Ultimate College Softball
Register Calendar New Posts Chat
 
 
 


Reply
 
Author Comment
 
softtoss

Registered: 04/23/08
Posts: 17
Reply with quote  #1 

watching ULLAf.  vs ARI.ST. CAJUNS pitcher. illegal every pitch. They called her about 10 times last year in Austin. Do you have to be Pac 12 pitcher to be called for IP.


__________________
softtoss
Laffy

Registered: 05/19/08
Posts: 1,034
Reply with quote  #2 
It depends on the umps, which is a major issue.

Some umps call it every time, others just don't care. The inconsistency in the calls is what makes the rule so absurd.

__________________
I don't hate stupid people, I just feel we should remove all warning labels and let the problem take care of itself.
hofman19

Registered: 05/12/12
Posts: 66
Reply with quote  #3 
I was rooting for Hofstra, but felt very bad for Nevins.  I know technically they were illegal, but the extent to which she was off the ground was minor.  It's not as she was three feet off the ground. 

Like a boxer called for low blows, if you get called enough for it, it starts to affect your mental approach.

mikec

Registered: 08/13/09
Posts: 2,321
Reply with quote  #4 
DD and are I are watching both games. DD got called for stepping g out of the lines about 4 times this season. The UL-LAF pitcher is way out - DD is Losing it ("why did I get called - that girl is way out").

Nevins was leaping and replanting. The replays were very clear in the replant.

airborne

Registered: 03/31/12
Posts: 188
Reply with quote  #5 

I watched Mowatt win a WCWS by landing out of the lanes and throwing changeups all week. Ashley has been called for leaping before though. That is why they try to wipe the lines away, as do the slappers with the batter's box.


__________________
Some say it is unfair to hold disadvantaged children to rigorous standards. I say it is discrimination to require anything less–-the soft bigotry of low expectations.

George W. Bush
iwitness

Registered: 03/01/05
Posts: 842
Reply with quote  #6 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikec
DD and are I are watching both games. DD got called for stepping g out of the lines about 4 times this season. The UL-LAF pitcher is way out - DD is Losing it ("why did I get called - that girl is way out").

Nevins was leaping and replanting. The replays were very clear in the replant.


Good teaching moment??  Explaining to DD that just because some else jumps off a cliff....she shouldn't feel obligated to do the same?

Just because some else is trying to break a rule....doesn't mean she should??
Dewey

Registered: 08/08/04
Posts: 16,149
Reply with quote  #7 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Laffy

It depends on the umps, which is a major issue.  Some umps call it every time, others just don't care. The inconsistency in the calls is what makes the rule so absurd.


I agree but at the same time I think I understand the dilemma it places on these umpires.  At the risk of sounding repetitive, let's reduce the penalty to "ball only and no runner advance" and I'm convinced the consistency of the call will improve greatly.
Laffy

Registered: 05/19/08
Posts: 1,034
Reply with quote  #8 
Tonight is a shining example of why the rule is SO STUPID.

In one game, you have to get slow motion close ups to see it, in another you can clearly see the other pitcher leaping.

Either enforce the rule 24/7/365 or just get rid of it.

__________________
I don't hate stupid people, I just feel we should remove all warning labels and let the problem take care of itself.
spazsdad

Registered: 07/10/08
Posts: 2,527
Reply with quote  #9 
The only people that meed slow motion to see Nevins illegal are the fans of USF.
You have to laugh when coaches of known illegal pitchers come out with a total look of indignation on their faces when they try and question the call like they are so surprised and it has never happened before.
Summers

Registered: 08/09/04
Posts: 725
Reply with quote  #10 

Quote:
Originally Posted by spazsdad
The only people that meed slow motion to see Nevins illegal are the fans of USF.
You have to laugh when coaches of known illegal pitchers come out with a total look of indignation on their faces when they try and question the call like they are so surprised and it has never happened before.

 

Eriksen is a pitching coach by trade, so this is as much on him as anyone else for not fixing it. At least two of the IP's were going airborne on change-ups, which means she wasn't even trying to throw it hard - the problem is simply mechanical.

 

Thing is that it took the change-up out of the equation when the runner got to third, because of the IP risk.

bhblue

Registered: 05/15/08
Posts: 1,146
Reply with quote  #11 

Quote:
Originally Posted by pitch
Quote:
Originally Posted by airborne
Ashley has been called for leaping before though.
Brignac was called for 8 IP last year in the Regional final vs Houston. ULL lost.

I called IPs on her before the lines were part of the rule book.  Mike never came out. 

 

Superstar

Registered: 05/16/12
Posts: 53
Reply with quote  #12 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Laffy
It depends on the umps, which is a major issue.

