There Oughta Be A Law

This weekend my daughter’s travel softball team participated in the 18A ASA So Cal State Tournament. As a first year travel ball team they did very well and we were proud of their overall play. But the most interesting topic of the weekend was the calling of illegal pitches.

Now, illegal pitches can be of many varieties. There’s the crow hop, the leap, not presenting, both feet not touching the rubber to begin, illegal substance, etc. Many times they are overlooked. Other times, the umpire will warn the pitcher and try to help the pitcher correct the offense. And then there are those times, which seem to be quite rare, where the ump will call the illegal pitch, the pitch is called a ball (unless of course, the batter chooses to hit the pitch), and any runners on base are awarded a base.

I have had an interesting journey with illegal pitches, especially the crow hop. My first year coaching high school softball, one of the rival pitchers in our league had a major crow hop. This girl flew off the rubber. After a series of discussions with the base ump, his final answer was “I’m the President of the Association and I’m not going to call it.”

Wow.

The girl happened to be the coach’s daughter and he told me that she was pitching 18 under travel ball and that she had not been called. I had my parents wanting to bring out the rule book. It got pretty crazy. But off and on over the years, I have run into instances in both high school and travel ball where pitchers were crow hopping, stepping off the rubber, etc. and couldn’t get a call. At ASA State in Palm Springs a few years ago (16u) a girl was hopping and our first base coach was trying to get the ump to see it but she wouldn’t call the hop. When our pitcher came out, and again when the other team put in another pitcher, the ump would say now she’s dragging properly. We agreed. But still couldn’t get her to call the illegal pitch on the first pitcher.

Now I have read about and been told that there are a few reasons that umps tend to ignore crop hopping. But the biggest reason seems to be the lamest, unless of course you are the umpire and you have to bear the brunt of your calls. That is, it has been said that most blues will not call illegal pitches because of the fallout from parents and coaches. Once you call one girl, then that team wants you to call the opposing pitcher. Sort of like speeding, where do the cops start writing tickets…5 mph over, 10? Other reasons for not calling illegal pitches are a new ump not recognizing or understanding what the offense is; poor field conditions, etc. Another confusing thing for those umpires that do multiple levels is that it is legal in men’s fastpitch to crow hop. And of course, one of the issues that came up this weekend, with some pitchers if the umps called every illegal pitch a two hour game could become a four hour game.

The sad part of all this is that illegal pitches are called in college ball and quite strictly. I once saw Amanda Freed called for illegal at a UCLA game once. I couldn’t even notice her off the ground. Here again, depending on your angle, you may not even notice it. My daughter almost never hops but once, upon returning home from a 12u tournament in Las Vegas, I was looking over some pictures I took and low and behold, here was Jessica frozen in air with both feet a few inches off the ground.

Anyway, this weekend at Artesia Park, the umpires were calling illegal pitches right from the outset. In our second game, the ump must have called at least eight to ten pitches between both team’s pitchers. The opposing coach was jawing in his ear every inning about our pitcher, until his pitcher also got tabbed. Finally, the umpire said he wasn’t calling any more unless they were real extreme, otherwise we’d be here all night.

My issue with this is fairness. Remember, I’m one that has been trying to get blue to call pitches for several years, and I’m not alone. But at the same time, it really isn’t fair to the players when the umps ignore the illegal pitches all year in friendlies and smaller tournaments to suddenly decide they are going to enforce the rule. It’s sort of like telling your kids, don’t put your shoes on the sofa, then ignore them putting their shoes on the sofa for six months, then suddenly WHAM giving them a swat for putting their shoes on the sofa today.

ASA…let’s make this simple. Either instruct the blue to enforce the rule ALL THE TIME or take the rule out of the books.

While I know some advantage can be gained by replanting in front of the rubber, but how much of an advantage is it really? When you have kids throwing 60+ mpg from 43 feet, or even 40 feet, what’s another six inches. It usually is the stronger pitchers that get called for hopping because they have so much leg drive off the rubber. Maybe we draw a chalk line six inches in front of the rubber and a pitcher is only called for illegal if they go over the line. It may simplify the rule making it easier to understand. It may save a lot of arguments and grief. And it may take a little heat off our kids.

