Yes, the FP game has remained the same, but as you can see from many in this and other threads, there are still too many people engrained with a "traditional" or baseball mentality that will not even entertain change let alone accept it.
Maybe because they play a different game on a different field with different equipment and a different mentaility and different philosophy than softball. I find it amazing how people always defend their game against the baseball elitest by telling them it is a different game, but really don't want it to be.Just like the 90' bases in baseball (though I do know some leagues gradually go from 60' to 90' at the youth BB levels) so I do ask, why would you want to change something that has been fundamental to the game since almost its inception?
And some think it is broken. How often do you see the routine play turn into the banger? When was the last time you saw a routing 5-4-3 deuce? Unlike what many want to defend with, "don't make the game baseball", I'm not. I suggesting the game be adjusted to it's participants, their ability and equipment. Otherwise, why not put down the hot balls and bats and go back to the equipment used when the game was set up to be played at 60'? One three-letter word is why not, ego and that is try of all games.To me is ain't broke, don't fix it. And I really don't see the 60' bases as broken.
Stop thinking one-dimensional. There are two teams on the field, not just the offense. You were okay with moving the PP back to give the offense more of a chance to put the ball into play. That's fine, but that shouldn't guarantee a hit. Give the defense a chance to make a play or two that isn't scuttled on a .1 second hesitation.Sure I think most if not all of the girls wouldn't have a problem with 65' bases above the U12 level but I still don't see a real good argument to lenghten the base paths.
This has been happening in SP for years. It is fun and guess what? The true hitters still hit, even with the wood bats.I do like the idea someone posted of a tourney with cheap or even wooden bats. That would be interesting to see.
BTW, for all those who routinely raise the bat and ball issue, please try to catch up to the rest of the game. The bats and balls have been worked and reworked, restricted and tested and limited for more than a decade. ASA has been so far ahead of this curve, it is ridiculous. But as much as people on here and other boards involving FP claim there should be something done about the ball, every time there is a suggestion they move to a safer ball that may not carry as far, we get the same argument about making change as above.
SP has changed balls a couple of times. The bats are as safe as they have been in years and, following ASA's SP lead, the NCAA is testing the 52/300 (COR/Comp) ball which travels just as far, but hits with less impact and suffers little to no effectual change due to climate.
As previously stated, JMO