Message board »Message Board home »Sign-in or register to get started
Online now: 5 members: Jeffrey Hined, TABLE SETTER 11, dillydilly, ernie stucki, terryl; 81 anonymousDiscussion: The Screamer5
| Posted | Discussion |
| April 25, 2018 OZ40 549 posts | The Screamer5 The Screamer5 stated: "We simply disagree on this topic, which is okay. I believe any changes to the game will be minimal. (Just my opinion) You just can't be as patient/selective as a hitter. That's a major change for me....." That's quite a juxtaposition, first you say it's "minimal then you say it's "major". My opinion is you can't effect half of the game's composition (offense) and hope for minimal impact. The game has been impacted, irrevocably I fear. Sorry I didn't get a chance to reply to you before the thread was closed. Have a good safe season one and all. |
| April 25, 2018 The Screamer5 Men's 60 69 posts | OZ40, for some reason, you refuse to let it go. Lol. I don't know why you feel so strongly against this change... but I guess time will tell. What I said was I feel the change will have minimal impact on the GAME. It's a major change for ME personally because of my normal patient approach...but one that I will have absolutely NO problem adjusting to. It doesn't always end in success but I still plan on hitting the ball hard regardless of what the starting count is. Hopefully you will do the same. Its still underhand, slow pitch softball. Hit the ball! I'll let you have the last word my brother. Good luck this season! |
| April 25, 2018 Jon44 Men's 55 149 posts | Just my opinion, but every game I was involved in at the SW Championships this last weekend went all 7 innings and I didn't feel the adjustment was so great. I obviously am a proponent of the 3-2 count and didn't love the "one to waste" compromise, but I even found that to be ok for me after watching it all play out. This is always going to be a personal feeling thing and I don't expect anyone to change their opinions over anything I say, but I like the game going the full 7 and loved the fact I never felt rushed or forced to hit first good pitch. |
| April 25, 2018 DaveDowell Men's 70 4312 posts | Jon44 ... I was the lead Field Director at Big League Dreams from Thursday (last day of Session #1) through Sunday and supervised 162 games of play ... The "tally" of games going the full 7-inning format was 162-0 ... There were NO complaints made to me about the 1-1 count when it was employed during the second session ... This is the sort of data that is relevant as we get to late November and the National Rules Committee convenes their 2018 sessions ... |
| April 25, 2018 chico senior Men's 60 134 posts | Well you guys running NCSSA, are you going to still claim there is no proof that playing with a 1-1 count doesn’t speed up the game? If i’m not mistaken between last years at Vegas and the SW Championships every single game that was played went 7 innings. |
| April 26, 2018 OZ40 549 posts | Jon44: I agree when you say the 'adjustment wasn't so great'. That goes back to what I said numerous threads ago. That being: not everyone takes the count full at every trip to the plate. I also said that usually on or before the third pitch most of us, including myself, offer at a pitch. So again, if late in the game and it's close I would like the luxury of being a little more selective on the pitch depending on the game situation at that point, that's what best for my team and myself or your team and yourself whatever the situation may be. |
| April 26, 2018 yerwombat Men's 60 76 posts | Pitchers determine if a batter takes a 3-2 count all the 1-1 count does is enlarge the strike zone from the batters perspective |
| April 26, 2018 OZ40 549 posts | Yep, all this time the answer has been in the pitchers hand, throw more strikes, no need for 1-1 start, very simple, I've said that too in previous posts. |
| April 26, 2018 DaveDowell Men's 70 4312 posts | This is cyclical redundancy at its finest! ... So we'll do the same (just once): SSUSA considers potential rules changes only one time per year, at the ISA/SSUSA Annual Convention in late November ... This year's Convention and Rules Committee sessions are in Las Vegas during the week of November 26th ... The sessions are open to the public, so you may make your case for change(s) via personal appearance OR by prior submission of identifiable written correspondence in the form of a conventional letter or email ... NOTE: Message Board commentary is specifically excluded from Committee consideration due to its generally anonymous and often factually deficient content, both of which prevent follow-up inquiries ... |
| April 26, 2018 OZ40 549 posts | For the record, I did submit an email for the last convention, it would have been nice to at least receive an automated response saying it was received and will be submitted, for all any potential submitter knows their email ended up in the spam or junk folder..(I know, right where mine belongs, HAH, beat you to it!) Hmmmm, maybe a submittal to the upcoming convention for yet another 'trial' season, this time with a 2-0 starting count. I mean the pitcher would have to throw strikes. Wouldn't that 'speed up the action' even more? |
