Clock

[Umpire]

Teaching them the rules of the game and how to work within the confines of the game to help secure a win is not unethical. Teaching them to lose without using all their skill and knowledge of the game is. Is it ethical to sacrifice a pawn to get a check mate? Is it ethical to spike a ball because you are out of time outs? How about running out of bounds to stop a clock? No, it's not. It is knowing the game and using what you know to your advantage.

Problem with coaches - meet coach.

We're not talking chess. We're talking teaching someone to do the right thing. If you can't get that straight, find another hobby.

 

[David Carter]

Problem with coaches - meet coach.

We're not talking chess. We're talking teaching someone to do the right thing. If you can't get that straight, find another hobby.

or maybe you could find another hobby besides calling people "cheaters" ....you can call it unethical or you can say you think it teaches players in a way you think is wrong...but you need to take the "cheater" talk somewhere else! probably not going to comment anymore since my usual calm cool and relaxed self is starting to give way to my younger days when I was not so nice in letting people know exactly what I thought about people comments

 

[softballphreak]

It's not cheating! It's taking advantage of a poor rule! The rule is the problem! The rule is what needs to be fixed!

The dollar rules in this case! Along the same lines as "showcase" tournaments.

 

[Easton33]

Problem with coaches - meet coach.

We're not talking chess. We're talking teaching someone to do the right thing. If you can't get that straight, find another hobby.

Meet that Umpire that is so arrogant on the field he will not listen to any protest you make because he can't be wrong. Philosophically, we see things very different and are on two different levels, that is ok. If you don't understand the simple analogies I made then apparently we are on two different levels of intellect as well, not ok. Maybe the chess one was a little weak, but the football ones are dead on. Don't just waller in your ignorance, open your mind to the possibility that you could be wrong and listen. Just so you know, I personally have NEVER used this tactic. (Stepping of base to get an out) Why? I like the girls to experience the pressure of do or die. You have a baserunner, you have a batter, you need runs, let the girl swing away and have a chance to knock in the winning run or be the winning run. If you are down by more than 2, you have other problems and starting that other inning may break the dam. Saw a coach, thought he was real smart, he was down by 2, had 2 outs, under a minute of game time, bases loaded, 9 hole up to bat...... he had a girl get an intentional out to start next inning!! All he needed was right there to win. He wanted his 1-5 to go at them next at bat. Start of new inning they score 2 more, and the coach that had so little faith in 9 hole watched 3 up 3 down on his at bat. I will use the clock when I am ahead, or no base runner with 2 outs and down by 2 or less, never when I have a baserunner. Although I do not agree with getting a baserunner to step off for an out, it is NOT cheating. I suspect, as your handle implies, you want everyone to know YOU are the umpire at everygame. Pull your head out, you are wrong about this. Cheating is playing a 14 y/o in 12u. Are intentional walks cheating? Is the pitcher breaking the rules? If you have still not come to the conclusion that it is NOT cheating, well then keep being ignorant but keep it to yourself.

 

[Easton33]

Problem with coaches - meet coach.

We're not talking chess. We're talking teaching someone to do the right thing. If you can't get that straight, find another hobby.

Meet that Umpire that is so arrogant on the field he will not listen to any protest you make because he can't be wrong. Philosophically, we see things very different and are on two different levels, that is ok. If you don't understand the simple analogies I made then apparently we are on two different levels of intellect as well, not ok. Maybe the chess one was a little weak, but the football ones are dead on. Don't just waller in your ignorance, open your mind to the possibility that you could be wrong and listen. Just so you know, I personally have NEVER used this tactic. (Stepping of base to get an out) Why? I like the girls to experience the pressure of do or die. You have a baserunner, you have a batter, you need runs, let the girl swing away and have a chance to knock in the winning run or be the winning run. If you are down by more than 2, you have other problems and starting that other inning may break the dam. Saw a coach, thought he was real smart, he was down by 2, had 2 outs, under a minute of game time, bases loaded, 9 hole up to bat...... he had a girl get an intentional out to start next inning!! All he needed was right there to win. He wanted his 1-5 to go at them next at bat. Start of new inning they score 2 more, and the coach that had so little faith in 9 hole watched 3 up 3 down on his at bat. I will use the clock when I am ahead, or no base runner with 2 outs and down by 2 or less, never when I have a baserunner. Although I do not agree with getting a baserunner to step off for an out, it is NOT cheating. I suspect, as your handle implies, you want everyone to know YOU are the umpire at everygame. Pull your head out, you are wrong about this. Cheating is playing a 14 y/o in 12u. Are intentional walks cheating? Is the pitcher breaking the rules? If you have still not come to the conclusion that it is NOT cheating, well then keep being ignorant but keep it to yourself.

 

[Easton33]

Actually, I said that wrong. He did not have a girl step off base, he had 9 hole step on plate so she would burn her at bat and they could start top of line-up.

 

[MTR]

You all do realize that intentionally violating a rule after being warned is a forfeiture of the game to the other team, correct? You also realize that employing tactics noticeably designed to delay or hasten the game is means for a forfeiture without warning, correct?

These two conditions are in the book for ASA, NCAA, ISF & NFHS and probably just about every other softball rule set.

 

[Easton33]

Rule 1) does not apply because it is a once a game occurrence.
Rule 2) "delay" would apply to calling excessive timeouts in an inning, tieing shoes, on mound conferences, ect.. The play Umpire is calling "cheating" is the girl intentionally stepping off base, getting called out. In no way is it "delaying" the game or cheating.

 

[GOINGDEEP]

Every sport that is governed by a time limit has stratigies by the coaches/players to use the "time" as an advantage tool. When you take a game that was not designed for a clock, this is what you get. I've been on both sides of this fence because the game "play time" was altered from the norm and it adds another level of stratigy.

We all know why tournaments do it. But I wish every tourney would play a straight 7 inning championship game, the clock shouldnt be part of the equation at least for that one BIG game.

 

[Umpire]

You all do realize that intentionally violating a rule after being warned is a forfeiture of the game to the other team, correct? You also realize that employing tactics noticeably designed to delay or hasten the game is means for a forfeiture without warning, correct?

These two conditions are in the book for ASA, NCAA, ISF & NFHS and probably just about every other softball rule set.

Of course not. That would mean that they read a rule book.