Why have the rule?

[default]

Maybe they should just move the pitching distance from 43' to 46' and make crow hopping/leaping legal. lol
If they stay in the circle. Jennie Finch could probably hop 6'. ha

 

[default]

I will look at the videos. We have have had three calls for leaving early this season and twice the umpire called it immediately and forgot to do a delayed dead ball.

Sammy, you may be right that there is no advantage in leaping. I'm fine with legalizing it, but if it's illegal, we need to know because it changes the mechanics for some pitchers. If we don't need to work on correcting it, then no point in wasting time doing so.

Mark - excellent example videos. I have a video "archive" of my own from DD's college days of some very questionable pitching techniques. Maybe some day I'll pass them on to someone for training purposes...

Joe, actually there might be a slight advantage gained by not dragging the pivot toe, depending on the pitcher. One point in Mark's videos I had forgotten was how a pitcher's momentum might go upward instead of forward. A pitcher who has learned (correctly) to drive toward the plate, pushing forward not upward will have a greater advantage when not dragging. Going upward is just wasted motion. For a pitcher who is driving hard forward should not have to change her mechanics much at all. The pitchers who leap UPWARD would certainly have to correct some things to keep the drag toe down. Add a replant to that upward motion, and you'll have a pitcher who completely falls apart if required to pitch legally. Point is, if leaping was made legal, a seasoned legal college pitcher would have no problem adding a little oomph to her forward drive which might bring her drag foot slightly off the ground. However, the crow hoppers and replanters should still be penalized - because IMO it's a combination of leaping and replanting (the second push) that provides the most advantage.

 

[default]

I absolutely love the videos. They should be mandatory viewing for all fastpitch umpires. I don't care whether the toe drags or not. These videos point out the obvious signs of replanting which are very clear when viewed from the side. Years ago, I too, used to complain to umpires, but learned my lesson. It's just sad that it is allowed to go on and on. From my many years of watching games around the State, I would estimate that as many as 30% of the pitchers out there, are guilty to one extent or another. But then, everyone wants to be "that dominant pitcher" no matter what it takes. Sad.

 

[default]

Those are good videos. Although I find the "guilty until proven innocent" approach interesting. I do see occasional "token" illegal pitch calls but never any real enforcement.

 

[default]

Excellent videos!

 

[default]

You know some of you may not like this opinion, but who cares if she or he is crow hopping ..I think we truly get away from the athleticism of the game when we focus and disect the technicalities of the game !!! When the umps start watching the pitcher, the runners start leaving a litte earlier ...we may be talking inches to foward movement as to up and down movement.lets work on a consistent strike zone for both teams! Most of the the time it has to be brought to attention of the umpire . Once it has; now you have a conrfontation for opposing coaches , than the father of the pitcher, than the opposing team , its rediculuos ..Let the players play! I agree with some of the comments to move the rubber back . You mean to tell me that the batters dont have any advantage they have the potential to hit it back to the defense/pitcher nearly one and a half times faster than it comes in ...LET THEM HOP! Ive seen a few Racer games and some Mens fastpitch games and I think they are crow-hopping...I could be wrong,but it sure is fun to watch!

 

[default]

Crow hop- It isn't necessary for the pivot foot to leave the ground to have a crow hop. It could be slid forward in front of the pitcher's plate, never leaving the ground, then the pitcher could push off from that point.

If the pivot foot has left the ground....where might the stride foot be at that moment? If it's already landed, then the pivot foot cab be off the ground. If it's in the air, then you have both feet in the air at the same time, which is a leap.

Also, I'd be careful about defining any of these by if the pitcher landed inside the circle or not. The circle has zero bearing on any of the pitching rules. The only rule the circle applies to is the look back rule.

I was getting ready to ask what each of those were and lewam3 starts it out and bretman clarifies. Thanks to both.

 

[default]

Rocketboo27,
I dont disagree with you. The problem is that it is a current rule. If we allow this violation why not allow the runners to leave the base early? Either have the rule and enforce it or get rid of it. Crow hopping and leaping is at this time considered cheating. The same as leaving the base early is considered cheating. Just my opinion.

 

[default]

I can definitely see the advantage gained by crow-hopping. However, my dd has gone through leaping habits from time to time that we were quick to work on. I observed that she actually LOST speed on her pitches when she leaped because she was killing the momentum of her drive off the rubber.

 

[default]

If they did allow leaping, think of all the ways you could leap and distract the pitcher and be within the rule. Leap 15 inches off the ground, do a ninja kick, etc. Excepting the ninja kick (it would be cool to see) quite a bit could be done and still match the form of a then legal leap.

 

[default]

If they did allow leaping, think of all the ways you could leap and distract the pitcher and be within the rule. Leap 15 inches off the ground, do a ninja kick, etc. Excepting the ninja kick (it would be cool to see) quite a bit could be done and still match the form of a then legal leap.

Ninja kick?:lmao:

 

[default]

I think the videos are excellent and show what I've been thinking all along about replants. They really aren't that hard to see IMHO. I'm curious what bretman thinks about them. I'm even more curious what the OHSAA people would think about them.

 

[default]

I was able to watch Georgia and Tess Sito play last night online against Kennesaw State. This was a non-conference game, but I am assuming some pretty good umpires were calling the game. The starting Kennesaw State pitcher was an obvious re-planter, yet to my knowledge there were no illegal pitches called.

