No time left...Rules for STALLING

[default]

At the older age groups, you will see pitchers take one, maybe two warm-ups and then they are ready. Do pitchers really need five warm-up pitches? Think about it. At 10U and 12U, for a 7 inning game, that's 35 more pitches to her arm. Hmmmmm. So if you throw her two games a day, you have had her throw almost a complete 3rd game just in warm-ups, and that's not even counting the warm-up pitches you had her throwing before the game.

One of the tournaments we were at last year, we were 10U, did just that. We were coming back, and this was the drop dead inning. Told our 1st basemen and Rf not to grab balls and our pitcher just to throw one pitch. We were down like 5-0 in the beginning, and at this time the game ws 5-4. We were the home team. I forget who we were facing, but the stall was in play immediately. Things like I don't know the sign coach, to tieing shoes, etc.

I think in those situations, I think the ump should have the ability to then change the format to remove the stall tactic.

 

[default]

Bretman - love the idea. Parma - please do implement this in your tournament and let us know how it works. It would put the game back into the hands of the players more.

 

[default]

A couple of things on this subject. I talked to a guy who umps College and he said that in his opinion no game should need more that 75 minutes if played right.

A couple of tihngs he discussed:

- 2 warm up pitches
- batter is not allowed to step pout of box, one foot needs to stay in box during hwola at bat
- coach batter conferences need to controled
- enforce time between pitches rule, on both pitcher and batter

Alll of this will move game along.

 

[default]

Or we could add a rule that you can beat the hell out of the stalling coach, that would take care of the problem.

 

[default]

As much as I despise stalling, I also despise being rushed in the last five minutes of a timed game. In one game two years ago, we had the lead by one run. No one on either team seemed to be rushing or stalling until we reached the five minute mark.
Then, as our girls got the last out of the inning and were jogging in, the opposing manager and fans began yelling for us to hurry up and quit stalling. The umpire then turned to our coach and said he wouldn't tolerate stalling and to get our batter up there now. As she was grabbing her batting gloves, he pointed at the pitcher and said "play!".
As the pitcher began her motion, our batter was running up to the plate. I yelled TIME and the pitcher stopped her motion and the umpire called a strike without the pitch being thrown. Needless to say, a brief heated discussion ensued which ironically took up more time than if he would have just let our batter get to the plate. Would anyone hazard a guess as to how quickly our three better hitters struck out?? Obviously our coaching staff didn't dare discuss balls and strikes! We did hold on in their half of the inning to win but it sure was a fiasco.

I like Bretman's idea. I would love to see a tourney try it and evaluate its effectiveness.

 

[default]

I like the new rule but I also have to agree with some of the post, stalling does play a factor but every coach knows it is there before they start the tournament. So is it really stalling or using the rule to its fullest extent? I will never stall as a coach. I think the games should be played 7 innings like they are designed to but I also understand why there are time limits as well.

I had a team try everything they could to stall a game 2 years ago in a tourney in West Liberty and asked the ump to move the game along and he did the best he could but a rule is a rule. Anyway we were down 1 run and I believe 1 minute left and my batter biggz, god love her, hits the ball down the right field line for a homerun. Game ends in a tie and we go on to win the tourney. Now the bad thing was, while shaking hands with the other team, that the coaches called my coach and me out to the parking lot to fight afterwards. I did good and told him he was not worth my time even though I really wanted to but its for the girls. I wish I could remember the coaches names because I sure would post them, at least the team name, but I cannot remember. Can you believe coaches calling out the other coaches to fight? What a bunch of morons. Help me out with this one softballmomrlz22, what team or the coaches names was this? Their names should be posted on here so whoever plays them next knows to bring their boxing gloves, lol.

That was a interesting game, they thought they had it all wrapped up until the hit.....boy were they ugly after that.

 

[default]

OnTheBucket ... although not quite as bad, I have seen close to that situation as well several times where the ump was either grouching at everyone the whole game (isn't the game supposed to be fun??) or a coach got upset at the end because of perceived stalling. God knows I have been guilty of being on both ends of that myself, and it's just so frustating to be in that position, especially in elimination games.

 

[default]

Or we could add a rule that you can beat the hell out of the stalling coach, that would take care of the problem.

Where is the "LIKE" button when we really need it!! HAHAA!

 

[default]

AAAaHhhhh, I like this!!! Is this something a TD can just decide to implement? I would love to see this tried.

I love the idea as well. Has anyone used this yet? I am planning on 90 minutes between games and will need a good estimate on how it would work out. If you set it at 60 minutes like Bretman mentioned you would theoretically need to play 2 innings in 20-25 minutes. Its interesting. Anyone have any thoughts on it?

 

[default]

I have not seen it as much in the older ages but I will tell you that if we are in bracket play, I say do what you have to within the rules to get the win. That includes trips to the mound by the catcher, trips to the mound by the coach, taking pitches and stepping on the plate and swinging to get another inning in. If peple don't like it then change the rules. I prefer full 7 innings for sure but I say do what you can in the rules to win. I personally would not condone some of the stuff I have seen like having your catcher throw into centerfield on the throw down pitch but the rules are out there to stop that stuff.

coach murph

 

[default]

And herein lies the problem ... I don't blame Coach Murph at all. I won't take it to there (e.g., I won't go to the mound unless I would have done it anyhow), but I will admit to telling a batter to take pitches until they get a strike. The point is though that some people are going to play it like this (or worse) and now we're into a bunch of gamesmanship that is not supposed to be part of this game. I like the finish the inning + 1 suggestion as well, where both teams get at least one more at bat.

 

[default]

I am not sure I understand the benefit of the +1. Finish the inning seems to me to be sufficient. No stalling or anything of that kind matters then.