Some umps call it every time, others just don't care. The inconsistency in the calls is what makes the rule so absurd.


Amen!!!!
whatusmokin

Registered: 03/27/09
Posts: 134
Reply with quote  #13 
Most of the pitchers go through life working to not pitch illegal and not be punished, there are others that take what they can get away with and along with their coaches act as if they are being attacked.  I really believe that if the IP rule is changed, there will be a large increase in IP's  Currently 1 in 10 to 15 IPs are called during a game and if it is just a ball... the number may drop, but the number of IPs will increase dramatically... it is just a ball and you have the advantage over the batter if it is out of the lanes to get more spin or a leap to get a better drop or shorter distance to the plate. 
CoachB25

Registered: 06/19/08
Posts: 1,192
Reply with quote  #14 

First, the umpire in the Hofstra/South Florida game was right every time on the illegal pitch and so, it is apparent that he DIDN'T NEED SLOWMO to call it. 

 

If there is inconsistency in how umpires call the game, then the rule is not the problem.  Where are the people evaluating the umpires?  Heck, this year even for our regional play in high school basketball, we had an official representing the state evaluate the refs.  Surely to goodness they have this for the umpires in a Super Regional.


__________________
Be more concerned with your character than your reputation, because your character is what you really are, while your reputation is merely what others think you are – John Wooden.
daemon

Registered: 04/16/09
Posts: 99
Reply with quote  #15 
Quote:
Originally Posted by CoachB25

First, the umpire in the Hofstra/South Florida game was right every time on the illegal pitch and so, it is apparent that he DIDN'T NEED SLOWMO to call it. 

 

If there is inconsistency in how umpires call the game, then the rule is not the problem.  Where are the people evaluating the umpires?  Heck, this year even for our regional play in high school basketball, we had an official representing the state evaluate the refs.  Surely to goodness they have this for the umpires in a Super Regional.



Amen.  The IPs are obvious.  The fact that pitchers are still illegal at the college level means that umpires at the high school and lower levels are not calling it until the pitcher fixes it.  They call it a time or two and let the rest slide because "it's not as bad" or "she's trying".  By the time pitchers reach college, they can't fix it.
Dewey

Registered: 08/08/04
Posts: 16,149
Reply with quote  #16 

Quote:
Originally Posted by whatusmokin
  I really believe that if the IP rule is changed, there will be a large increase in IP's.  Currently 1 in 10 to 15 IPs are called during a game and if it is just a ball... the number may drop, but the number of IPs will increase dramatically...


I disagree.  It's my opinion that umpires do not want to have that great of an impact on the game.  Calling every IP might turn the game into a complete mockery with the runner advance rule.  Instead, I think they call a few to make it known they recognize the IP but, at the same time, I think they have little desire to call every one due to the magnitude of the penalty and the merry-go-round that follows.  I think a ball penalty would allow them to call four IP's in a row if there actually were four IP's in a row without feeling like they were dramatically altering the game.  I guarantee you if eight IP's are called in a row, you'll only have two runners on base, no runs, and a Coach realizing he must take the pitcher out of the game.  That will correct this problem sooner rather than later.  Of course, these are only my opinions, as a fan, and until umpires explain why they don't call 14 or 15 out of 15, rather than a small percentage of the IP's, we'll never know for certain. 
Prowler

Registered: 05/03/09
Posts: 991
Reply with quote  #17 
And linemen in football should be allowed to hold and even tackle defenders.

After all, holding happens a lot more than it gets called. If they're not going to call it every time, it should be legal, right?

They basically made traveling legal in the NBA, so now players take four steps instead of three. Great solution.

IP is a harder call with runners on base, for one thing. The ump is in a different position and has other things to watch as a priority. Home plate ump has eye on the pitch for balls and strikes and isn't likely to be able to see it and make the ball/strike call.

I'll say it again: if they INCREASED the penalty drastically -- eject pitcher on third IP call, and suspend pitcher for a full season after three ejections, the IP would go away immediately. No coach would dare throw an illegal pitcher.

If you make it a ball, keep in mind that about a third of pitches in most games are balls -- chase pitches, misses, etc. So other than 3-2 pitches, there's not much disincentive to throwing illegally. You're practically inviting pitchers to leap and replant if you only make the penalty a ball.
CoachB25

Registered: 06/19/08
Posts: 1,192
Reply with quote  #18 

Dewey, for the sake of argument, wouldn't the same rational then hold true for calling left handed slappers out for being out of the box?  Call it a time or two and then just let them get away with it for the rest of the game.  Look I can understand an umpire missing a call once in a while and with regards to illegal pitches, maybe a couple in a row.  However, they have the responsibility to take emotion out of the equation and enforce the rules.  JMHO!


