NFHS rules vs. ASA rules

[default]

In the spirit of no dumb questions, can anyone identify the rule differences between NFHS (National Federation of State High School Association) rules and ASA rules?

I was at a tournament last year and questioned a call and the ump pulled out an NFHS book for clarification of the rule. When I asked him why he was using the NFHS book, he responded that "there are only a couple of differences and I was always told to just go off of NFHS rules and I'd be OK".

Page 50, diagram 6, rule 6-1 of the NFHS was a source of controversy for me last year as I had one pitcher who loves to put her left foot back behind the rubber. I even had one High Schoool coach question her legallity. Obviously, the diagram shows one foot off the rubber (behind/within the side boundaries). Is this one of the "couple" differences the ump made mention of?

I've read the NFHS from cover to cover at least four times now (and the case book). I can honestly say, I'm doing good to memorize the 10% that I think I've memorized. Has anyone sat down and compared the rules or better yet, are there cliff notes that show the differences?

Thanks,
Bad Medicine.

 

[default]

There are many more than "a couple" rule differences between NFHS and ASA rules.

Just to confuse things even further, some of the rules are written almost exactly the same, but interpreted differently in each organization's study guides and case books.

On the ASA website, under the "Umpires" section, there is a PDF document listing rule differences for ASA, NFHS and NCAA softball. This document is 23 pages long! Here's a link:

http://downloads.asasoftball.com/umpires/pdf/2007ASANCAANFHSruledifferences.pdf

The pitcher's foot placement on the rubber is one of the differences. NFHS allows the pitcher to place her stride foot behind the rubber to start, or take a step backwards simultaneous with her wind-up. ASA requires both feet on the rubber to start and no backward step is allowed.

 

[default]

Thanks for the link.

PS
I've even read information contained in case study books of an organization that doesn't appear to be in the same organizations rule book. i.e. A ball hitting the rubber and bouncing foul. According to the case book, it is a foul ball assuming it did not hit a person (NFHS Page 14 2.25.1 situation A). Yet to find it in the rule book. I'm sure that's not the only one.

At any rate, thanks for the info.

 

[default]

A batted ball hitting the pitcher's plate, then going into foul territory before passing either first or third base, would meet all of the definitions of a foul ball as found in the rule book. So the rule is there, but maybe just not in as specific a form as you would expect.

The Case Book plays are designed to answer "what if" scenarios, clarify existing rules or cover unusual plays. They spell out how the rules are applied in certain specific situations.

The Rule Book is more general. Writing a rule to cover every possible scenario would result in a rule book as thick as a phone book!

 

[default]

Oddly enough, I asked three different Red Shirts at Beavercreek about it last year and one said "absolutely not a foul ball if it hits the pitchers plate and rolls foul". The other two stated "to their knowledge it would still be fair".

I'll double check but I think it is written up in the NFHS as "if a fair batted ball hits an object other than a player and rolls foul before passing first or third, then it is a foul ball". When I presented the rule as it was written to the Red shirts who just got finished telling me it wouldn't be interpreted as a foul, and asked what "object" other than the pitchers plate and possilby an umpire, could they be describing? I got blank responses. Made me wonder at the time, if this was an NFHS generalization that the ASA was very specific on.

I couldn't imagine the spirit of the rule trying to identify anything other than those two things. As you pointed out, interpretation is part of it and my hunch was that the ASA must have a different spin on it, since these three guys were all ASA and couldn't be wrong, or at least the odds of them being wrong weren't very good. Also, the question if, is one organization specific and the other general? I can't help imagine that coaches involved with both organizations are constantly battling with the seperation.

I suppose my best bet would be to continue to digest the information from all organizations and be as prepared as I can be to make sure I'm using the correct set of rules. A challenge presumably to all that coach both NFHS and ASA events. For certain, no one wants a phone book sized rule book to digest.

You are obviously well versed in the subject matter and as you can tell from my number of post, I'm new to OFC. Appreciate the feedback and good conversation.

Thanks again for the link. Should make for some good rainy day read.

Maybe if we keep finding topics, it will eliminate the need for the cliff notes, lol.

 

[default]

There are rule differences that can trip you up. But this particular rule is universal for any level of softball- or even baseball- from T-Ball up through the Major Leagues.

In fact, the ASA definition of a foul ball includes this line: "A batted ball that hits the pitcher's plate and rolls untouched to foul territory before reaching first or third base."

