Pitching and Pitchers Discussion Crow Hop

[default]

Have her drag with the top of the drag foot (or top of her toes), impossible to replant or leap (that gets air under the foot) that way. This is tough on the shoes, but she will be legal. Anyone who drags with the bottom of the foot is more than likely replanting (even if they drag)

 

[default]

How are they going to call a leap if "the pitcher's foot doesn't leave the ground"? And if they dragged at all, they didn't/couldn't replant. Maybe I am misunderstanding you. Could you find some video showing what you are referring to?

Replanting at the end of the drag is epidemic in Ohio fastpitch. Not only is it possible, but most pitchers who drag replant. It IS illegal. A replant is nothing more than a second push off place. if you notice any type of "skip" or hesitation on the drag foot, it normally is because they are replanting (even if the foot never leaves the ground)

This is what we see a lot of here in Ohio. totally illegal, even if the foot never leaves the ground. If the foot DOES leave the ground then you have a leap AND replant



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NnRdBRVopFg

the correct way

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rMSa3CEkhqw

 

[default]

I certainly hope not! By rule and definition, if the pivot foot never leaves the ground the pitcher hasn't committed a leaping violation.

As in many other pitching discussions, some seem to be mixing up and misunderstanding the leap and the crow hop, which are two distinct, separate violations covered by two different rules.

True, not a leaping violation. however a pitcher can drag AND replant. No that is not a leap or crowhop (meaning they left the ground) but a replant is still illegal. I posted video a little earlier that shows, leap replant, drag replant and also the correct way to drag so you will not replant

 

[default]

Replanting at the end of the drag is epidemic in Ohio fastpitch. Not only is it possible, but most pitchers who drag replant. It IS illegal. A replant is nothing more than a second push off place. if you notice any type of "skip" or hesitation on the drag foot, it normally is because they are replanting (even if the foot never leaves the ground)

This is what we see a lot of here in Ohio. totally illegal, even if the foot never leaves the ground. If the foot DOES leave the ground then you have a leap AND replant



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NnRdBRVopFg

the correct way

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rMSa3CEkhqw

:lmao::lmao: Thank God Bill is my dd's PC.

In all seriousness, I don't have my rule book in front of me. Can you cite the section (and maybe quote it) that says a replant (as you are calling it) is illegal if the foot never leaves the ground?

Bretman... some clarification on this one please? I know dd doesn't pitch illegally in any form, but I want to make sure our team pitchers don't either.

Also, this is why I said initially, that if they are dragging properly on their toes, or the upper side of the foot, it's impossible to replant.

 

[default]

:lmao::lmao: Thank God Bill is my dd's PC.

In all seriousness, I don't have my rule book in front of me. Can you cite the section (and maybe quote it) that says a replant (as you are calling it) is illegal if the foot never leaves the ground?

Bretman... some clarification on this one please? I know dd doesn't pitch illegally in any form, but I want to make sure our team pitchers don't either.

Also, this is why I said initially, that if they are dragging properly on their toes, or the upper side of the foot, it's impossible to replant.

Watch the first video I posted up above.At the beginning it states the rule. A replant is a replant is a replant. Does not matter if the replant is after a leap in the air or a drag, if there is a replant it is illegal. It clearly states if the foot drags and replants it is illegal

 

[default]

Okay. I see what you are saying. I would offer up the theory, however, that most of the girls who replant in the fashion of the posted video actually get some air before that replant, but it goes unseen due to the dust and whatnot. The only reason I am thinking along that line is in the video, you can clearly see her contract then explode off that knee. Not that it makes it less illegal. Just wondering if that is, maybe, why it goes unnoticed?

 

[default]

Okay. I see what you are saying. I would offer up the theory, however, that most of the girls who replant in the fashion of the posted video actually get some air before that replant, but it goes unseen due to the dust and whatnot. The only reason I am thinking along that line is in the video, you can clearly see her contract then explode off that knee. Not that it makes it less illegal. Just wondering if that is, maybe, why it goes unnoticed?

