EmptyMessage board »Message Board home »Sign-in or register to get started
Online now: 1 member: Jkline719; 7 anonymousDetails for frampton
Real name:
Location:
Alameda, CA
Division:
Men's 55
Messages posted by frampton »Message board home »Start a new discussion
| Aug. 8, 2011 frampton | Topic: General and miscellaneous Discussion: Input It does sort of boggle the mind that a legal bat can become illegal because it's been used. I have no problem with outlawing shaved or loaded bats, but "rolling" seems to me to be in a different category. Not to mention the notion that hitting a tree or a pole with a bat could also make it illegal. The altered bat thing has a personal impact as well. I had a grey combat and the end cap came off. I glued it back on using epoxy -- I wasn't hiding anything, the glue spilled onto the barrel -- without any alteration of the bat itself. Of course, a catcher complained to an ump, and the bat was confiscated by SSUSA. (They were actually apologetic about it, it was pretty clear to everyone that there was no intent to make the bat any hotter, just to make it usable.) They finally sent it back to me -- they couldn't get the cap off the examine it (!), but told me I couldn't use it again. Just kind of underscores that the rules can lead to absurd consequences if taken to absurd lengths. Such as the notion that a bat that is broken in could be considered "altered" and therefore subject to criminal penalties. |
| Aug. 3, 2011 frampton | Topic: Bats Discussion: Composite Bats I only took a few years off before I started playing as a senior at 50, so wood bats were a distant memory. Probably hadn't used a wood bat since about 1976. We always used the best bats we could find, magnesium, aluminum, whatever. I used an Ultra II when I started playing senior ball. I'd be lying if I said I don't prefer the composite bats, but even with the composite bat I'm a line-drive hitter, have maybe six or seven home runs in as many years. (Maybe I'm getting better, four of those were in the last two years.) I always wonder on this board why my experience seems so different from what others post. In NCSSA tournaments (I play 55-AAA), more than half of our innings are less than five runs, we rarely hit more than three or four homers a game (and often one or none), and defense is a big factor in most of our games (wins and losses). The games are competitive and fun, more so (to me) than when we use lesser balls. (Side note, I just had my shoulder replaced, so I'm just hoping I'll be able to play at all once my rehab is over.) I don't use persimmon-wood drivers when I golf, either. |
| July 25, 2011 frampton | Topic: General and miscellaneous Discussion: Waivers I am a California lawyer, and I can tell you that, while it is true that lots of waivers/releases can be broken down or disregarded by courts, that will tend to be in situations where the *field or facility* causes the injury. It's very hard for a property owner to enforce a release when the property owner's negligence causes the injury. In California anyway, it is the law that a player assumes all known and reasonably knowable risks inherent to the game. That includes even the negligence of a co-participant (such as, for example, a collision during a tag play). It certainly includes the risks that are a part of the game -- being hit by a ball foremost among them. Virtually the only exception to this rule is intentionally-caused injury (liability for which also can't be affected by a waiver or release form). California used to be one of the most plaintiff-friendly states in the country in the area of tort law, so if that's the rule in California, I expect that it's the rule in the vast majority of states. An insurer of a facility or an organization like the SSUSA may well want a waiver form as an extra protection (or the organization might argue for a lower coverage rate if they get waivers), but chances are that in most states the assumption of risk rules are sufficient. (That also doesn't preclude that someone or some organization might want to settle with an injured person to avoid the hassle of a lawsuit and/or the p.r. hit of stonewalling an injured person.) |
| July 21, 2011 frampton | Topic: General and miscellaneous Discussion: When did it all start for you? I had a Mag Bat back in the early 70s, liked it a lot. Until the day I got a hit and found myself holding just the handle, the bat broke off right above my hands. As I recall, it was filled with what looked like styrofoam . . . |
