Follow
Donate to HeyBucket.com - Amount:

Welcome Anonymous !

Your Fastpitch Softball Bible
 

The Umpire Corner

Men's Slow Pitch - 70 Foot Basepaths for 2012?

Rule question? Get it answered here.

by EzOut.EzOut » Fri Dec 16, 2011 3:42 pm

Did I read that right? It was noted that some classifications already played at 70 feet this year.
"Bringing Defense Back."
EzOut.EzOut
 
Posts: 155
Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2009 3:07 pm

by GIMNEPIWO » Fri Dec 16, 2011 5:30 pm

yep
"For the strength of the pack is the wolf, the strength of the wolf is the pack" Rudyard Kipling
User avatar
GIMNEPIWO
 
Posts: 4339
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 6:58 am
Location: Between Rock & Hard Place

by MTR » Sat Dec 17, 2011 7:31 am

EzOut.EzOut wrote:Did I read that right? It was noted that some classifications already played at 70 feet this year.
"Bringing Defense Back."



That is correct, some have been for years. Before the majors died, they were playing at 80' and it was a great game and yet players still had stolen bases.

Last year, the A & B levels used 70' bases. In the most recent Championship Series, all levels used 70' and not a team noticed it until they were told after the tournament.
MTR
 
Posts: 2317
Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2008 5:21 am

by softballaddict » Mon Dec 19, 2011 9:47 am

We've been playing with 70' bases at our local rec league for a couple years now. As an older guy who still plays (well I try anyway) as well as umpires, I was called out on a close play at first shortly after the change to 70'. Kidding the blue (who I knew well and have called with for several years) that I was safe, with a straight face he said "You were out by ten years". :lol: :lol: :lol: I had to laugh and agree with him.
softballaddict
 
Posts: 127
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2008 12:35 pm

by shagpal » Thu Mar 15, 2012 6:34 pm

usssa had the right idea long ago
shagpal
 
Posts: 36
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 4:20 am

by MTR » Thu Mar 15, 2012 8:03 pm

shagpal wrote:usssa had the right idea long ago


ASA upper levels have been playing at 70-80 bases for more than a decade. It just finally matriculated down. The only thing that was holding it back at the lower levels the past 5 years was the P&R folks.
MTR
 
Posts: 2317
Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2008 5:21 am

by shagpal » Fri Mar 16, 2012 6:07 pm

ASA is full of grey haired, over the hill types. everyone saw that weakness but them. it may be too little too late, who really knows, but then again, who really cares.


MTR wrote:
shagpal wrote:usssa had the right idea long ago


ASA upper levels have been playing at 70-80 bases for more than a decade. It just finally matriculated down. The only thing that was holding it back at the lower levels the past 5 years was the P&R folks.
shagpal
 
Posts: 36
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 4:20 am

by MTR » Fri Mar 16, 2012 8:25 pm

shagpal wrote:ASA is full of grey haired, over the hill types. everyone saw that weakness but them. it may be too little too late, who really knows, but then again, who really cares.



No, it was the point that many of the council members are associated with their local Parks & Recs departments and they did not want to have to change their fields. Even with the change, many are still resisting the change.
MTR
 
Posts: 2317
Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2008 5:21 am

by shagpal » Fri Mar 16, 2012 11:26 pm

in the last 3 years, 3 localities switched to utrip and 65ft bases. Ima not buying, but if yer convinced, then it must be so in your world. in the real world, usssa, nsa, premier, tcs and pony are making huge gains at the expense of asa stubborness, miscalculations and miscues. even the ncaa, frustrated with old skool asa geezers decided to go their own way a decade ago. but in your world, the asa is perfect, so it must be everyone else that is resisting.

MTR wrote:
shagpal wrote:ASA is full of grey haired, over the hill types. everyone saw that weakness but them. it may be too little too late, who really knows, but then again, who really cares.



No, it was the point that many of the council members are associated with their local Parks & Recs departments and they did not want to have to change their fields. Even with the change, many are still resisting the change.
shagpal
 
Posts: 36
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 4:20 am

by MTR » Sat Mar 17, 2012 6:48 am

shagpal wrote:in the last 3 years, 3 localities switched to utrip and 65ft bases. Ima not buying, but if yer convinced, then it must be so in your world. in the real world, usssa, nsa, premier, tcs and pony are making huge gains at the expense of asa stubborness, miscalculations and miscues. even the ncaa, frustrated with old skool asa geezers decided to go their own way a decade ago. but in your world, the asa is perfect, so it must be everyone else that is resisting.


WTF are you talking about? You obviously don't know the process. The discussion was moving SP bases to 70' and why it took so long. I know why because I've been in the rooms for the past decade listening to the discussions and observing the vote. Last year it was changed just for A & B only because championship play at those levels would affect a minimum number of locations. However, when the Championship Series was played in OKC, the bases were set at 70' for all levels, men and women alike and it went unnoticed until teams were told after the tournament.

This year it passed after a non-unanimous consensus from committees for approval, an amendment exempting the Senior game and a last ditch floor fight. The constant argument was not about the game, but how it inconvenienced those who maintain the fields. The change eventually passed with a 73.5% of the votes to pass.
MTR
 
Posts: 2317
Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2008 5:21 am


Return to The Umpire Corner