portsmouth just moved on to the regional finals. under a cloudy win ,but espn on sun. good luck nh.
Original Post
Replies sorted oldest to newest
Cloudy would be an understatement, the paper this morning said the vermont team forfeited because a player didn't play. Rules are rules I guess, but is it really fair to the other Vermont kids that one the game on the field have to pay the price for an adult not following the rules?
It's unfortunate the kids can't coach themselves sometimes, heard of many adult caused situations in LL Baseball. Need I mention Danny Almonte?
Regardless, good luck to New Hampshire and Connecticut in their game to go to Williamsport
It's unfortunate the kids can't coach themselves sometimes, heard of many adult caused situations in LL Baseball. Need I mention Danny Almonte?
Regardless, good luck to New Hampshire and Connecticut in their game to go to Williamsport
BB23East,
It is most unfortunate that a game ever has to be decided this way, BUT this is why the rules exist. I truely believe this was an accident, but when the VT coach realized what he had not done, he knew what the ultimate consequence was. He tried to do the only thing he could, which was to purposely squander a lead to get his team one more time to hit.
Also, its not just one adult's fault. Each of these teams always 3 coaches.
I read the paper here this morning, and i am still not absolutely clear as to wehter he could have given the player in question an AB or not. From what was in the paper, the player had already fulfilled the defensive portion of the requirement, but was pinch hit for the 5th inning. This means this kid must have been a sub, and therefore when he was replaced, that was it for him for the game. Unless the subsitution rules have changed in the past 3 years, only starters can re-enter the game.
As far as fair goes, baseball, like life, is rarely if ever fair. Is it fair when the Florida coaches intenionally walked the top Georgia hitter 4 times in a game? Or is that "good baseball strategy"?
The mandatory play rules exist for a reason, and without a severe penalty, no one would follow it. This is why when your distrcit conducts its pretournament meeting for the coaches they strongly emphasize that you get your subs into the game early. You certainly want to do that in case you win the game in 4 innings. The Portsmouth LL coaches know that very well, the won every district round robin game by mercy rule in 4 innings.
Nobody wants to see this happen, but you can bet everyone will be double checking their sub play from now on.
It is most unfortunate that a game ever has to be decided this way, BUT this is why the rules exist. I truely believe this was an accident, but when the VT coach realized what he had not done, he knew what the ultimate consequence was. He tried to do the only thing he could, which was to purposely squander a lead to get his team one more time to hit.
Also, its not just one adult's fault. Each of these teams always 3 coaches.
I read the paper here this morning, and i am still not absolutely clear as to wehter he could have given the player in question an AB or not. From what was in the paper, the player had already fulfilled the defensive portion of the requirement, but was pinch hit for the 5th inning. This means this kid must have been a sub, and therefore when he was replaced, that was it for him for the game. Unless the subsitution rules have changed in the past 3 years, only starters can re-enter the game.
As far as fair goes, baseball, like life, is rarely if ever fair. Is it fair when the Florida coaches intenionally walked the top Georgia hitter 4 times in a game? Or is that "good baseball strategy"?
The mandatory play rules exist for a reason, and without a severe penalty, no one would follow it. This is why when your distrcit conducts its pretournament meeting for the coaches they strongly emphasize that you get your subs into the game early. You certainly want to do that in case you win the game in 4 innings. The Portsmouth LL coaches know that very well, the won every district round robin game by mercy rule in 4 innings.
Nobody wants to see this happen, but you can bet everyone will be double checking their sub play from now on.
NH- you are right except you are not required to fulfill the substitution rule if there is a mercy rule. Mercy or weather cutting the game short- all bets are off
it is a tragedy when a team wins the game and loses on a violation.i feel for that vermont team.how do you tell a kid we need to let them score?on the other hand how do you tell a kid at bat to make an out?the game should be decided on the field.
i'm a few years removed from the little league rules,there was no must play back then in all stars.shouldn't be one now in my opinion. but i do like the pitch count idea shouldn't have to have a rule like that,coaches should know better.
i'm a few years removed from the little league rules,there was no must play back then in all stars.shouldn't be one now in my opinion. but i do like the pitch count idea shouldn't have to have a rule like that,coaches should know better.
JH,
Unless the rules have changed, your wrong....Mandatory is Mandatory. Weather shortened games still have to go through the 4th. If its stopped before that, you pick up from the pint the game was stopped.
My last year being invovled with LL was 2002, I just looked back at the rule book.
Tournament Rule 9b.
"There is no exception if the game is shortened for any reason after becoming an offical game"
Tournament Rule 9d.
"To be assured of meeting the minimum participation requirements, all of the substitutes who have not entered the game previously SHOULD ENTER THE GAME DEFENSIVELYat or before their start of theie half of the thried inning(visitors) or fourth innng(home). This is the responsibility of the manager."
Now these were the days when the mandatory play rule was 3 consecutive defensive outs OR one at-bat. Today its 3 consecutive defensive outs AND one at-bat.