__________________
Be more concerned with your character than your reputation, because your character is what you really are, while your reputation is merely what others think you are – John Wooden.
Dewey

Registered: 08/08/04
Posts: 16,149
Reply with quote  #19 
Quote:
Originally Posted by CoachB25

  However, they have the responsibility to take emotion out of the equation and enforce the rules.  JMHO!


Coach - I agree.  However, I also think this excessive penalty is making it too hard on them to call every IP as I've tried to explain why in several threads.  In fact, it's obvious some umpires have stayed completely out of the controversy altogether by not calling them while simply implying "I just can see it".  Again, it's going to take a few umpires to explain why only a small percentage are called.  I wish a couple of umpires would sign on anonymously and explain their position on this matter as well as chiming in on my idea to lessen the penalty.  Would it help them or not? 

PS:  Prowler, I am for a penalty for IP's, not making them legal.  Secondly, in my idea of a rule, an IP can be hit for a single or more and the offense has the option to accept the play.  There is no incentive to deliberately deliver an IP and give a batter multiple chances.

Prowler

Registered: 05/03/09
Posts: 991
Reply with quote  #20 
So the pitcher throws two strikes, count is 0-2.

Bases are loaded and she's protecting a one-run lead.

The penalty for throwing illegal on the next pitch is a ball under your rules. She intends to throw a ball anyway. If she leaps, she gains an advantage that makes it less likely that the batter will be able to hit it -- that's why it's illegal.

So worst-case scenario is that the batter swings and it's a ball. Or maybe the umps are watching the runners for leaving early and she gets away with a swing and a miss.

Lessening the penalty is encouraging pitchers (and coaches) to take the (now lesser) risk, which results in more IPs.

What's wrong with a stiff penalty for breaking a rule that gives a pitcher an advantage?

Heck, base runners pay an even greater penalty for leaving base early. Yet some get away with it sometimes. Should we lessen the penalty for leaving early too? I mean, being called out is really kind of harsh, isn't it?
Dewey

Registered: 08/08/04
Posts: 16,149
Reply with quote  #21 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Prowler
So the pitcher throws two strikes, count is 0-2.

Bases are loaded and she's protecting a one-run lead.

The penalty for throwing illegal on the next pitch is a ball under your rules. She intends to throw a ball anyway. If she leaps, she gains an advantage that makes it less likely that the batter will be able to hit it -- that's why it's illegal.

So worst-case scenario is that the batter swings and it's a ball. Or maybe the umps are watching the runners for leaving early and she gets away with a swing and a miss.

1)  If bases are loaded, umpires have no reason to watch for runners leaving early and should be able to spot IP's,
 
2)  Most umpires know when an IP takes place and are perfectly capable of calling them.  If it's undetectable, it's likely of little advantage.  To suggest pitchers can fool umpires is unconvincing to me,
 
3)  Today, imo, the vast majority of umpires will not call the IP in a bases loaded situation because of the dire impact.  The inconsistency continues and I, for one, understand their hesitancy in a bases loaded situation.  I suspect they care for this game as much as the rest of us.
 
4)  You're assuming most IP's take place as rare instances of a pitcher choosing to take advantage of a situation rather than a consistent case of incorrect mechanics or deliberate infraction.  I'm not sure this pick and choose scenario is true in most cases.


Lessening the penalty is encouraging pitchers (and coaches) to take the (now lesser) risk, which results in more IPs.

Lessening the penalty should allow umpires to more easily call the infraction.  Until someone can explain why most aren't called, I have to believe this.

What's wrong with a stiff penalty for breaking a rule that gives a pitcher an advantage?

Are you watching the same postseason games most of us are watching?  Suspend pitchers for a season and you'll see fewer umpires calling the IP.

Heck, base runners pay an even greater penalty for leaving base early. Yet some get away with it sometimes. Should we lessen the penalty for leaving early too? I mean, being called out is really kind of harsh, isn't it?

I don't see what the leaving early call has to do with any of this.  This call is rather consistent year round.
 
Finally, as I said earlier, I'm not for making IP's legal but searching for a way to make the call as consistent as the leaving early call.  These are clear infractions and if there is a better plan for making this call more consistent, I say we go for it.  Today's penalty appears too great to open up this call to most umpires and a greater penalty would make this call even less consistent, imo.


mikec

Registered: 08/13/09
Posts: 2,321
Reply with quote  #22 
Iwitness - puhlease. Her point was, some can get away with it, and some can't. In her case, it was a tie game, 1 runner on. The umpire calls 2 in a row (she has not been called in 5 years), advancing the runner to third. Seemed sketchy. Only 2 she was called for all year.

Inconsistency is a problem.