The way we ran our tournaments last year and the way they will run again this is:

Maple Leaf - 80 minutes - finish the inning
Cinderella - 90 minutes - finish the inning

Last year most of the games completed 6 innings and about 50% completed 7 (or mercy) for the Maple Leaf. The Cinderella's 90 minute games got about 85% playing 7 (or mercy).

We could go to 60 minutes, finish +1 but I think that would accomplish very little except in extremely rare cases. Not to mention the coaches would be keeping track of that 60 minutes point, which comes very quickly, and the pressure would be on for two innings instead of one. JMHO

 

[default]

Instead of a 75 minute (or whatever) "finish the inning" time limit, dial the clock back to 60 minutes. When the clock expires, you finish the inning you are in. Then, you play one more inning.

Under this format, the incentive to stall is virtually eliminated. A team cannot stall to sit on a lead in hopes of the clock running out. This format ensures that each team will have another at-bat and that at-bat cannot be deprived to them by stalling.

This format is used a lot down here - except it is 70 minutes, inning plus one. It makes things nice.

 

[default]

Doug ... the advantage is that it ensures both teams get another at bat, and it doesn't help to stall at that point ... you know when the game is ending. You're not going to have a situation where its going to help the home team to stall at the end of the game to avoid the other team getting another at bat (or the visiting team in a drop dead situation). I don't see it adding any pressure ... I think it reduces it some but more importantly it takes out the gamesmanship. If someone gets a big lead early and chooses to stall before the 60 or 70 minutes whatever it is, then so be it ... they probably are going to win anyhow. Your 80 and 90 minute finish the innings though are good too.

 

[default]

Bretman - love the idea. Parma - please do implement this in your tournament and let us know how it works. It would put the game back into the hands of the players more.

I am really thinking about changing to this type of format, i like it alot.

A couple of things on this subject. I talked to a guy who umps College and he said that in his opinion no game should need more that 75 minutes if played right.

A couple of tihngs he discussed:

- 2 warm up pitches
- batter is not allowed to step pout of box, one foot needs to stay in box during hwola at bat
- coach batter conferences need to controled
- enforce time between pitches rule, on both pitcher and batter

Alll of this will move game along.

ASA does have rules like this
1. warm up pitches between innings are i believe 3
2. Batters must keep one foot in box between pitches with some exceptions.
3. Coach - batter conferences is 1 per innning.
4. Pitcher has 20 sec from time recieved ball to pitch / Batter has 10 sec to get in box after pitcher is ready (ie. on rubber).

 

[default]

Look, we have all discussed a million times why there has to be time limits in tournaments, but the fact remains is that this game was built not to have them, and I don't buy any comparisons to other games where there is a clock...

This is the problem with time limits. They just feel wrong in baseball/softball. Stalling is not part of the history or traditional strategy of baseball/softball. It actually goes 180-degrees against the customs of our game.

One of the great things about the game is that we're not in a hurry. Before a pitch, the defensive players will go through their personal pre-pitch routine and make minor positioning adjustments, the hitter and runners get their signals, the pitcher gets her's, the defenders step up into their stance and off we go. This happens 200-300 times per game.

All of these things comprise the nature of the game. Without them, we might as well play back yard Wiffle Ball (not that there's anything wrong with that). Without throwing the ball around the infield after an out, it's not the same game. Without a throw to second after the pitcher warms up, it isn't baseball/softball. I say we have three guaranteed games instead of five in a tournament, but get in seven innings and retain the integrity of the sport. Moreover, the girls would learn to appreciate details, nuances and customs, along with a little patience.

 

[default]

ASA does have rules like this
1. warm up pitches between innings are i believe 3
2. Batters must keep one foot in box between pitches with some exceptions.
3. Coach - batter conferences is 1 per innning.
4. Pitcher has 20 sec from time recieved ball to pitch / Batter has 10 sec to get in box after pitcher is ready (ie. on rubber).

ASA rules are 5 warm up pitches in Fastpitch (3 in Modified and SP) and they're only allowed 1 minute to do it.

 

[default]

This format is used a lot down here - except it is 70 minutes, inning plus one. It makes things nice.

How much time between game start times? Is it typically 90 minutes or is it more?


According to a post on another site, they do it in Texas also:

thats done in quite a few tournaments around Fort Worth. the "mansfield" rules.
55 + 1 i think for the 8, 10, and 12s the last few years.
(55 minutes finish inning plus one more)

 

[default]

Joe, I agree. Time limits are not any fun. Changes the whole game.

Problem with less guarenteed games is the fact of the money being spent by parents on travel cost and getting their monies worth in actually game time playing. You see a lot of 2 pool / single eliminations down South in the Georgia area. Less entry fees of course.

I can't tell you how many teams and their players are completely worn out after playing two (2) games of back to back games... let alone the three games like I have in the Uniform Blowout. ALL 7 innings games. Just worn out.

There is really no easy answer except having more diamonds available so longer games can be played. Personally, I'd like to see 16u and 18u play 7 innings and no time limits and other age groups with a reasonable time limit

 

[default]

Coached in the Dallas Fort Worth area from 05 - 08 - never saw those rules but would have loved to seen it. In fact, Texas was the area that made me warm up to playing within the rules to win. They had many, many tourneys that had large number of teams. The other interesting thing there is that many of the complexes had running clocks ticking down on the scoreboard so everyone knew exactly how much time was left at all times. Ballfields at Craig Ranch in the North Dallas area were beautiful and hosted the JUCO championships every year I was there. By the way, I did not think that the play down there was much better but the difference that I saw was the depth of teams. I would say that between OK City and Dallas, you had 20 very good teams - the same ones you see at Nationals each year..........

Sneaky Cleats
Texas Glory
etc