 

[default]

I was able to watch Georgia and Tess Sito play last night online against Kennesaw State. This was a non-conference game, but I am assuming some pretty good umpires were calling the game. The starting Kennesaw State pitcher was an obvious re-planter, yet to my knowledge there were no illegal pitches called.

Did not see the game, but maybe this was the situation. I posted this earlier. A state UIC answered my question about replanting by saying;

"The confusion has become even greater as the NCAA has approved the technique as legal as long as the hands have separated and the windmill of the arm is continuous and does not have a hitch or pause to it."

It is very confusing at best....

 

[default]

Did not see the game, but maybe this was the situation. I posted this earlier. A state UIC answered my question about replanting by saying;

"The confusion has become even greater as the NCAA has approved the technique as legal as long as the hands have separated and the windmill of the arm is continuous and does not have a hitch or pause to it."

That makes sense because she did have a continuous motion after her "first" pushoff.

 

[default]

Well - here is a further update. Seems like our UIC has tried to stay on top of this issue because it is being called a lot down here during HS. Here is what he got from the NCAA, NFHS and ASA regarding the "leap, crowhop and replant" controversy. I know I will make it a point to ask the TD's and UIC's at our qualifiers and Showcases if they interpert it the same way. Hopefully the TD's will make it a point of clarification during their pretournament meetings.


*************************************************************************************************************
Subj: IMPORTANT - GUIDANCE ON CALLING the Crow Hop/Replant from NFHS and ASA

Umpires,

Sometimes from controversy comes clarity. The illegal pitch controversy has created quite a stir since the NCAA SUIP made it a point of emphasis with the umpires some 3 years ago. It resulted in people losing jobs. However, what was being taught was never refuted or clarified until recently, when after a rash of illegal pitches being called this spring for replanting, Dee Abrahamson, rules editor and interpreter for the NCAA, published the following clarification/directive:

[FONT=times new roman, new york, times, serif]If the pivot foot remains in contact with the pitcher's plate prior to the initial drive and then remains in contact with the ground throughout the pitching motion, and the pitching arm circle is continuous without hesitation, and the drive of the front foot remains inside the pitching plate, then we have a LEGAL pitch. It is LEGAL footwork if the pivot foot is in contact with the pitcher's plate prior to the initial drive, and then remains in contact with the ground throughout the pitching motion as the front foot land inside the pitcher's lane.

Many of you have seen the illegal pitch video/powerpoint presentation that was a produced during that time frame. It was recently posted on the FHSAA web site under the belief that this was a correct interpretation and a sanctioned presentation. Many of the points on the video are valid but the section on crow hopping and replant is NOT. This video/powerpoint will be removed from the web site.

After the directive from the NCAA, I sent an e mail to Julie Johnson of the NFHS asking for guidance from NFHS and the ASA. I wanted to make sure that the umpires in Florida were operating on the same page as the rest of the country. I have since heard back from Julie that the NCAA interpretation and guidance is the same interpretation and guidance from NFHS and ASA.

What does that mean to us?

We will continue to call the leap. The only time we will call a crow hop is if there is a noticeable hitch or stoppage in movement when the pitchers arm circle has begun and the foot has already pushed away from the pitching plate. As long as the arm circle is continuous and the foot remains in contact with the ground, we have a LEGAL pitch.

[/FONT]

 

[default]

I think the videos are excellent and show what I've been thinking all along about replants. They really aren't that hard to see IMHO. I'm curious what bretman thinks about them.

My contention has always been that as long as the pivot foot starts out on the pitcher's plate, then remains in contact with the ground as it drags away, it doesn't really matter what sort of twist or turn the pivot foot takes, or if it's on the side or on the toe, or if it digs in a little as the pitcher releases the pitch. I've been consistent in that interpretation from the beginning.

What I thought when I saw those videos was that some of the things were a little off. Some of the interpretations were contrary to what I've been taught in the past.

The follow-up post quoting Dee Abrahamson, from the NCAA Rules Committee, confirms that they were off and reinforces the interpretation I've presented on this forum in the past. That is further confirmed by Julie Johnson, who is on the NFHS Rules Committee and also a member of the ASA National Umpire Staff.

To rehash:

If the pivot foot remains in contact with the pitcher's plate prior to the initial drive and then remains in contact with the ground throughout the pitching motion, and the pitching arm circle is continuous without hesitation, and the drive of the front foot remains inside the pitching plate, then we have a LEGAL pitch. It is LEGAL footwork if the pivot foot is in contact with the pitcher's plate prior to the initial drive, and then remains in contact with the ground throughout the pitching motion as the front foot land inside the pitcher's lane.

 

[default]

Oh sure, I see how you are. Hiding behind official interpretations from high up mucketty-mucks!

Ah well, I always saw it the way the FL people do, but once again I go down in flames. I do wish they would write the rule the way they mean it instead of writing conflicting sections and trying to tie it all together later via an interpretation. I also wish I had a toilet made out of solid gold, but it's just not in the cards.

Thanks bretman.

 

[default]

So, it sounds like the rules committee has dropped the wording concerning a "second impetus", or push off point? I would have thought they would have legalized leaping before opening the floodgates with legalized replanting . Just my humble opinion...

 

[default]

Sammy I agree. the replant is a definate advantage. Not sure about the leap. But I guess as long as the arm continues to move and the foot stays dragging the ground it's ok.