Cant answer until an official softball rulebook is made available to us.

Wee hoo! Thanks!

Maybe it's time to give the scorekeepers a raise? You might get some more takers at say, $10 a game. Asking for a friend....

From a friend who attended the meeting last night: "The softball field remains! But it will be surrounded by 90 carriage homes and 30 single family homes. Adding an additional 300 or so people with virtually zero impact to services, water, traffic.... you get the idea! Btw: the are planning to ...

Where did you see the notice for this meeting? I can't seem to find anything on the internets.

Screw it! Tee shirts for EVERYONE!

OK.

IMHO, the fact that the ball must be catchable is moot. If the catcher is in the vicinity of the plate, and he/she has the right to be there (not blocking the plate), AND the ball arrives just before/after or at the same time as the runner, it shouldn't matter if it's catchable. We're trying to prot...

I just want the rule to be more clear, because I feel that umpires are not applying it consistently. Some people say the ball has to be catchable, some say not. I don't care that much either way, let's just make the rule clear.

P.S. Kristen, it's not BS.

sixofdiamonds wrote: ↑Fri Nov 16, 2018 10:08 amI give up.

Don't give up! Just add the word "catchable" to the rule as I suggested a while back.

Respectfully, we're trying to protect the catcher and the runner. Why would we care where the ball is? If the catcher is "in the vicinity" of the plate, and has a right to be "in the vicinity" (not blocking it), then the rule should apply regardless if the ball is catchable or no...

That's fine, please just change the rule so that everyone knows that the ball must be "catchable", and then I guess we have to define what THAT means.

I guess what I'm trying to say is, most of the time the runner makes up his/her mind to slide/surrender before the ball is even thrown. For example, in the scenario I posted above about having to chug all the way from 1st to home one time, I looked at where the fielder was and the fact that he was a...

Its completely asinine that you want to eliminate the "catchable ball" factor tho. I never said I wanted to eliminate it. I'm saying it's not in the rule so it shouldn't be a factor. If Les wants to put it in the rule, then I'm fine with that, he should do it, otherwise, umpires should ad...

One other point Bob... I know I'm crossing sports here, but take Pass Interference in football. There is no penalty if the ball is uncatchable. The ball has to be catchable in order for the flag to be thrown. I'm OK with changing the rule to say that the ball has to be catchable. That's not in the ...

Question... this is just a fun side not... do you think more people have been hurt in collisions at home plate or trying to hold home plate. I personally think the sliding on fields like LUKENS 3 Or the Quarrys Merca Mat have caused more injuries than collisions but I'd like to hear from the field....

On a side note, I wish that GIF you posted showed the umpire's call. IMHO, I think the runner was safe, due to the catcher tagging him with his empty glove (the ball was in his hand and it doesn't look like he tug him with his hand).

Looks like the catcher is still in the vicinity as defined by our rule, so, other than a good suggestion to keep the catcher safe, I don't see how this works into our conversation. In my original scenario I posted about last Sunday, the catcher was, in fact, in front of the plate, and only stepped o...

sixofdiamonds wrote: ↑Tue Nov 13, 2018 2:45 pm Geez, Bob. Lighten up.

I am lightened up! I said LOL.

So I get that you're not going to eliminate the rule. That's fine. Please add the wording to the rule that explicitly states the ball must be catchable, and then I guess we have to define what "catchable" means. You already promised to make sure umpires are aware of the rule and the import...