CrowHopping, Replanting, etc. - Not being called by Umps

[BoardMember]

There is no confusion Skinner. How about we just stick with the "definition" of a Crow Hop as defined by the "governing body of softball" here in the US, instead of "Coach Hals Method" of re-defining things........."Skip to my Lou" has no bearing on the definition..........

Rule 1 Definition.

"A crow hop is defined as the act of a pitcher who steps, hops or drags off the front foot of the pitcher's plate, replants the pivot foot, establishing a second impetus (or starting point), pushes off from the newly established starting point and completes delivery".

A Crop Hop is a REPLANT WITH A REPUSH.........Period. Whether it's a Step Forward/Replant/Repush.......Hop Forward/Replant/Repush......Or Drag Forward/Replant/Repush.......

Any act of REPLANTING AND REPUSHING is a CROW HOP............Without the REPUSH, there can be no CROW HOP as defined by the RULE...........This is exactly why the rule was clarified. You MUST be able to prove a repush to create the illegal crow hop.............

The rule is clearly defined to those who don't always feel the need to create their own definition...........

Kinda like........45 degrees "closed"...........ROFL!

 

[RubberBiscuit]

Crud BM ya sucked me back in with your last post.

I would LOVE for anyone to tell me how a replant can't automatically include a repush.

Keeping in mind that if you are analyzing the vector forces a replant will exert a force forward to up on the torso which WILL provide the extra force in a crow-hopper over a dragger. A forward to up force WILL give positive influence on the ball.

Now please think on the rotational forces of the pitch. Would you rather swing a bat with your back foot tied off the ground? Well think about the double-point of leverage a replanted crow-hopper gets every time they launch their pitch from two solidly planted feet.

Now one could try to argue that a replant is not exerting force. "Nuts!" I say as if there were no force then the pivot foot would just be collapsing under the body (which it never does with crowhoppers).

I folks could just evaluate the crowhop with science/physics we could all finally conclude it IS AN ADVANTAGE! PERIOD!

 

[BoardMember]

Of course it is an advantage RB.........The word Impetus defines that for itself. How do you NOT create a "New Impetus" when using a method that recreates/stores energy after the initial move from the rubber..........

The problem is the word "pushes".........I pretty much summed it up previously in this thread or some other one..........The word "pushes" reeks havoc in the rule........

The basics of physics says that for every action there is an equal and oppo reaction........With that said........We know the fact is that as soon as you replant, the ground is PUSHING against you........

The rear foot off the ground analogy deals with open chain vs. closed chain kinematics. If we start going there we'll really lose everyone.........So lets just say that if you land or re-land on the pivot foot........Ground reaction force is supplying a charge of energy.......Or re-charge of energy from that new point...........And that my friend IS the "Impetus" that SHOULD make it ILLEGAL without argument........For some reason, the ASA avoids the physics all together.........

But can we please not introduce the new "skipping" term.........There's are enough "terms/definiitons" floating around the rule book already.......

 

[RubberBiscuit]

Of course it is an advantage RB.........The word Impetus defines that for itself. How do you NOT create a "New Impetus" when using a method that recreates/stores energy after the initial move from the rubber..........

The problem is the word "pushes".........I pretty much summed it up previously in this thread or some other one..........The word "pushes" reeks havoc in the rule........

The basics of physics says that for every action there is an equal and oppo reaction........With that said........We know the fact is that as soon as you replant, the ground is PUSHING against you........

The rear foot off the ground analogy deals with open chain vs. closed chain kinematics. If we start going there we'll really lose everyone.........So lets just say that if you land or re-land on the pivot foot........Ground reaction force is supplying a charge of energy.......Or re-charge of energy from that new point...........And that my friend IS the "Impetus" that SHOULD make it ILLEGAL without argument........For some reason, the ASA avoids the physics all together.........

But can we please not introduce the new "skipping" term.........There's are enough "terms/definiitons" floating around the rule book already.......

This thread was music to my ears my friend.

I will stop using the "skippy" term. I have probably been the main offender with this....

"Skippy" was being used by myself and other coaching influences I have teamed with in the recent past as we have needed to not use the word "crowhopper" as to not send off the ultrasensitive parent of the crowhopping pitcher into a frenzy of defensiveness and offensiveness. You crowhopper parents know who you are like this ;-)

 

[halskinner]

The pivoit foot slides forward of the rubber. The stride foot comes forward of the pivot foot and touches down. The pivot foot , at its new location DOES NOT COME FURTHER FORWARD until AFTER the stride foot touches down.

There is no 2nd push from the new replant of the pivot fott. A new pivot point is established but no 2nd push off.This is not a crow hop, no 2nd push. This is a 'Skip'..


A step style pitch from a new point ahead of the rubber.

 

[5citysluggers]

Fballchgup is the only post here after reading all this makes the most sense. To add, I rarely see crow hopping, its the leaping that I see most and not one umpire will call it. I think its BS when you work hard to keep your own daughter to the ASA rules that is and has been the rules to pitch legally. Yeah im going to complain everytime to the blue as its in the rule book, call the game as its stated. STONECRABS02 one thing I learned from one of our pitching coach, never let the UMPIRE talk to your pitcher. Stop him and have him talk to you and you tell your pitcher what to correct. This will help keep her head together.

 

[Rocketech1]

Having just got back from 10U ASA Nationals, I did not see one IP for leaping or crowhopping. While there were some pitchers who technically could have been called for it, it wasn't obvious and the umpires (and coaches) did not focus on it which I applaud them. They did however give an occasional warning and and a few IPs for hands not separated while taking the pitching plate, hands together than separated then together before the pitch, and not pausing to simulate getting a sign from the catcher. Overall, I thought the umpires did a great job of keeping the games moving smoothly and the pitchers pitched within the rules.

 

[Comp]

Rocket, which 10U national did you go to?

 

[Rocketech1]

Rocket, which 10U national did you go to?

10U "B" Western Nationals (AZ). Placed 2nd.

 

[Ken B]

10U "B" Western Nationals (AZ). Placed 2nd.

ljkasdhlkdglkdjfladkfj