| Dec. 16, 2010 frampton | Topic: General and miscellaneous Discussion: How did you get your start in softball? My first year in college a friend worked at a sporting goods store that had a team, so I hooked up with them. (A local HS baseball coach was on the team, we used to have 2-3 hour practices, taught me lots of great techniques.) That was 1973, played in Oakland leagues throughout college and law school. In 78 or so started playing in a pickup game in the Berkeley hills, which lasted well over 20 years in various incarnations, that got me with a new group of guys and Berkeley leagues. Some tourneys in those days, though when my daughter was born I limited it to league play, had to choose volleyball tourneys in the winter, was just a better volleyball player. Got into fastpitch around 1980, played that through '95 when my swing was just too slow to play in A leagues. Played less and less slow pitch too after that, at least, until I started playing senior ball in 2005 with some guys I played with and against back in the day. |
| Nov. 3, 2010 frampton | Topic: General and miscellaneous Discussion: Fear the Beard Well, that was the point -- NOBODY will throw 29 CG again, because the game has changed. In 1968, both the NL and AL LEAGUE ERAs were under 3.00, this year both were over 4.00. Again, I have loads of respect for Koufax, even if he did beat the Giants like a drum. 1962 to 1966 were a great run, even if Dodger Stadium did help him. He was lights out in both the '63 and the '65 WS. That said, I'd argue that Maddux was definitely the equal of either Koufax or Gibby. A different style of pitcher, to be sure, but the results in context are astounding. |
| Nov. 3, 2010 frampton | Topic: General and miscellaneous Discussion: Fear the Beard Koufax was obviously a great pitcher, and it's way too early to say that Lincecum is up there with Koufax and Gibson, but let's looks at the contexts in which Koufax and Lincecum pitch(ed). Koufax's home park was the best pitcher's park in the majors at the time, he was pitching off a 15-inch mound, in an era where pitchers dominated. (BTW, it was Gibby's 1968 that was the best pitching year of our lifetimes.) There's much more hitting these days, in the 60s every team had two or three banjo hitters plus the pitcher, so pitchers could "take a breather" during the bottom of the order, which is why they routinely threw 300 and more innings in a season. Nowadays, even eighth-place hitters have double-figure homer power, so pitchers need to bear down almost all the time. It's silly IMHO to think that the players in the past were better than today's players -- today's players are bigger, stronger, and faster. In every sport where there are objective measurements (track, swimming, etc.) today's athletes are better than in their parents' generation. Stands to reason that the same is true of the team sports. The balance between offense and defense is what makes baseball such a great sport -- as the hitters get better, the pitchers also get better. Here's another shout-out for Mays, nobody else has ever done it all the way he did. He could beat you at the plate, on the bases, catching and throwing. One of the smartest guys on the field you ever have seen, maybe ever will see. |
| Oct. 25, 2010 frampton | Topic: Rules of the game Discussion: Batter interference ? For the initial question, that's absolutely interference. The batter-runner must get out of the fielder's way. Rule 7.09(l). (The comment that there is "generally" no interference between the batter and the catcher would not apply on a pop fly, that's for balls on the ground near the batter.) |
| Aug. 20, 2010 frampton | Topic: Rules of the game Discussion: TIME TO EXTEND TIME LIMITS I'm in my seventh year of playing senior ball in NorCal, cannot remember ever playing a game of less than six innings, and we often get seven in. Granted, it's AAA, but I don't have a problem with the way the game is now. Last weekend in the Cal Cup we played (and lost, that was a drag) a 6-4 game. So in my part of the world, there's still defense being played. When we play on 300' fields, there are typically three or four homers a game. Without really checking, I'd say our average game score is something like 19-17; I know our team feels that if we score 20 we're in good shape to win if we're playing any kind of defense at all. Seems like the softball I've always played . . . I personally hate the 1-1 count -- even though Einstein will attest that I'm not up there looking too often, THAT seems to me to be a change in the rules of the game far more radical than improvements in the bats. Just MNSHO. |
