Vicinity Rule

[TopHat]

Will umpires or do they already give the vicinity rule at 2B? (16's and 18's)

Shortstops will be getting the spikes into their leg and ankle next year, runners "breaking it up" and I'm wondering if there are thoughts on this from the blues?

[wadeintothem]

Personally, I'm more worried about how many catchers are going to absent mindedly step back and spike my plate shoes than your vicinity rule. You parents begged for the rule, now tell em to tag the base.

[MTR]

Will umpires or do they already give the vicinity rule at 2B? (16's and 18's)

Shortstops will be getting the spikes into their leg and ankle next year, runners "breaking it up" and I'm wondering if there are thoughts on this from the blues?

Some umpires (not all, maybe not even many), like myself, believe it was an unnecessary change based on.....absolutely nothing other than "the boys can wear them". NFHS made this allowance a couple years ago and admittedly had no statistical logic to make the change. Nor did they want any and made no plans public to gather or even want to hear of any statistics regarding the affect the change had on the game. When asked if feedback of information regarding injuries to players was requested from NFHS, the local rep emphatically stated "absolutely not".

Yes, I know the state HS assns. can adopt or amend the rules as they see fit, but do you honestly believe that any state would risk legal action by doing so as it pertains to what could be considered a gender-biased ruling?

Personally, I have no problem with it and had introduced legislation to make a similar change in ASA last year, which was rejected. This year it passed for 16U & up. I just don't think HS is a great place to start. While very competitive in some areas of the country, in others, the game barely breaks the rec ball barrier. IMO, like with the 43' pitching distance, it would have been nice if the NFHS requested state assns. to volunteer as a test market so they could at least get a feel for the proposal prior to blindly passing something new.

The real ludicrous part if that in HS a player cannot wear anything which could be considered jewelry, even a rubber wristband which cannot possibly add any risk to injury, but metal spikes are no problem.

As far as the play goes, nothing changes in my mind. If you want to play with metal spikes, that is your choice, the other rules or the way they are to be applied do not change.

[watcher]

Will umpires or do they already give the vicinity rule at 2B? (16's and 18's)

Shortstops will be getting the spikes into their leg and ankle next year, runners "breaking it up" and I'm wondering if there are thoughts on this from the blues?

Some umpires (not all, maybe not even many), like myself, believe it was an unnecessary change based on.....absolutely nothing other than "the boys can wear them". NFHS made this allowance a couple years ago and admittedly had no statistical logic to make the change. Nor did they want any and made no plans public to gather or even want to hear of any statistics regarding the affect the change had on the game. When asked if feedback of information regarding injuries to players was requested from NFHS, the local rep emphatically stated "absolutely not".

Yes, I know the state HS assns. can adopt or amend the rules as they see fit, but do you honestly believe that any state would risk legal action by doing so as it pertains to what could be considered a gender-biased ruling?

Personally, I have no problem with it and had introduced legislation to make a similar change in ASA last year, which was rejected. This year it passed for 16U & up. I just don't think HS is a great place to start. While very competitive in some areas of the country, in others, the game barely breaks the rec ball barrier. IMO, like with the 43' pitching distance, it would have been nice if the NFHS requested state assns. to volunteer as a test market so they could at least get a feel for the proposal prior to blindly passing something new.

The real ludicrous part if that in HS a player cannot wear anything which could be considered jewelry, even a rubber wristband which cannot possibly add any risk to injury, but metal spikes are no problem.

As far as the play goes, nothing changes in my mind. If you want to play with metal spikes, that is your choice, the other rules or the way they are to be applied do not change.

I agree 100% with you, My kid didn't wear them in HS & has yet to lace'm up in college, The HS had a few more ankle injuries last year than normal. I can't say it was the fault of the spikes, But it does make one wonder.

[Patrick]

Topper,
Could you cite the reference for this "Vicinity Rule"?
It doesnt't appear in my rulebook.

[SoCalASABlue]

No way. Don't care what age we're talking about. No touching of the bag, no out. And it ticks me off every time I see the MLB umpires not enforce it either.

[Comp]

I have to laugh sometimes reading the baseball umpire board. They talk about the vacinity call as being a safety issue to protect the fielders, yet they seem to have no qualms about a catcher getting plowed.

[topper]

Topper,
Could you cite the reference for this "Vicinity Rule"?
It doesnt't appear in my rulebook.

Why me? I have no idea.

[airbear]

Don't sell that "we call em by the book" crap. Show me the strike zone that stops at the breast bone. You guys bend the rules all the time. You have also taken illegal pitches to the ridiculous.

[Comp]

NCAA Rules

1.107 Strike Zone
The area above home plate between the bottom of the batter’s sternum and
the top of her knees when she assumes her natural batting stance. When the
top of the ball is on or within the horizontal plane and either side of the ball
is on or within the vertical plane of the strike zone, a strike is called unless
the ball touches the ground before reaching home plate.