2012 Rocketech and NCAA Approval?

[MTR]

No one beating anyone up. Just calling it what it is. NCAA runs NCAA softball. Their name is on it because, well NCAA softball is theirs. I suspect NCAA is little worried about the value of their brand vs. ASA.

As far as the list. It has exactly served it's purpose. Old rule set had a hole that allowed hot bats in the game. The game quickly about bat shenanigans, everyone on the Florida team using only one bat, the AZ Nike bat, the UCLA older model Louisville sluggers had magic powers to blast home runs when the kid swinging was laying on her back. It became ludicrous.

NCAA added testing of bats in service and the resulting list. Everyone of the suspect bats that everyone has been saying are obviously hot, failed the new standard. Bat shenanigans have disappeared. Are you saying this did not happen?

No it hasn't. There is no new standard. There is no new rule. The list is what the manufacturers believe will pass ASA testing. It has nothing to do with actual testing. For that matter, the list specifically notes that being on the list does not absolve the manufacturer, team or player from the ramifications of using an illegal bat should the listed bat be found out of spec.

What NCAA has changed was their protocol as it applies to updating the manufacturer's list, increasing required BCT and the timely reporting of any failures.

Bat standards are still ASA's level and approval.

[AlwaysImprove]

No one beating anyone up. Just calling it what it is. NCAA runs NCAA softball. Their name is on it because, well NCAA softball is theirs. I suspect NCAA is little worried about the value of their brand vs. ASA.

As far as the list. It has exactly served it's purpose. Old rule set had a hole that allowed hot bats in the game. The game quickly about bat shenanigans, everyone on the Florida team using only one bat, the AZ Nike bat, the UCLA older model Louisville sluggers had magic powers to blast home runs when the kid swinging was laying on her back. It became ludicrous.

NCAA added testing of bats in service and the resulting list. Everyone of the suspect bats that everyone has been saying are obviously hot, failed the new standard. Bat shenanigans have disappeared. Are you saying this did not happen?

No it hasn't. There is no new standard. There is no new rule. The list is what the manufacturers believe will pass ASA testing. It has nothing to do with actual testing. For that matter, the list specifically notes that being on the list does not absolve the manufacturer, team or player from the ramifications of using an illegal bat should the listed bat be found out of spec.

What NCAA has changed was their protocol as it applies to updating the manufacturer's list, increasing required BCT and the timely reporting of any failures.

Bat standards are still ASA's level and approval.

The question is still the same. 3 years ago, bat shenanigans galore. Everyone saw it, everyone knew it. This year, no bat shenanigans. True or False?

[MTR]

The question is still the same. 3 years ago, bat shenanigans galore. Everyone saw it, everyone knew it. This year, no bat shenanigans. True or False?

3 years ago? How about 8 years ago. I shouted it from the highest mountains on every softball board I could find.

Know what happened? Same thing that happens on these boards when someone posts anything not popular or understood, I got beat to hell, mocked, scoffed at and vilified. I was promptly informed that I had no idea about what I was talking and any issues with the bats was a slow pitch issue and ASA should leave the FP people alone.

Please, don't tell me about the shenanigans. I knew they were there and tried to warn people and was basically ignored.

The NCAA started addressing bats at the turn of the century. Probably more as a precautionary measure. You want to know what the difference is between baseball and softball? The softball side of the wall paid attention to what was happening and got involved with ASA's standards and testing to the point they even helped fund some of the research.

Baseball allowed the manufacturers to police themselves and didn't think twice about how hot the bats were becoming until the Tennessee coach raised his hand a few years ago about all the home runs being hit in the baseball games. Bad press usually gets action by those receiving some form of government monies and sure enough, baseball had an issue that was much bigger than what softball faces. That is when all the knee-jerk reactionaries "banned" composites pending testing and approval all the way down to LL. State & city governments were banning the use of composite bats to which softball was eventually excluded in most, if not all, cases simply because they demonstrated the bats in their game were under control.

The "shenanigans" were there before and have been disappearing since the baseball fiasco, but there are still those that believe that the hot bats are there and everyone is turning a blind eye based upon the popularity of the program and all the good shit that slow pitch has been going through the last decade. This is why the NCAA has finally put some teeth into the penalty for those caught cheating. Now that the coach is responsible, any player who shows up with a bat which even remotely may seem to be illegal may have some explaining to do.

ASA has been experimenting with a procedure during their championships in OKC the last couple of years. Bats that are legal and pass BCT are taken. Those which do not are given back to the team.

Come game time, that team's bats are placed next to the dugout for that game. When the game is over, the bats are removed and secured until that team plays again. If a player walks into the dugout with a bat, that bat is confiscated and retested. If it passes, it is returned to the barrel of bats that team may use.

Some would call it insulting, but it works. ASA tested those bats last year as the tournaments progress, including a couple times without the teams' knowledge. Out of a couple hundred bats, only two had accelerated out of spec through use during that tournament. It is a painful and timely task, but it worked and I would not doubt to see that happen with the NCAA in the future if they find the bat situation to get worse which, I would think, no one anticipates.

