She had to color in her yellow laces

[BretMan]

Yeah, but it was enforced improperly here. The idea is that they can't have round circles (especially filled in ones) on the glove. Not that "Wilson" is yellow or that the lace is yellow.

I guess that the part that says, "Lacing shall not be the same color as the ball", doesn't really mean what it says?

There are NFHS instructional materials on this rule that specifically illustrate the glove's logo as being an issue.

The rule doesn't mention anything about "circles" or "especially filled-in circles". So how do you figure that's what they really mean?

If you read the rule, and if you have read the published interpretations of it, there's no way you can say that the logo or laces aren't to be taken into consideration. Both are specifically mentioned in the rule and in interpretive and instructional material.

Aside from the judgment of the actual color of the logo or laces matching the actual color of the ball- which neither of us could accurately address, since neither of us were there to see it- how do you figure that the rule was improperly enforced? I won't disagree that the rule is somewhat silly, or that some coaches will try to use it a ploy to get into a pitcher's head, or that some umpires are overly fanatical about applying it. But I can find nothing that supports any of the statements I quoted above.

 

[marriard]

Rules like this exist because some *&(@#&$( decided to try to get an advantage by making some team uniform the same color as the ball - or had graphics of a ball all over the uniform - or had all optic yellow dyed gloves or some other BS. Making the rule black and white and just banning everything ball colored stops this rule loophole jerk, even though the rule can sound stupid in contexts where it really doesn't have any effect on play.

So when you read those weird 'why does that rule even exist' rules, we all know the sort of people who caused it to be written in the first place.

Tangential story: When I used to run our local rec league we used to have a couple of coaches looking for that 'rule loophole edge'. First time it happened on my watch I clarified/rewrote the local rule and then named it after them in our local rules document. That put an end to that pretty quickly.

 

[Rocketech1]

DD last glove was a Mizuno MVP Prime series, with a bright day-glo greenish/yellow color on the name and logo. I put a black sharpie pen in her equipment bag just in case some rogue coach called her glove illegal. I guess Mizuno is more concerned with marketing/sales than having their fastpitch gloves in compliance of the rules?

 

[SoAZDad]

DD last glove was a Mizuno MVP Prime series, with a bright day-glo greenish/yellow color on the name and logo. I put a black sharpie pen in her equipment bag just in case some rogue coach called her glove illegal. I guess Mizuno is more concerned with marketing/sales than having their fastpitch gloves in compliance of the rules?

That's my take. I guess Mizuno figures Jennie Finch endorsements waive ASA rules.

 

[Comp]

Out of town and dont have my book to double check, but I do not believe ASA has any rule about the color of the logo or laces. It is NFHS that has the logo color and lace color rule. USSSA also restricts the color of the laces, but not the logo.

 

[Dabears17]

ASA 2013 rule supplement #41 says 'The pitcher's glove/mitt may be of one solid color or multi-colored as long as the glove/mitt does not contain colors that are the same as the color of the ball being used in the game'

 

[BretMan]

Out of town and dont have my book to double check, but I do not believe ASA has any rule about the color of the logo or laces.

They do not. Their rule says that the pitcher's glove may be one solid color, or multiple-colored, as long as the colors are not the same as the ball. Of note, for ASA this applies only to the pitcher's glove. In high school/NFHS the rule applies to all positions.

There really isn't any "one size fits all" rule on gloves across the board for all sanctioning bodies. They each have their own take on this and their own unique rules to cover it.

Rules like this exist because some *&(@#&$( decided to try to get an advantage by making some team uniform the same color as the ball - or had graphics of a ball all over the uniform - or had all optic yellow dyed gloves or some other BS.

Most of the rules in the rule book exist for reasons like this!

The original rules of baseball had about nine or ten rules. Pretty basic stuff- ball, strike, fair, foul, batting orders, number of innings and outs, and that was about it. The pages and pages of rules we have today evolved because somebody was trying to game the system, finding loopholes to gain some sort of advantage

 

[grmerrill]

Out of town and dont have my book to double check, but I do not believe ASA has any rule about the color of the logo or laces. It is NFHS that has the logo color and lace color rule. USSSA also restricts the color of the laces, but not the logo.

Rule 3 section 4 of the ASA umpire manual says that the pitchers glove can be one color or multicolored as long as the color(s) are not that if the ball being used.

 

[Comp]

Rule 3 section 4 of the ASA umpire manual says that the pitchers glove can be one color or multicolored as long as the color(s) are not that if the ball being used.

As bretman stated that is in reference to the glove itself not the logos or laces.

 

[guero_gordo]

Tangential story: When I used to run our local rec league we used to have a couple of coaches looking for that 'rule loophole edge'. First time it happened on my watch I clarified/rewrote the local rule and then named it after them in our local rules document. That put an end to that pretty quickly.

Brilliant.
Every time our rec-ball parents complained about some stupid rule that had been added in the offseason I told them some shameless jackhole made it necessary and it should bear their name forever.