Should the game be modified in today's age?

[MTR]

To me it is pretty much common sense. The Xeno and cf5 in no way compare to the bats pre 04. This same argument happend then . What did they do? Reduce the ball exit speed to 95 on all bats that were to be accepted by ASA. If higher scores are being accomplished when all bats have the same ball exit speed the hitting is what's improved. Some won't be happy until the game is

Actually, I believe the earlier restrictions set the BES at 85 mph. If memory serves correctly, there was some sort of error or miscalculation and the method of testing was changed along with the allowance being raised to 98 mph where it is presently.

Even with these and hotter bats, the 52/300 will help negate the effect of the hot bats to the point that altering them would be useless and not worth any risk. Those who can hit will still be able to hit, and those which rely on the equipment to make up for their shortcomings better spend more time learning how to hit it where they ain't.

 

[02Crush]

Yep, the base distance issue was raised a short while ago, by me, and you would have thought softball was asking for their first born.

I'll bet they looked at you like you were a green martian for sure!

IMO, 65' bases would be quite appropriate for the FP game of the 21st century and it really doesn't change the game as much as the reactionaries believe it would.

I agree with base length's. I had initially felt that 70' would be good but am starting to agree with 65' as it would be enough but not too much at one time. I also agree with moving the fence back. I do not see it as that high of a cost and both these actions equalize things for the offense a bit and open up the chance for more base running and different strategies. However if the fence was the same....the base length's should increase.

Well stated MTR.. Well Stated

 

[02Crush]

BTW. I was talking about elevated increases. Not moving to longer fields at age 10. Example of my line of thinking....
8U 50'Bases/30' pitching
10U 60'Bases/35' pitching
12U 60'Bases/40' pitching
14U 65'Bases/40' pitching
16U/HS/College 65'Bases/43' Pitching
As far as fields go...we see different field length's on many Baseball Fields. If money is an issue for a school then leave the fence at the minimum 225'. However if you can afford to then move it out to a maximum 235'. This just adds different situations, dynamic to consider and home field advantages for different schools. I think all of this adds to making the game more interesting. Now balls are in play and being thrown for outs on fast running players. How many double and triples do we see in the game???Lot's of singles and HR. Not much in the middle.

As for all against increasing base length's I would ask you to go field the ball at 3rd/SS against some of the best players in College. Then tell me if we should do it or not. The game is not exciting if all we watch is pitching. The game is about getting hits, offense and defense. All are parts of the game. Over time pitching has become more and more dominant. Then we move pitching back to increase then offense opportunities yet we do nothing to the base length's. So we see once again if you do not hit with power, slap and run like lightning then you will not make it on base unless an error occurs (I do not see so many anymore as fielders are getting better as well). Increasing the base length means you have to run harder and the defense has a chance to make a play.. but not so fast...it increases the distance across the field and therefore the increasing the chances for throwing errors. Baserunning and defensive plays are equal parts of the excitement of the game to many. I do not think it is the bats...It is the players being more knowledgeable, efficient and (flat out) better at the game versus 20 years ago. That is what makes this discussion one of interest to me.

 

[tghorley]

The only thing I would change would be to ajust the bats where it was more about the swing than the $$$$$$ in the bat.

I bet that the BCs would love this with all the extra money they would make on lessons. Hmm, $300 bat or 15 more batting lessons. One trip to the store vs time and gas for round trips. Just saying.....

No, seriously, I don't believe the bats are the problem. One of the hardest positions to master is pitching. It takes a lot of time and effort to master. At the younger ages, the batters are more advanced than the pitchers and a little girl may hit one a ton with the bat but she will not be consistent, unless she is exceptional. As the players grow older and advance to the upper levels of softball, the pitchers catch up, hits go down, and scores go down.

For physical reasons and money, I don't believe the fences should be moved. A lot of the fields I have seen don't have the space to move the fences back 5 ft much less 25 ft. And think of the money. Some of these larger complexes have 8-12 fields. And who owns most of these complexes? Cities. Do they want to spend the money on softball fields or do they want to spend more on schools, water, roads, etc.

I would not have a problem with the bases being move to 65 ft at the upper levels, say starting at 14u or 16u. Just seems to me at the different levels 60 ft and 65 ft would make it a more level playing field (pun intended) for the batter and the infielder.

 

[Bouldersdad]

Actually, I believe the earlier restrictions set the BES at 85 mph. If memory serves correctly, there was some sort of error or miscalculation and the method of testing was changed along with the allowance being raised to 98 mph where it is presently.

Even with these and hotter bats, the 52/300 will help negate the effect of the hot bats to the point that altering them would be useless and not worth any risk. Those who can hit will still be able to hit, and those which rely on the equipment to make up for their shortcomings better spend more time learning how to hit it where they ain't.

First of all let me apologize for my post ending in mid sentence, I tried to use my I phone, sure diddnt work. You may be correct about the BES for some reason the number 95 keeps coming to mind. My point was why do we keep complaining about the bats or the balls?......... The game went for years unchanged until someone saw an unfair advantage with bats. It was supposed to be a safety issue, I can remember people moaning and complaining that someone was going to get killed. That was supposed to be corrected with the last ruling change. The next logical step as you mentioned will be the dumbing down of the ball. To me it would be a shame to do that. Because where do you stop the changes, how far do you change the game until it no longer is what it is. Right now the advantage seems pretty much divided, it has made defenses better it will make pitchers better it makes the game more exciting. I just dont see watching games at my dd,s level that there are any safety issues and to me that would be the most justifiable reason to make a change.


Tim

 

[02Crush]

This has been an interesting debate. Thanks to each of you for throwing your perspectives into play!