As for travel ball, my assistant coach was ejected for talking to an umpire between every inning about the other pitcher, when her leap and replant was worse than what we saw last night. There just didn't seem to be much appetite, for whatever reason, to call it in travel ball.
Fresh

Registered: 03/20/09
Posts: 410
Reply with quote  #23 
Move the plate back and allow women to pitch by the same rules as the men. This problem doesn't seem to exist in men's softball.
Nabisco

Registered: 07/30/11
Posts: 5
Reply with quote  #24 
My daughters school played in an early season tournament at South Florida, before we traveled down there I had never heard of Nevins. I was sitting with my wife and told her that this girl was a great looking pitcher but was throwing an IP every time, just no doubt about it. Never was it called the entire tourney that I saw. In last nights game she was much better than in the early season but was called 5 or 6 times I guess. The sometime we call it and sometimes we don't attitude is what is making it tuff on everyone.

Scary thing about Nevins to me is that she is already throwing a breaking pitch at 71 mph with a movement that is almost a straight up hop off the rubber. I think if she could correct it to really pushing to the plate, driving with her lower body she may hit 74. It appears to me what she does really takes a little away from her not the batter. She is just an outstanding pitcher, my hats off to this young lady.    

__________________
Pickupplayer
daemon

Registered: 04/16/09
Posts: 99
Reply with quote  #25 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikec

Inconsistency is a problem.

As for travel ball, my assistant coach was ejected for talking to an umpire between every inning about the other pitcher, when her leap and replant was worse than what we saw last night. There just didn't seem to be much appetite, for whatever reason, to call it in travel ball.

Ass. coach deserved to be run.  You hit on the nail on the head.  Pitchers develop the leap in wreck, advance to a level where it's never called and there is little incentive to fix it.  Coaches give umpires a load of <> for calling IPs.  I recall one coach in the WCWS last year trying to argue over how much she was off the ground not realizing that if she's off, it's illegal.  Any doubt as to why they're reluctant to call all of them?

[edit: fixed one word]
steelball

Registered: 04/11/10
Posts: 331
Reply with quote  #26 

Its pretty simple. You cant fix it now but state for next year any hop in the pitch will be called, period. No ifs ands or buts. Also correct me if I am wrong but during week games two umpires , weekend conference games three umpires. Do we have three or four umpires during the NCAAs? if we have four that is an extra pair of eyes to look for the illegal pitch.

Dewey

Registered: 08/08/04
Posts: 16,149
Reply with quote  #27 

I think the question of whether IP's should be called has mostly been answered.  The question is do you think all the umpires are trying to call them all consistently.  If not, why not?  What can be done to change this?  I'm at a loss as to why some of our member umpires don't chime in on this debate.  Are we wrong about this inconsistency?  Should the penalty rule be tweaked or left alone?  Do you have any suggestions on how to improve this glitch in our game?  It hasn't been too bad so far but it still pops it's head up here and there.  Umpires, please share your opinions. Thanks.

steelball

Registered: 04/11/10
Posts: 331
Reply with quote  #28 

dewey it is a judgement call just like balls and strikes. Every ump has a different Strike  zone. Pitchers and hitters just have to adjust.

Dewey

Registered: 08/08/04
Posts: 16,149
Reply with quote  #29 
steelball - Is that really true?  Is the IP simply a judgment call?  How about the leaving early call?  Is that a judgment call too?  Maybe this is semantics.  Anyway, let's say you're right and one umpire calls the outside pitch a strike all game long.  Does the IP umpire call the same IP all game long?  It doesn't appear to have the same consistency as an umpires strike zone, (did I just say that).  Anyway, I think you get my point.  Umpires with wide strike zones call strikes over and over.  Umpires who see IP's call one here and maybe there.  Why is that or do you think I'm wrong in this conclusion.

PS:  Can I ask if you do umpiring?
daemon

Registered: 04/16/09
Posts: 99
Reply with quote  #30 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dewey

Quote:
Originally Posted by Prowler
So the pitcher throws two strikes, count is 0-2.

Bases are loaded and she's protecting a one-run lead.

The penalty for throwing illegal on the next pitch is a ball under your rules. She intends to throw a ball anyway. If she leaps, she gains an advantage that makes it less likely that the batter will be able to hit it -- that's why it's illegal.

So worst-case scenario is that the batter swings and it's a ball. Or maybe the umps are watching the runners for leaving early and she gets away with a swing and a miss.

1)  If bases are loaded, umpires have no reason to watch for runners leaving early and should be able to spot IP's,
 
...




I'm certain you don't really mean point 1).   For proof, see below ...




Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Powered by Website Toolbox - Create a Website Forum Hosting, Guestbook Hosting, or Website Chat Room for your website.