| June 8, 2010 frampton | Topic: Tournaments Discussion: Rocking Reno Ouch, yeah, that was us, thought we had it going into the 7th with a four-run lead, but your bats definitely livened up that inning. So you guys went through the winners bracket? Look forward to seeing the actual results and putting things back together. Guess we can't complain too much about our losses in the DE portion being to the 1st and 2nd place teams . . . Mike, #20, RH IF |
| June 8, 2010 frampton | Topic: Tournaments Discussion: Rocking Reno I guess I'm reading that the Desperadoes beat R&R in the finals? I play for ODB (3B against Desperados, EH against R&R), both you guys beat us, and played well to do so, but being a good AAA team doesn't necessarily make you a major team. Congratulations to both of your teams -- I thought it was a really good tournament, good comp all around. |
| May 12, 2010 frampton | Topic: General and miscellaneous Discussion: To screen or not to screen... (Continued) The "protecting only one player" point is a red herring, IMHO. The pitcher is the closest to the hitter, and the requirement that he be in the box when he delivers the pitch limits how far he can get. First and third basemen can start deeper, and the other players are obviously further away in the first place. Also seems like it's always a balancing act -- we could play with sock balls and nobody would ever get hurt, but I'd rather play with better, harder balls. And it's not because I'm such a home run hitter -- I've hit three balls over the fence in 5+ years playing senior ball. |
| Jan. 4, 2010 frampton | Topic: General and miscellaneous Discussion: Waiver or not to waiver... Concerning the enforceability of a waiver, lots depends on the exact language of course. It IS difficult to waive the right to sue someone for the latter's negligence (and pretty much impossible to waive the right to sue for gross negligence or intentional conduct). However, in this case -- where the "waiver" is basically an agreement to assume risks one knows are inherent in a given activity, in known circumstances -- chances are better that it's enforceable, at least in California. (Not sure about other states' laws.) In fact, in California, a waiver may not even be necessary under the circumstances; there was a Cal Supreme Court decision 20 years or so ago that barred liability for the risks that one knows or should know are inherent in a sport/recreational activity. |
| May 27, 2009 frampton | Topic: Rules of the game Discussion: Scoring Texas Transplant is correct, a force play involves only a runner forced to advance because another runner has taken the base the runner was on. Not the case on a fly out. |
| April 13, 2009 frampton | Topic: General and miscellaneous Discussion: You make the call #3 Of course, tagging the runner rather than the base doesn't make a difference; in either case, the appeal was necessary (even if it would have been the "fourth out") to prevent the run from scoring. Were all the fielders asleep? |
| Oct. 13, 2008 frampton | Topic: General and miscellaneous Discussion: ROCK 'N ROLL TRIVIA 7 The hint about the band name -- it was a takeoff on the Beatles. |
| Oct. 12, 2008 frampton | Topic: General and miscellaneous Discussion: ROCK 'N ROLL TRIVIA 7 Hmm, okay, here's a Feat question for you. What mid-60s TV series did Lowell George and Richie Hayward appear in, and what were they called in the show? (hint for the show -- "We're the Hekawi") |
| Oct. 10, 2008 frampton | Topic: General and miscellaneous Discussion: ROCK 'N ROLL TRIVIA 7 Correct! (Mick Jagger and Keith Richard (at least) were singing harmonies on "All You Need Is Love", I think Jagger had a tambourine. That was the other one I know about.) "You Know My Name" was started in 1967, but released as the B-side to "Let It Be" in 1970. You're up. |
| Oct. 10, 2008 frampton | Topic: General and miscellaneous Discussion: ROCK 'N ROLL TRIVIA 7 Okay, here's one that shouldn't be too hard. There's a Beatles song on which a member of the Rolling Stones played a (non-percussion) instrument. (There's another with a couple of Stones providing vocal harmonies and possibly a tambourine -- we'll call that extra credit.) Name the song and the Stone. |
| Oct. 9, 2008 frampton | Topic: General and miscellaneous Discussion: ROCK 'N ROLL TRIVIA 7 Well, jeez, I was wrong, so I'd say dbax, you're up. |
