| |
Admin
Softball Umpires
Tom - Iceblue
Metro, Minnesota
|
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
 Welcome |
|
Welcome softball umpires, coaches, players and fans. This site is primarily a repository of information about softball umpiring, but everyone interested in the sport of softball is welcome.
Check out the Gallery section for an illustrated "how to" for folding your hat, plus pictures of some of the umpire web board participants, and some nice illustrations of the slot.
Check out the News section for softball news, articles, and links to time sensitive information. Included are links to the NFHS and ASA 2010 rules changes, comments, and corrections.
Go to the Handouts section for articles on DP/FLEX, on safety, and for the 40 rule myths list, plus other information.
Go to the Links section for links to most major softball sanctioning organizations, on line rule books, umpire equipment suppliers, and to other sites of interest.
Editorial
What Has Become of the ASA Rules Change Process?
This is written as a complete outsider. I have only limited knowledge of how the ASA process to make changes in the playing rules works. But based on the actual output of that process for the 2007 rule changes, it seems something is amiss.
ITEM: The pulsating batter’s box.
The change of the slow pitch batter’s box from 3x7 to 4x7 was enacted. The ink was hardly dry on the first printing of the rule books before an “emergency” ballot was circulated. What could possibly have been the “emergency” here? I don’t know, but it was apparently driven by strong opposition from the players. This begs the question: how did a rule such as this get all the way through the process with such strong opposition from the players? It would seem that someone is very much out of touch, at least. So, now we are back to a 3x7 batter’s box with a 4x7 egg on ASA’s face.
ITEM: The "legalization" of dodge ball rules.
The change to remove intent from most of the interference rules that previously required intent is almost breathtaking at first reading. Now, for example, if a runner is hit with a thrown ball, intent on the part of the runner is no longer required for there to be an interference ruling. Supposedly, this was done to make the playing rules more consistent with the definition of “interference” in Rule 1. Well, did anyone stop to consider revising the definition instead? Here, I offer this free of charge. Add this to the end of the last sentence of the Rule 1 – INTERFERENCE: “, but intent sometimes is.” So the rule would now read,
INTERFERENCE: The act of an offensive player or team member, umpire or spectator that impedes, hinders, or confuses a defensive player attempting to execute a play. Contact is not necessary, but intent sometimes is.
I have read the views of the NUS that this is not really a change, and that all that was intended (use of that word is ironic, don’t you think?) was to not require the umpire to think he had to get inside the player’s head. Phooey. Somebody just got a bug up their butt about the lack of “intent” in the definition.
Now, instead, what we will have is a season of poor calls by umpires who now believe that ASA has become the ADA (Amateur Dodgeball Association) calling runners out because of some imagined interference. Not to mention all the “discussions” with coaches who will now want to argue with an umpire who makes the proper call that “Ya gotta call that, Blue, intent is not required.” So, this is an improvement?
What were you people drinking at the convention, anyway?
Perhaps the entire process is too susceptible to foolish hobby-horse ideas coming from people who can gather alliances or can otherwise carry the day before more rational people have a chance to mull over the proposal and weigh into the discussion with some sensible, considered, rational, in-touch-with-reality views.
|
|
