Ultimate College Softball
Register Calendar Latest Topics
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment   Page 7 of 27     «   Prev   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   Next   »
3leftturns

Registered:
Posts: 15,058
Reply with quote  #181 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kurosawa


Pitched for her U19 national team. Leaping is legal under international rules, but crowhopping isn't.
Actually, replants are legal in international
Kurosawa

Registered:
Posts: 3,031
Reply with quote  #182 
Leaping is legal, but crow hopping is not, in the ISF rule book. Leaping and landing (replanting) is legal, even with a push-off, if it is part of a continuous action/motion. Crow hopping establishes a second impetus/starting point and then pushes off (as part of a discontinuous action/motion). (While the NCAA in its latest rule book appears to have redefined a crow hop as a replant, previously they defined it as a replant and a push-off.)

http://www.baseball-softball.de/wp-content/uploads/Softball-Rules-2014-2017-English.pdf

Quote:
Sec. 20. CROW HOP. (FP ONLY)
A crow hop is defined as the act of a pitcher who does not push off from the pitcher's plate to deliver the  ball. THIS IS AN ILLEGAL ACT if  the pitcher steps off the pitcher’s plate, thereby establishing a second impetus (or starting point) and then pushes off from the new starting point and completes the delivery.

Sec. 61. LEAPING (P ONLY).
Leaping is the act of a pitcher that causes him to be airborne on his initial move and push from the pitcher’s plate. The momentum built by the forward movement of the pitcher causes the entire body; including both the pivot and stepping (non-pivot) foot to be in the air at the same time and moving towards home plate. The pitch is completed when the pitcher lands and with a continuous motion delivers the ball to the plate. The pivot foot may push off and/or follow through with this continuous action. Leaping is a legal act.
3leftturns

Registered:
Posts: 15,058
Reply with quote  #183 

A second impetus IS a replant. You REALLY cannot be this dense.

Those 'rules' look a little 'Juk'd Micronics'-y... but I defer if UmpSteve says the action is illegal in international ball

Kurosawa

Registered:
Posts: 3,031
Reply with quote  #184 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 3leftturns

A second impetus IS a replant. You REALLY cannot be this dense.



You can't be serious! You CAN NOT be serious!!

Where did I (or the ISF or NCAA rule books) say a second impetus isn't a replant? A replant, however, may or may not be a second impetus.

3leftturns

Registered:
Posts: 15,058
Reply with quote  #185 
Replant, by definition is a second impetus always

Read up on the prefix re-

Idiotic
Kurosawa

Registered:
Posts: 3,031
Reply with quote  #186 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 3leftturns
Replant, by definition is a second impetus always

Read up on the prefix re-

Idiotic


[I-always-think-its-a] 

All I've done is quote the plain words of the ISF rule book (and, previously, the NCAA rule book), according to which a replant isn't a second impetus (or push-off). Go argue with them, not me.
3leftturns

Registered:
Posts: 15,058
Reply with quote  #187 

There is not ONE syllable in those 'rules' that says a replant is anything but ALWAYS a second impetus.

I don't want to have to go all Stu on you, Alan

 

Kurosawa

Registered:
Posts: 3,031
Reply with quote  #188 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 3leftturns

There is not ONE syllable in those 'rules' that says a replant is anything but ALWAYS a second impetus.

I don't want to have to go all Stu on you, Alan



Well, quote where the ISF or NCAA rulebooks support your contention that a replant is necessarily a second impetus (or push-off). Put up, or shut up.

Fresh

Registered:
Posts: 4,635
Reply with quote  #189 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 3leftturns

There is not ONE syllable in those 'rules' that says a replant is anything but ALWAYS a second impetus.

I don't want to have to go all Stu on you, Alan

 



So you're saying Barnhill takes a 2nd point of impetus? I would suggest that any time you get air, there would be a point of contact and if you just continue forward, you have not set a 2nd point of impetus. Probably idiotic, but you have to consider the source of the evaluation.