| April 26, 2018 SSUSA Staff 3483 posts | Now maybe we're getting somewhere! ... At least you do (or did at one time) know the process on rules Committee submissions (and it's NOT here) ... Every piece of written communication the Committee received, including yours (we know who you are), was reviewed by the Chair as she built the list of potential formal Agenda items ... Many times, she included them in their entirety as an "Exhibit" ... In some instances, where there were multiple submissions that were essentially identical, such as a simple "..Please do (or don't) implement the 1-1 starting pitch count..", she summarized the common position and disclosed the number of submissions involved ... She also took great care to highlight unique commentary when appropriate ... It is obvious you disagree with the decision the Committee made on this matter and, despite the irrelevance of this forum, wish to debate it again seven months early ... Exactly half of the Rules Committee regular voting membership was not happy at one time or another, either ... There were two critical Committee votes on topic, and both were initially tied at 6-6 before the Chair exercised her tie-breaking voting responsibility to, in effect, decide the issue ... Somewhat surprisingly, the six votes in the minority each time were NOT comprised of the same six individuals ... This matter was given extraordinary thought and deliberation, and great weight was given to the results of the membership preference poll that was done in December ... Ultimately, we implemented the "1-1 count" for those ages and genders that voted in favor by more than a 20% preference margin ... I'm sure it will reach agenda inclusion status in November, like it does every year, but we'll let you in now on a not very well-kept secret ... The "on the field" objections to the "1-1 count" are virtually non-existent, and more important, the actual hard data being generated shows an approximate 99% of games being played to a full seven innings ... |
| April 26, 2018 OZ40 549 posts | I fully understand that the process for inclusion is not from the message board. To that extent, neither is this forum for softball equipment research and development but members still discuss their preferences for such things here. Why? Because it relates to the nature of the site itself (softball). Secondly, after the 'experimental' 1-1 count for this year was effected at the convention I didn't raise it again here, but as I said before when it comes up I'll surely comment on it. The reason I started this thread was to respond to a fellow player from the last thread which was 'closed' before I could do so. I don't understand why threads that are civil are closed and as I recall, I mostly remember just threads on this subject closed, but I have an idea about why that is. |
| April 27, 2018 yerwombat Men's 60 76 posts | Sure would be nice to see games scores so one could if one was inclined to make a determination on the effect of the 1-1 count tim mowery |
| April 27, 2018 OZ40 549 posts | This will take a bit of explanation so bear with me: A long time ago a wise man once said that 'softball games are like fingerprints, no two are exactly alike'. To compare this years games to last years games under different conditions and teams is impossible. You may get a trend either up or down but you cannot replicate on paper the emotions such as angst or apprehension that take place from one game to the next and compare them to other games that took place under a different set of rules. Different rules, different mindsets when approaching those two different circumstances. |
| April 27, 2018 yerwombat Men's 60 76 posts | The philosopher in me agrees the logical mathematician does not and this is how teams are rated if i'm not mistaken tim mowery |
| April 27, 2018 DaveDowell Men's 70 4312 posts | OZ40 ... When a decision is made to close a thread, it's normally due to the presence of two characteristics ... [1] a very limited number of posters, usually two or three, posting the same thing over and over with very little new being introduced to the discussion ("cyclical redundancy") and [2] excessive "pitch count" ... I may have jumped the gun by closing it one post too early, missing the fact that you're one of the "..gotta have the last word.." guys ... Which is what caused this thread to pop up so quickly! ... Tim ... Nice cheap shot, well played!!! ... You can get a jump on your highly anticipated statistical analysis with the 740 scores from Las Vegas and I'll fill in the 160 from the Tidewater later today or tomorrow once the FedEx delivery of the paperwork occurs this morning ... The 900 games played last week should be a good start for you! ... |
| April 27, 2018 k man Men's 65 326 posts | Here's a thought, since the main concern seems to be getting in the full 7 innings, but some think the 0-0 count changes the game complexion particularly in the lat innings how about this: The game starts with a 1-1 count and once the game reaches the 6th inning in the time limit meaning it would go to the full 7 innings, we switch in the 6th inning to a 0-0 count to finish the game allowing the batters ands pitchers to deal with that next perfect pitch. Dave, rather than forward my hardcopy to the convention and rules committee, I'll save you the trouble and throw it in the dumpster now! LOL |
| April 27, 2018 yerwombat Men's 60 76 posts | Awesome Dave Great job Thank you tim |
| April 27, 2018 DaveDowell Men's 70 4312 posts | Tim ... You've got another 160 scores available for your statistical analysis ... have fun! |
| April 27, 2018 OZ40 549 posts | Understand the closing of the thread parameters. Regarding the closed thread: 52 responses by 24 posters is not the same as 'the same 2 or 3 people posting' and 2851 views or followers to me indicates interest in the topic. It's obvious that a permanent 1-1 is the end game here by the powers that be and so be it. Well at least your server host is enjoying the click numbers this topic is generating... |
| April 27, 2018 DaveDowell Men's 70 4312 posts | You may be right OZ40 to some extent... But just so we're (crystal) clear on that, the "..powers that be.." are the players who chose to express a preference for the "1-1" starting pitch count structure in the survey ... |
| April 27, 2018 OZ40 549 posts | You may be right Dave to some extent...But just so we're (crystal) clear, you're now saying if the 'players' express a preference for 7 innings regardless of time with the 0-0 start SSUSA is on board with that. I think not, the powers that be are indeed the powers that be. |