[jonriv]

No one beating anyone up. Just calling it what it is. NCAA runs NCAA softball. Their name is on it because, well NCAA softball is theirs. I suspect NCAA is little worried about the value of their brand vs. ASA.

As far as the list. It has exactly served it's purpose. Old rule set had a hole that allowed hot bats in the game. The game quickly about bat shenanigans, everyone on the Florida team using only one bat, the AZ Nike bat, the UCLA older model Louisville sluggers had magic powers to blast home runs when the kid swinging was laying on her back. It became ludicrous.

NCAA added testing of bats in service and the resulting list. Everyone of the suspect bats that everyone has been saying are obviously hot, failed the new standard. Bat shenanigans have disappeared. Are you saying this did not happen?

No it hasn't. There is no new standard. There is no new rule. The list is what the manufacturers believe will pass ASA testing. It has nothing to do with actual testing. For that matter, the list specifically notes that being on the list does not absolve the manufacturer, team or player from the ramifications of using an illegal bat should the listed bat be found out of spec.

What NCAA has changed was their protocol as it applies to updating the manufacturer's list, increasing required BCT and the timely reporting of any failures.

Bat standards are still ASA's level and approval.

That's not exactly true either- these are bats that the MFGs submitted to pass NCAA specs and testing. Older bats are generally not on the list(why would a MFG send in a bat they no longer make) That is why the Phenix is not on the list. The NCAA standards were not for safety reasons, but for competition reasons(that was the answer I got last year from two of the coaches on the board.)

[AlwaysImprove]

The question is still the same. 3 years ago, bat shenanigans galore. Everyone saw it, everyone knew it. This year, no bat shenanigans. True or False?

3 years ago?
<snip>
Out of a couple hundred bats, only two had accelerated out of spec through use during that tournament. It is a painful and timely task, but it worked and I would not doubt to see that happen with the NCAA in the future if they find the bat situation to get worse which, I would think, no one anticipates.

Yes, 8-10 years ago ASA led the way. Bringing experience from what was happening slow pitch, resulting in the 2004 improved bat standard, which built on the already established ASA bat standard.

Also Kudos to ASA for spot checking BCT in tournaments now. Hopefully someone is looking closely at those bats that fail BCT. Are they modified post manufacturer? Or is there something inherent in that bat model that allows a break-in process to get the bat hot? Are problematic models getting added to a banned list as a result of the BCT testing?

To be honest, I am in the fastpitch community every day, and hot bats are still an issue. Whether that be shaving, rolling, or excessive application of break-in like beating a bat on a telephone pole or having the entire team hit batting practice with hard balls. Guys like bigdawgbatrolling.com are still selling bats and they are being used in youth games. There are still bat models used in youth, that have been banned in NCAA play (like the Phoenix) that are known by all to get hot, beyond 98mph, with break in, beyond ABI.

You have to give kudos to NCAA. They test every bat in regionals and beyond. A bat model fails and they pull that bat from the dugout and send for ASTM certified testing. A bat model fails 3 times, that bat model is added to the banned list. This creates an huge incentive for NCAA coaches to not use modified bats, or bats that have been excessively broken in. The game has been improved.

2011 NCAA WCWS and playoffs was awesome. You seen teams like Hawaii go from 100's of homeruns back down to normal homerun numbers they had before the hot bat era. The homeruns that were hit were all well hit balls. A much funner game. No arguing that. Good for NCAA coaches for standing up and saying the game will be more fun, more competitive without the bat goofiness. ASA will catch up eventually.

[MTR]

That's not exactly true either- these are bats that the MFGs submitted to pass NCAA specs and testing. Older bats are generally not on the list(why would a MFG send in a bat they no longer make) That is why the Phenix is not on the list. The NCAA standards were not for safety reasons, but for competition reasons(that was the answer I got last year from two of the coaches on the board.)

What NCAA specs? NCAA rules refer to ASA approval, not NCAA's.

The bats on the list were what MFG believed would pass the ASA test.

Are they modified post manufacturer? Or is there something inherent in that bat model that allows a break-in process to get the bat hot? Are problematic models getting added to a banned list as a result of the BCT testing?

BCT test only detects whether an approved bat meets the compression standards, not whether they passed the standards testing. The compression of a bat can be affected by altering, but also by a bat becoming damaged or through normal use. Just because a bat doesn't pass a BCT does not mean it has been altered.

You have to give kudos to NCAA. They test every bat in regionals and beyond. A bat model fails and they pull that bat from the dugout and send for ASTM certified testing. A bat model fails 3 times, that bat model is added to the banned list. This creates an huge incentive for NCAA coaches to not use modified bats, or bats that have been excessively broken in. The game has been improved.