__________________

When the full extent of your venality, moral turpitude, and political corruption becomes known, you will take your rightful place as a disgraced demagogue in the dustbin of history. You may scapegoat Andy McCabe, but you will not destroy America...America will triumph over you.

3leftturns

Registered:
Posts: 15,058
Reply with quote  #190 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kurosawa


Well, quote where the ISF or NCAA rulebooks support your contention that a replant is necessarily a second impetus (or push-off). Put up, or shut up.
Your entire post
Kurosawa

Registered:
Posts: 3,031
Reply with quote  #191 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 3leftturns
Your entire post


Weak.
3leftturns

Registered:
Posts: 15,058
Reply with quote  #192 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kurosawa


Weak.
Literally.... nothing in that text represents what you are purporting....smdh


3leftturns

Registered:
Posts: 15,058
Reply with quote  #193 
Elish was on fire

As were Jenna Lilley, D.J. Sanders
azure

Registered:
Posts: 1,929
Reply with quote  #194 
Actually Oregon gave up 3 hits but it still was a great win!
__________________
--Read my personal blog at http://azure-turquoise.blogspot.com
musftblfan

Registered:
Posts: 1,177
Reply with quote  #195 
Ha... late at night misreading the boxscore on 'sidearm sports' or whichever dysfunctional scoreboard site it was for this game.... a 3 hitter is still great! Sorry for my fake news post
__________________
live in Brooklyn, NY, raised in St. Louis. not a lot of people know I like softball this much..... 
Kurosawa

Registered:
Posts: 3,031
Reply with quote  #196 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 3leftturns
Literally.... nothing in that text represents what you are purporting....smdh


You mean where the ISF rule book states that it is legal if a (my emphasis added) "pitcher lands and with a continuous motion delivers the ball to the plate," and whose "pivot foot may push off and/or follow through with this continuous action"? A pitcher can legally land (replant) the pivot foot and then push off/follow through, as long as it is part of a continuous (rather than discontinuous, or interrupted) motion.

The term "second impetus" is only used in the crow hopping rule, following which the pitcher "then pushes off from the new starting point and completes the delivery". A "new starting point" implies a discontinuity (or stop) within the pitching motion, and thus is illegal. A second impetus implies a following push-off; the mere landing (replanting) of the pivot foot does not.

While the language might not be felicitous (rules strive for exactitude in an inexact medium, language), the basic logical sense is clear: In the ISF rulebook, re-pushing off is legal as long as part of a continuous pitching motion; it is illegal if the pitching motion is interrupted (stopped/re-started) with a new staring point (or second impetus).

Try forming a single cogent argument. Stop the tiresome sniping and utterly pointless ad hominem insults.

TheNarrator

Registered:
Posts: 6,241
Reply with quote  #197 
Come on guys - Fresh doesnt even know the NCAA rules, lets not go confusing him more.

Barnhill gets air - should be called

__________________
Dewey/Will_I_Wynn is our forum moderator and is allowing a poster to call for the assassination of our President
3leftturns

Registered:
Posts: 15,058
Reply with quote  #198 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kurosawa


You mean where the ISF rule book states that it is legal if a (my emphasis added) "pitcher lands and with a continuous motion delivers the ball to the plate," and whose "pivot foot may push off and/or follow through with this continuous action"? A pitcher can legally land (replant) the pivot foot and then push off/follow through, as long as it is part of a continuous (rather than discontinuous, or interrupted) motion.

The term "second impetus" is only used in the crow hopping rule, following which the pitcher "then pushes off from the new starting point and completes the delivery". A "new starting point" implies a discontinuity (or stop) within the pitching motion, and thus is illegal. A second impetus implies a following push-off; the mere landing (replanting) of the pivot foot does not.

While the language might not be felicitous (rules strive for exactitude in an inexact medium, language), the basic logical sense is clear: In the ISF rulebook, re-pushing off is legal as long as part of a continuous pitching motion; it is illegal if the pitching motion is interrupted (stopped/re-started) with a new staring point (or second impetus).

Try forming a single cogent argument. Stop the tiresome sniping and utterly pointless ad hominem insults.

a foot dragging behind is not a replant. Ever. Even after a leap, a la escobedo. Replant is putting that back cleat into to ground again.... re is again, plant is into the ground.