I think it goes unnoticed because of the sheer amount of girls who replant. It now looks normal to many of the umps because most girls ARE illegal. I pointed it out to a pretty good ump, and he said, " I dont see what you are talking about, she is doing the same thing all the other girls are doing"... My point exactly.
I would agree that many of the replanters do leave the ground, even if it is slightly and then replant. But I have still seen many who drag and then replant.

 

[default]

I think it goes unnoticed because of the sheer amount of girls who replant. It now looks normal to many of the umps because most girls ARE illegal. I pointed it out to a pretty good ump, and he said, " I dont see what you are talking about, she is doing the same thing all the other girls are doing"... My point exactly.
I would agree that many of the replanters do leave the ground, even if it is slightly and then replant. But I have still seen many who drag and then replant.

Thank you Thank you Thankyou. I feel better now. I thought I was all alone on this.

 

[default]

Watch the first video I posted up above. At the beginning it states the rule.

I'm not sure where the person who put that on YouTube got this "rule", but what they posted does NOT appear in the ASA pitching rules.

So it kind of shoots down the premise that they know what they're talking about.

 

[default]

I'm not sure where the person who put that on YouTube got this "rule", but what they posted does NOT appear in the ASA pitching rules.

So it kind of shoots down the premise that they know what they're talking about.

I found this

In their rulebooks, the USSSA, ASA, etc. offer essentially the same definitions for "crow hopping":

ASA - "A crow hop is defined as the act of a pitcher who steps, hops, or drags off the
Front of the pitcher's plate, replants the pivot foot, establishing a second impetus
(or starting point), pushes off from the newly-established starting point and
and completes the delivery."
And the ASA rulebook also states:
"Pushing off with the pivot foot from a place other than the pitcher's plate is illegal."

USSSA - "A crow hop is the replanting of the pivot foot prior to delivery of the pitch."
Additionally, under USSSA Pitching Rules:
"Pushing off with the pivot foot from a place other than the pitcher's plate is illegal.
NOTE 1: It is not a step if the pitcher slides (her) foot in any direction on the pitcher's plate,
provided contact is maintained.
NOTE 2: Techniques such as the "crow hop" and "the leap" are illegal
and here is the link I found it.. pay attn to the ASA rule


http://www.pitchsoftball.com/Page3.html



A different source same difinition


http://en.allexperts.com/q/Softball-2562/2010/3/crow-hop-2.htm

Both clearly state the a pitcher can not drag and replant...Any replant is illegal.

 

[default]

My point was that in the video, whoever posted it started off by saying that "this is the ASA rule"- then posted a statement that does not appear in the ASA rules. If they are trying to "prove" a playing rule, it would help if they posted the actual rule. If they're posting a statement that doesn't appear in the rule book, then it looks like maybe they don't know what they're talking about.

What you are posting is an ASA Rules Supplement. Rules Supplements are not playing rules and cannot supercede a playing rule. And you're posting just a "snippet" of Rules Supplement, leaving out the part that explains how a crow hop is a violation committed before the pitcher separates her hands- that is, before the defined "start of the pitch". (You're also apparently quoting from an old, out-of-date rule book, because this is not what appears in the 2010 book or any of the books I have here dating back to 2006.)

Could a pitcher possibly drag her pivot foot away in a legal manner, then gather her weight over the pivot foot and push off a second time? Possibly, but that is something altogether different than what is being shown in the videos. You would need to see the stride foot coming down, then a second push that causes the stide foot to land significantly further ahead than it would have landed had there not been a second push. (It's hard to describe and probably even harder for a pitcher to actually accomplish.)

We know what a leap is- that's an easy one. It's when both feet are airbourne at the same time.

We know what a crow hop is. It is a violation that happens before the pitcher separates her hands, accomplished by the pitcher moving her pivot foot off of the plate before the pitch even starts.

If the pitcher has legally dragged her pivot foot away from the plate, it can't possibly be a leap. If she has already separated her hands to begin the pitch, it can't possibly be a crow hop.

That only leaves one other possibility- the one I tried to describe earlier with the pitcher digging the pivot foot in to the point where she is causing her stride foot to land "an extra step" further ahead of where it would have landed from her initial push off the rubber. Frankly, I've never seen a pitcher that could do that.