The pitcher's plate only exists in relation to the pitching rules. On a batted ball it is, essentially, just part of the infield. A ball hitting it has no special bearing on the "fair/foul" call. It is the same as hitting the dirt, a clump of grass or a rock.

The three umpires that told you differently were officially "0-for-3"! ?

 

[default]

If this were a perfect world, all sanctioning bodies would have the exact same rules for HS & travel, college and pro. Too many organizations think they have the best way to play the game and it only dilutes the sport. Count the number of sanctioning orgs: ASA, NSA, PONY, AFA, USSSA. That's all I can think of, but there are probably more. It would be so much better if there was only one, like it was in the beginning, not saying that ASA is the best.

To make matters worse in HS, not all states enact all of the rule changes made by NFHS, and not all states are a part of NFHS.

Same way with college: NCAA vs NAIA.

Let's all get on the same page. It only makes sense.

 

[default]

I heard for the first time about ISA a few weeks ago. I think you can add this one to the list also.

I like your reasoning. It sure would make a lot of sense. I doubt it will ever happen and my prediction is it will only get worse. The constant positioning for dominance is part of the game. I suppose it's one reason that makes it so desirable.

I wonder just which organization is most dominant. I would think it would be easy to figure out. In my opinion most travel coaches would jump at the chance to coach High School ball (a paid position). Most High School coaches may jump at a chance to coach College ball, etc. etc. If this reasoning is agreed upon by most, then wouldn't it make sense to adopt either the NCAA or NAIA rules as our standard?

As odd as it sounds, I'm not opposed to having so many organizations. I'm not opposed to learning so many different rules. It would be nice however, to have a document or book that was published that we can learn the differences from. Sounds like a good way to make some money for someone with enough time to publish one (assuming there isn't one already).

 

[default]

Several years ago someone did publish "The Umpire Handbook of Softball Rule Differences". It was my understanding that the gentleman who wrote this has sinced passed away and his son had continued updating and distributing the book.

The last available reference I could find was for a 2004 edition, so I'm not sure if this is still being published. Most sanctioning bodies update and add rules annually, so even an edition one year out of date would be bound to contain some incorrect information.

Here is the link that contained the contact information (it's also the link to a great website with links to most of the different rule books that are published on-line): http://eteamz.active.com/softballumpires/links/

Rule differences between different organizations can be confusing and there are a lot of them. Maybe 90% of the rules are the same, but that other 10% can cause you some problems.

There are many different sanctioning bodies- I can easily think of a half-dozen more beyond the ones already listed here- and the idea of a "uniform" rule set amongst all of them will probably never see fruition.

One reason- competition. Why do we all not drive one brand of car? Many of these organizations are run essentially as businesses and are in competition for your softball dollars. As such, each will have their own idea of what best serves their customers and a reluctance to share their "trade secrets" with other organizations.

An even bigger reason is that each governing body serves a different audience. NCAA rules are written to cover games played by adults in a highly competetive environment. Little League rules are designed for balanced competition at a recreational level for children. High school rules have an emphasis on safety, participation and an extension of the classroom experience. NPF rules are written for professional, paid players.

Each organization will have its own goals and agendas and will modify their rules to accommodate those differing goals.

 

[default]

bretman, once again thank you for the link.

Your next to last paragraph makes perfect sense. I understand the logic behind it and there is merit. I do have to remain puzzled by the fact that there are governing bodies that are co-existing in the same age group, right up until the money is factored in, then that makes perfect sense as well.

In another post, I replied about how it didn't take me long to figure out that travel ball was business like. I'll go out on a limb here and state that having so many different organizations is good for Fastpitch Softball....competition, interest, controversy, and Sales.

I'm starting to develop notions of College Football's BCS. Some love it, some hate, but the bottom line is it has been very good in creating interest in that sport, good & bad, it is still interest. My employees are addicted to the arguments (not so much the games)that each week brings with the effects of the BCS, which I pay for in lost time, lol. I'm an addict myself. Point is the interest is what sells the product.

I'm sure there are other new (and old) variables contributing to the interest of the game. The rule differences have certainly stirred my interest and I'm sure it will cost me even more money before next year. To me, mastering the rules is as essential as teaching the fundamentals, and should be high on every coaches priority list.

If I ever get time, I'll try and research the 10% that you mentioned and post the differences. I suspect there are others (new and veterans) out there that would benefit from the knowledge. Appreciate your feedback.

Thanks Sir.