violating them (resulting in pitchers dominating the game) and/or drastically raise the top penalty to something they won't risk (e.g. ejection).

2. Treat female athletes the same as male athletes rather than treating them like delicate flowers
My concern has only been with unrestricted leaping because I believe females would go further than similarly-sized men do under their restricted leaping rules.

3. Let athletes perform a natural athletic movement to the greatest extent possible.
Not clear what you mean with these qualifiers.

I'm attracted to going with the men's rules given they have already been tried. I could be talked into a lot of things if they move the above three goals forward.

Good luck.
User avatar
PDad
Premium Member
Premium Member
 
Posts: 3439
Joined: Sun Mar 29, 2009 4:52 pm

by Mark H » Fri Apr 24, 2015 7:42 am

1. Any pitcher hitter imbalances are easily addressed with rubber distance changes.

2. So?

Good luck? Very true.
Mark H
 
Posts: 318
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2012 7:08 pm

by jtat32 » Fri Apr 24, 2015 1:26 pm

Lot's of interesting insights and perspectives on this thread.

With regard to the watchability of the game (especially as it gets more TV exposure), I think PDad's suggestion to simply remove the advancement of baserunners from the rule is a pretty reasonable compromise. I still remain skeptical that leaping (by itself) really changes the dynamic of the game much. I tend to agree with Sam that it would be a matter of a few more inches for the pitchers and a few less milliseconds for the batters.

As far as moving over to the men's rules completely, I don't think that it's unreasonable to consider. UmpSteve's explanation of why men made the change was interesting. I guess my question would be - did the rule change make the men's game better?
User avatar
jtat32
Premium Member
Premium Member
 
Posts: 456
Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2009 1:53 am

by PDad » Fri Apr 24, 2015 3:23 pm

Mark H wrote:1. Any pitcher hitter imbalances are easily addressed with rubber distance changes.

:roll: The point of stripping the rules down to where they're dominant was to remove their incentive to violate the rules. If they're not dominating within the rules, they will push the rules to give themselves a competitive advantage.

BTW, my suggestions were tongue-in-cheek to demonstrate the basic concept - people do what they have an incentive to do.
User avatar
PDad
Premium Member
Premium Member
 
Posts: 3439
Joined: Sun Mar 29, 2009 4:52 pm

by Mark H » Sat Apr 25, 2015 11:36 pm

PDad wrote:
Mark H wrote:1. Any pitcher hitter imbalances are easily addressed with rubber distance changes.

:roll: The point of stripping the rules down to where they're dominant was to remove their incentive to violate the rules. If they're not dominating within the rules, they will push the rules to give themselves a competitive advantage..


Not entirely sure I follow. Maybe you could reword it.

Competitors will push period.

Write the rules the way pitchers naturally want to throw. Let athletes perform a natural athletic motion. If a competitive imbalance results, move the rubber back.
Mark H
 
Posts: 318
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2012 7:08 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Fastpitch Discussions