According to Appendix C & D of the 2012-13 NCAA Rules, the only time a bat remains surrendered after the game is when it fails BCT during the check-in procedures. I assume they may have separate special protocols for playoffs. And since the coaches are held liable regardless of knowledge of any infraction, the bat situation should be greatly improved.

[AlwaysImprove]

That's not exactly true either- these are bats that the MFGs submitted to pass NCAA specs and testing. Older bats are generally not on the list(why would a MFG send in a bat they no longer make) That is why the Phenix is not on the list. The NCAA standards were not for safety reasons, but for competition reasons(that was the answer I got last year from two of the coaches on the board.)

What NCAA specs? NCAA rules refer to ASA approval, not NCAA's.

The bats on the list were what MFG believed would pass the ASA test.

Are they modified post manufacturer? Or is there something inherent in that bat model that allows a break-in process to get the bat hot? Are problematic models getting added to a banned list as a result of the BCT testing?

BCT test only detects whether an approved bat meets the compression standards, not whether they passed the standards testing. The compression of a bat can be affected by altering, but also by a bat becoming damaged or through normal use. Just because a bat doesn't pass a BCT does not mean it has been altered.

You have to give kudos to NCAA. They test every bat in regionals and beyond. A bat model fails and they pull that bat from the dugout and send for ASTM certified testing. A bat model fails 3 times, that bat model is added to the banned list. This creates an huge incentive for NCAA coaches to not use modified bats, or bats that have been excessively broken in. The game has been improved.

According to Appendix C & D of the 2012-13 NCAA Rules, the only time a bat remains surrendered after the game is when it fails BCT during the check-in procedures. I assume they may have separate special protocols for playoffs. And since the coaches are held liable regardless of knowledge of any infraction, the bat situation should be greatly improved.

Yes, NCAA does not publish their own specs, they use ASA 98mph standard. But it is still relevant what NCAA has done in the bat arena. Initially ASA 98 mph spec was 'at time of manufacture'. ASA then expanded to include some break-in by the addition of ABI protocol. All steps in the right direction.

NCAA has now extended that even further and said a bat must always be within 98mph spec for it's entire lifetime. Just asking bat manufacturers to sign up to a lifetime 98mph spec alone eliminated a number of problematic bat models. You can parse and spin all you want, the reason teams and manufacturers are giving up on bat models is because they cannot maintain the lifetime 98mph spec. Players, coaches, parents, bat manufactures and fans all know this and you make yourself look silly arguing otherwise.

Yet those problematic models, models that NCAA through their process have determined them too hot for NCAA play, are still allowed in youth tournaments.

I did not run through what the rules say. But it is clear what is happening on the ground in NCAA. Every bat going into a dugout in regionals and beyond is BCT tested. They are actually retested at each new level of play. When a bat fails BCT, the team has two choices. Send the bat for ASTM testing at WSU, because the team believes the field BCT test was a false-postive, or take a strike on that bat model. If the bat goes to WSU and fails, it will also result in a strike on that bat model.

As you know 3 strikes and a bat is removed from play. You can see the process play out every time they publish a bat list. You see new bats banned for 3 strikes you see other bats getting first or second strikes.

In addition the smart conferences have instituted BCT testing, such as SEC. SEC tests at their tournament and they have bought BCT testers for all the coaches. Coaches do not want to be in a situation where a bat model they depend upon get's eliminated from play.

So you are arguing that failure of a BCT means nothing. I am saying failure of BCT means one of three things: The bat was purposely altered by the end user, the bat has a design that allows the bat to become hot beyond 98mph spec with usage/break-in, the BCT has registered a false-positive. ASA shrugs, sets the bat aside and returns the bat to the user post that tournament. NCAA confiscates, offers to ASTM test, inspects bats that fail and eliminates models that routinely fail. FWIW, ASA is way better than PGF, who does nothing on this issue. Which one seems smarter to you NCAA, ASA, PGF?

Let's say a youth gets injured by one of the bats on the NCAA banned list. How long do you think it will take a lawyer to win a substantial case against coaches, ASA, PGF, whomever was involved? I am thinking it will take about 8 minutes.

[UmpSteve]

How can a 2012 be thrown out of a game, you sure the ump wasn't hitting the juice?

Tumbleweed are you out there

The NCAA approved bat list is a matter of public record. https://nfca.org/web_docs/forms/ncaabatlist.pdf

That model number is not currently on the list. Umpires cannot challenge the list, can only allow bats on it.

The next modification date for the list is, I believe, March 15. If not on that list, won't be allowed for the 2012 playing season.

The updated list is out and effective today. There have been numerous (10) Anderson Bat additions.

[NumeroUno]

Get your 2012 Anderson bats here

http://andersonbat.com/

[fastpitch fool]

Thank you Tumblebug and Anderson Bat Company!!!

I checked the list earlier today, and saw the 2012 RT present. (I still think it's an NCAA issue, to be honest...)

I text my daughter the good news and received the following response from her........


Y E S ! ! ! ! ! Can we sell the CF5 now?