Oh, and by the way…pitching instructors…this is on you too. (I know some of you actually teach kids to crow hop, although you may be in the minority.)

Either way, let’s come up with a solution to this issue. A lot of time and energy is wasted yearly on this. Let’s get back to playing softball.

Association Can Be A Good Thing

April 24th, 2008 - CIF Southern Section Eliminates Blue Book Rule 313, better known as the Association Rule.

The Association Rule prevented high school coaches in Southern California from coaching their players in their given sport during the school year, with the exception of a regularly scheduled P.E. class. Basically, it hindered club or travel ball coaches from coaching high school sports and vice versa.

I noticed on the CIF-SS web site, that a poll they are conducting is evenly split for and against this decision. 27 votes that this is a good thing and 27 votes against. I voted for. However, the proof remains to be seen whether will be good for high school sports in Southern CA.

There are a few reasons that I am in favor of the ruling. For one, I believe it will open the doors for high school athletes to have better coaching overall. Yes, there are some very good coaches in CIF-SS schools. I coached at two different schools over an eight year period and I can tell you there are some quality teams and quality coaches there. But there are also a lot of schools who are not so fortunate and who's players don't have the best coaching they can have.

"Why?" you might ask. Largely because of money. A walk-on coach (of which many schools now have) in softball for example, will make between $1500 and $5000 for a SEASON. This may include the above mentioned P.E. class for which most schools do not pay extra for. With the Association Rule in effect, coaches could not make additional money by giving their players private lessons, something that many travel ball coaches can do. The booster club can pay the coach more, but it has to go through and be approved by the school. There are a lot of school that do not even have booster clubs for some of their sports. A coach may make some money for hosting a summer camp. Simply put, many coaches, given a choice, would rather coach a travel or club team instead of a high school team. I of course, think walk-on coaches should be paid more by the school, especially since they are still saving a lot of money as opposed to hiring a full time employee. (Of course, I'm biased too.) I am looking for coaching opportunities for this next year now that my daughter is graduating. But with gas at over $4 per gallon, I can't afford to drive 25-30 miles to a school like a did before.

One other argument that was very valid, was the since Southern Section was the only section in CIF with this rule, if put Southern Section players at a disadvantage in those sports whose playoffs went all the way to the State level. Southern Section players had to compete against players who may have had their club or travel coach as their high school coach.

Since many players are looking for athletic scholarship opportunities, the chances again may be improved by having one coach for a given sport year round. But there are concerns, some of which may be well founded. The success or failure of this change will depend almost entirely on the coaches, especially those travel or club coached who can now coach year round.

Two words that coaches will have to be extra careful to avoid with this new ruling are "undue influence." Generally this term applies to recruiting regulations. But one of the reasons for the association rule was to keep coaches from exerting pressure on players to 1)Play only on their travel or club team, and 2) to only play one sport.

I have had players play softball for me that also played other sports. Some of these players were among my best. Sometimes another sport may be a welcome cross training for the player's primary sport. Yes, sometimes a player would get injured and not be available for all or part of the season. One of my best players at Brethren sustained a sprained MCL and missed almost half of the softball season. But she was also able to play both sports at a junior college and was almost equally successful at both, although definitely, softball was her primary sport. Why would a coach want to deprive the player of that experience?

Coaches, regardless of what your coaching style or philosophy is, we need to remember that this is about the players, the student athletes. Most coaches I know are good at winning with the resources they have available to them, not manipulating the system to fit their needs. For many players, winning a CIF title is emotionally on the same level as winning a national title for a club or travel team; not equal perhaps but on the same level. The NCAA is running a significant number of commercials pointing out that most college athletes go pro in something other than sports. There are other things at stake here.

I believe the elimination of the Association Rule can be a good thing and greatly improve the level of play in Southern Section athletics. But it can only remain that way if coaches respect the high school programs and put their players first.

Coach Mike

I will be discussing the elimination of the Association Rule along with some other topics with CIF-SS Director of Communications Thom Simmons today on Kidz n Sports. The show airs at 3:00 PM CA time on the internet at www.AdrenalineRadio.com.