Do we see pitchers who legally drag away from the rubber and then see their pivot foot twist, turn or dig into the dirt? Yes, I see that fairly often. I've also been instructed in umpire training classes that this is not a rule violation. Any twist or turn of the pivot foot can be disregarded, so long as it isn't causing the stride foot to come down at a "second landing point", as if the pitcher had taken two steps or pushed off from the rubber twice.

 

[default]

My point was that in the video, whoever posted it started off by saying that "this is the ASA rule"- then posted a statement that does not appear in the ASA rules. If they are trying to "prove" a playing rule, it would help if they posted the actual rule. If they're posting a statement that doesn't appear in the rule book, then it looks like maybe they don't know what they're talking about.

What you are posting is an ASA Rules Supplement. Rules Supplements are not playing rules and cannot supercede a playing rule. And you're posting just a "snippet" of Rules Supplement, leaving out the part that explains how a crow hop is a violation committed before the pitcher separates her hands- that is, before the defined "start of the pitch". (You're also apparently quoting from an old, out-of-date rule book, because this is not what appears in the 2010 book or any of the books I have here dating back to 2006.)

The first statement looks like it was based on the Crow Hop definition in Rule 1 and the second statement was Rule 6-3-J.

We know what a crow hop is. It is a violation that happens before the pitcher separates her hands, accomplished by the pitcher moving her pivot foot off of the plate before the pitch even starts.

If the pitcher has legally dragged her pivot foot away from the plate, it can't possibly be a leap. If she has already separated her hands to begin the pitch, it can't possibly be a crow hop.

This is news to me and is only stated as such in Rules Supplement 40. The definition in Rule 1 doesn't say it only pertains to a replant prior to the start of the pitch. Are you saying a Crow Hop is only a violation of 6-1-E-2 and not 6-3-J?

That only leaves one other possibility- the one I tried to describe earlier with the pitcher digging the pivot foot in to the point where she is causing her stride foot to land "an extra step" further ahead of where it would have landed from her initial push off the rubber. Frankly, I've never seen a pitcher that could do that.

I've seen it - typically by a younger/shorter pitcher to get their stride foot further out. It isn't very hard to imagine it being feasible.

Do we see pitchers who legally drag away from the rubber and then see their pivot foot twist, turn or dig into the dirt? Yes, I see that fairly often. I've also been instructed in umpire training classes that this is not a rule violation. Any twist or turn of the pivot foot can be disregarded, so long as it isn't causing the stride foot to come down at a "second landing point", as if the pitcher had taken two steps or pushed off from the rubber twice.

What is the difference between the stride foot landing "an extra step" vs "at a second landing point"?

 

[default]

Not trying to be a smart a$$, but get her to a good instructor.

Good luck

I agree, get her to an instructor who can work with her. When the cro-hop is fixed , there is a good chance something else might be out of line. This way you can have her mechanics fixed properly and have someone to make sure it doesn't pop up and not get fixed.

 

[default]

The first statement looks like it was based on the Crow Hop definition in Rule 1 and the second statement was Rule 6-3-J.

Point granted and I apologize. I was looking at the the actual playing rule in Rule 6, not the definition in Rule 1.

This is news to me and is only stated as such in Rules Supplement 40. The definition in Rule 1 doesn't say it only pertains to a replant prior to the start of the pitch. Are you saying a Crow Hop is only a violation of 6-1-E-2 and not 6-3-J?

It's right there in the very Rule 1 definition you pointed out above. It says that the pitcher cannot "establish a new starting point". By rule, when does the pitch start? When the hands separate. Therefore, if the hands have already separated, the pitcher is already past her "starting point" and any subsequent pitching violation is something else besides a crow hop.

Rule 6-1-E-2 covers more situations than just a potential crow hop. It makes clear that a pitcher may also not step backwards prior to starting the pitch.

Rule 6-3-J is refering to the pitcher's initial push off, which must be from the pitcher's plate.

I've seen it - typically by a younger/shorter pitcher to get their stride foot further out. It isn't very hard to imagine it being feasible.

Feasible? Maybe. I granted that much in my other post. Something I see in games or that is being shown on the video. No.

What is the difference between the stride foot landing "an extra step" vs "at a second landing point"?