The top of the toe, or the side of the foot does not have a cleat on it...CANT be replanted
Fresh

Registered:
Posts: 4,635
Reply with quote  #199 
You are showing ignorance of the crowhop advantage. You must reset and establish a second point of impetus, it can't be just a continuation of the forward momentum already established. Getting air is always illegal, but is a tough call from most angles and will seldom be called for a minor elevation like Barnhill. I can tell you that from the first base side, the angle from head heighth is not as obvious as from a tv shot from afar. 
__________________

When the full extent of your venality, moral turpitude, and political corruption becomes known, you will take your rightful place as a disgraced demagogue in the dustbin of history. You may scapegoat Andy McCabe, but you will not destroy America...America will triumph over you.

leip822

Registered:
Posts: 394
Reply with quote  #200 
UCLA's Rcahel Garcia takes a perfect game into the 7th for the second straight game, broken up with a clean single this time.

27K in 14IP this weekend

__________________
sl
danesfastpitch

Registered:
Posts: 36
Reply with quote  #201 
Watched ASU this weekend, didn't face a ton of talented teams but Texas State game v. Sun Belt Preseason Pitcher of Year was a good test and although a close game, ASU did get a win in the ITB.  Pitching is a question;  v Texas State G Juarez didn't pitch ahead and Macha is very good (pound for pound best pitcher in country?) but she will need help.   Defensively, ASU was strong (3 Double Plays) and some young hitters (1B Frosh seems to be real deal) have some pop so I'll be optimistic.  

Texas State should be a Sun Belt contender with their All American.   North Dakota should fire their coach.  Illinois State was well coached and had a strong Valley type arm.  

__________________
Former Softball Coach
3leftturns

Registered:
Posts: 15,058
Reply with quote  #202 
Utah really struggling
leip822

Registered:
Posts: 394
Reply with quote  #203 
Bad loss for Utah, they’ll drop out of the top 25 after this weekend for sure
__________________
sl
BlueSky

Registered:
Posts: 831
Reply with quote  #204 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 3leftturns
Utah really struggling


Yeah what's happening with the Utes? The Utes and Beavers schedules seem like they're playing tougher competition that the rest of the PAC 12 (so far), but Utah lost a couple games at the MNC that surprised me. 

__________________
 
ballbuzz

Registered:
Posts: 2
Reply with quote  #205 
Pleasantly surprised with Cal’s bats actually coming around and their pitching staying constant. Shout out to the newcomer Dung for 15 ks against Fordham, she was quite the buzz amoungst the fields during Mary Nutter week 1. (The same Fordham team Garcia got 17 ks against the day before) Conley was great as well. The newcomers seem to be playing huge roles on this years team.
__________________
sammy R
BlueSky

Registered:
Posts: 831
Reply with quote  #206 
Beavers vs. Cowgirls tonight might be a great game, they both seem hungry and are coming back.
__________________
 
3leftturns

Registered:
Posts: 15,058
Reply with quote  #207 
Some insane pitching numbers at nutter from washington, ucla, arizona and oregon
HenryLouisAaron

Registered:
Posts: 1,674
Reply with quote  #208 
<< Some insane pitching numbers at nutter from washington, ucla, arizona and oregon >> (3LT)

You should post them for us to see...
3leftturns

Registered:
Posts: 15,058
Reply with quote  #209 
Maybe tomorrow. Driving to LAX for the redeye
Kurosawa

Registered:
Posts: 3,031
Reply with quote  #210 
UW:

Alvelo: 0.74era, 19.0ip, 7h, 2r, 2er, 1bb, 22so
Manti: 0.78era, 9.0ip, 10h, 2r, 1er, 1bb, 6so
Plain: 2.00era, 7.0ip, 5h, 2r, 2er, 8bb, 9so

UW: 1.00era, 35ip, 22h, 6r, 5er, 10bb, 37so

Impressive that Alvelo gave up only one walk in 19 innings.
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.