On the pitcher's initial push off the rubber, her stride length is established. Her "initial landing point" would be the spot her stride foot would normally land just from that initial push. A "second landing point" would be the point at which her stride foot would land if she actually were able to gather her weight beneath her and make a second stride- all the while maintaining the mechanics of a smooth continuous delivery.

(No, a "second landing point" isn't a term from the rule book. It is my attempt to describe in words what would happen if a pitcher really were "pushing off a second time". And it's something I just don't see happening.)

Now, these kinds of conversations usually take a predictable turn. Someone posts their interpretation of the rule, someone else posts their counterpoint. One person is convinced that the other doesn't know what he's talking about and the other will remain steadfast in his belief.

I'll just say this: I would NEVER try to convince a coach that I know more about pitching mechanics than he does, because I don't. It's not my area of expertise and I have no special training or experience in that area. I'm not going to tell a coach that his pitcher is off her power line, or isn't closing her hips, or that her arm circle is off, or her wrist snap is wrong. I leave that up to the experts who have been trained to recognize these things.

So why is it that so many coaches think they are experts on the interpretation of the pitching rules? Umpires have been trained in that area, through classes and clinics and interpretive literature from the various sanctioning bodies. Assuming that you are an expert on the pitching rules, just because you teach pitchers, makes as much sense as an umpire claiming to be an expert on pitching mechanics just because he watches a lot of pitchers pitch!

 

[default]

It's right there in the very Rule 1 definition you pointed out above. It says that the pitcher cannot "establish a new starting point".

Okay. I misinterpreted it as a new starting point for the step rather than the pitch.

(No, a "second landing point" isn't a term from the rule book. It is my attempt to describe in words what would happen if a pitcher really were "pushing off a second time". And it's something I just don't see happening.)

No problem. I was just checking if there was a difference between the two terms you used.

According to your umpire training, what is the correct call if an umpire sees a pitcher pushing off a second time?

 

[default]

I'm not sure I'm following how the rule concerning pitching footwork is actually interpreted. In watching the two videos, the one of Hillhouse especially illustrates the "pitching style" that is epidemic in Ohio. I think the focus here is on the pivot foot, not the stride foot, as the replant happens before the stride foot lands. I've never seen any pitcher be able to pick up their stride foot a second time before delivering the pitch, but the hop-skip that Hillhouse demonstrates happens all the time. Actually, a pitcher could probably "hop-skip" all the way to home plate without their foot leaving the ground if they didn't lose their balance.

Question is... is it legal to drag off with the pivot foot (as Hillhouse is showing), then replant the pivot foot, then continue the delivery? This entire motion is before the stride foot has landed. Seems like that is establishing a second impetus.

 

[default]

We know what a crow hop is. It is a violation that happens before the pitcher separates her hands, accomplished by the pitcher moving her pivot foot off of the plate before the pitch even starts.

.

How is that a crow hop... Is it not the perfect re-plant..like Monica Abbott does. Is it not a re=plant means to re place the foot to another spot other than the pitchers plate... A re-plant envolves one foot, a crow hop envolves 2 feet..

 

[default]

I'm not sure I'm following how the rule concerning pitching footwork is actually interpreted. In watching the two videos, the one of Hillhouse especially illustrates the "pitching style" that is epidemic in Ohio.

Just to clarify, I was commenting on the first video of the young girl, where the pitcher is actually dragging the pivot foot away from the rubber and there is a twist or turn of the pivot foot as the ball is released.

In the other video of Hillhouse, the first pitch he demonstrates is illegal, no question. But it's illegal because it is a leap, not because it is a crow hop. These are two separate infractions covered by separate rules. Once the pitcher's pivot foot is in the air (the "hop" that he shows at the beginning of the pitch), simultaneous with the stride foot, that is a leaping violation.

I respect Hillhouse's accomplishments as a coach and player, but his video is the perfect example of a coach not understanding the precise definitions of the pitching rules. He is demonstrating a leap, while stating "this is a crow hop". Totally false statement that reinforces others misunderstanding these terms. After all, he is the "expert", right?

The move that Abbott has been called for is something entirely different and is a better example of a true crow hop. Her pivot foot slides forward and loses contact with the pitcher's plate- while her hands are still joined- then she strides forward an delivers the pitch. At the starting point of the pitch- when her hands separate- her pivot foot is in front of the rubber, thus creating a new starting point for the pitch. She is pushing off from a place other than the pitcher's plate.

 

[default]

Bret - What I'm trying to clarify is if the pitchers I'm seeing are actually executing a replant. Obviously I didn't write the rules )) so all I'm trying to do is get a better understanding of how a knowledgeable umpire interprets the written rules. To avoid muddying the waters, let's just use the ASA rules.

My DD was taught from day one that what the gal in the first video is doing is a blatant replant. This was not my interpretation, but just what she was told by at least 5 or 6 pitching instructors. Being an open minded individual I will readily change my mind about this being an illegal pitch after I fully understand how this motion is interpreted.

OK - so let's step through this:

Let's assume that everything is done correctly by the pitcher up to and including her stride and push off of the pitcher's plate. Her stride foot is in the air striding towards home plate; her pivot foot begins dragging away from the pitcher's plate, caused by her stride momentum.

THIS is the point in the motion where I need clarification:
While the stride foot is still in the air, the forward momentum STOPS, and therefore so does the pivot foot. The pitcher's weight is primarily on the pivot foot at this point allowing them a second "push" (however slight). So you have a second push, then the stride foot lands as the ball is delivered. Even though this whole motion is "bang-bang", it has distinct characteristics that allow it to happen.

You will rarely see a pitcher who has been taught "Finch mechanics" do this. The reason is that the they are taught to drive the knee on the drag leg forward to the stride knee, keeping the drag toe generally pointing down. Unless they have ballerina skills, they would twist their ankle!

However, pitchers who are taught the old-school "slam the door" style of pitching can get into the bad habit of a "sideways jump", and not finish with the backside. This sideways motion will have the pitcher's weight REARWARD instead of balanced, and the drag foot FLAT (sole down). This sets up the situation I described above. Since the weight is shifted back onto the drag leg, it's easy to "replant" the drag foot - especially with the foot in a "sole down" position. This stopping of the drag foot will also create the distinct "two holes" where the feet landed. The "Finch style" will only have a hole where the stride foot landed, and a drag mark, usually a banana shape.

But make no mistake - what I'm seeing is the drag foot coming to a complete stop before delivery of the pitch. No twisting or turning; just a complete stop BEFORE the stride foot lands. This motion creates a distinct "hitch" or rocking horse effect instead of a smooth motion when the back side finishes.

SO... is it legal to allow the drag foot to stop it's forward motion as I've (in long-winded fashion ) described?

 

[default]

In the other video of Hillhouse, the first pitch he demonstrates is illegal, no question. But it's illegal because it is a leap, not because it is a crow hop. These are two separate infractions covered by separate rules. Once the pitcher's pivot foot is in the air (the "hop" that he shows at the beginning of the pitch), simultaneous with the stride foot, that is a leaping violation.

I respect Hillhouse's accomplishments as a coach and player, but his video is the perfect example of a coach not understanding the precise definitions of the pitching rules. He is demonstrating a leap, while stating "this is a crow hop". Totally false statement that reinforces others misunderstanding these terms. After all, he is the "expert", right?

Bretman, I think I am hearing something very different from you when I watched that clip of Hillhouse. I agree with you that leaping and crowhopping are both illegal and they are separate things. But I think the point of the video was demonstrate that not everyone who does the "leap and drag method" of pitching is pitching illegally and that there is a difference between the 2 things: crow hopping and leaping. In essence, a crow hopper is no different than a pitcher who steps before the rubber as they deliver the ball (Finch, Abbott, etc.) as they are pushing off from a place other than the rubber. I think this video was put into layman's terms for people to see and know what to look for. There is no question (which is demonstrated by his foot staying dragged as he did the "leap") that the point of it was to keep the foot in contact with the ground as you leave the rubber. Having been to multiple clinics and lessons with him I can tell you that you and he have identical view points on the wording and interpretation of the rule. I just think this video was done for a simplistic look at a confusing topic that a lot of people are confused about. Without question, a crow hopper also leaps. But not all leapers crow hop. It reminds me of a saying my grandmother used to tell me: All Poodles are dogs, but not all dogs are poodles.