20dad,
Im pretty sure this was the rule when your younger boy was playing. My son played from 1999 to 2002, and the mandatory play rule was the same all 4 yrs. It was a little more difficult here for us, because they were always putting the max of 14 players on the team.
Unless the rules have changed, your wrong....Mandatory is Mandatory. Weather shortened games still have to go through the 4th. If its stopped before that, you pick up from the pint the game was stopped.
My last year being invovled with LL was 2002, I just looked back at the rule book.
Tournament Rule 9b.
"There is no exception if the game is shortened for any reason after becoming an offical game"
Tournament Rule 9d.
"To be assured of meeting the minimum participation requirements, all of the substitutes who have not entered the game previously SHOULD ENTER THE GAME DEFENSIVELYat or before their start of theie half of the thried inning(visitors) or fourth innng(home). This is the responsibility of the manager."
Now these were the days when the mandatory play rule was 3 consecutive defensive outs OR one at-bat. Today its 3 consecutive defensive outs AND one at-bat.
20dad,
Im pretty sure this was the rule when your younger boy was playing. My son played from 1999 to 2002, and the mandatory play rule was the same all 4 yrs. It was a little more difficult here for us, because they were always putting the max of 14 players on the team.
well agree or not they are going to the big show.
how about the pitcher who made that catch on the liner?maybe with all the kids getting bigger and equipment getting better,it's time LL went to pony league dimensions.with leading and stealing. now that's an idea.
how about the pitcher who made that catch on the liner?maybe with all the kids getting bigger and equipment getting better,it's time LL went to pony league dimensions.with leading and stealing. now that's an idea.
Shouldn't the kid in question, or any kid, or any assistant coach have mentioned that the boy had not played? I'm sure even kids that age were aware of the rule. I think, as much as coaches hate a kid b*tching about playing time, that the kid should have said something. This was a special circumstance.
20dad,
Yes, that was a tremendous reaction by that pitcher. I would agree with you, I think it is time to modify the field dimensions to accomodate the fact these kids are bigger & better. God knows the bat technology is better. Imagine that same line drive coming back at that pitcher from the Georgia team. He was consistently hitting 80 and 81 on the radar gun.
From what I heard on the TV broadcasts, Little League has pushed the fences at Williamsports back another 20 feet. I do not understand why they are doing that only for the LLWS, but if they feel it is necessary to make the field bigger, then I agree with you, let's move up to the 70' diamond and have the pitcher 50' away. My son played AAU at 12 on this size feild, and there were no big issues in adjustment to the bigger field. Fences were typically 250 to 275 (on occasion 300). The kids could use the big barrel bat and could lead off the bases.
That was probably the single biggest adjustment, pitchers having to hold runners on.
In my opinion, it was better baseball for 12 yr olds (certainly 11 yr olds could play on a field like this too, we had a few on his AAU team). It takes the focus of the game away from the 70-75 MPH pitchers, and puts it back on having a complete team. The combination of good pitching, solid defense and good hitting is what is sucessful when kids have to play on that kind of field. Those 230' HRs on the LL field are just fly outs on the bigger diamond.
It is also a very good intermediate step towards the 90' diamond. The kids have to make the transition to it at 13 anyway (at least here in Northern New England). I know from our travels in AAU that many parts of the country have the ability to play on 70' or even 80' diamonds.
One reason so many kids never play after LL is their inability to just jump up to the 90' field and have the same success they had in LL.
Yes, that was a tremendous reaction by that pitcher. I would agree with you, I think it is time to modify the field dimensions to accomodate the fact these kids are bigger & better. God knows the bat technology is better. Imagine that same line drive coming back at that pitcher from the Georgia team. He was consistently hitting 80 and 81 on the radar gun.
From what I heard on the TV broadcasts, Little League has pushed the fences at Williamsports back another 20 feet. I do not understand why they are doing that only for the LLWS, but if they feel it is necessary to make the field bigger, then I agree with you, let's move up to the 70' diamond and have the pitcher 50' away. My son played AAU at 12 on this size feild, and there were no big issues in adjustment to the bigger field. Fences were typically 250 to 275 (on occasion 300). The kids could use the big barrel bat and could lead off the bases.
That was probably the single biggest adjustment, pitchers having to hold runners on.
In my opinion, it was better baseball for 12 yr olds (certainly 11 yr olds could play on a field like this too, we had a few on his AAU team). It takes the focus of the game away from the 70-75 MPH pitchers, and puts it back on having a complete team. The combination of good pitching, solid defense and good hitting is what is sucessful when kids have to play on that kind of field. Those 230' HRs on the LL field are just fly outs on the bigger diamond.
It is also a very good intermediate step towards the 90' diamond. The kids have to make the transition to it at 13 anyway (at least here in Northern New England). I know from our travels in AAU that many parts of the country have the ability to play on 70' or even 80' diamonds.
One reason so many kids never play after LL is their inability to just jump up to the 90' field and have the same success they had in LL.
Before I forget,
Congradulations to the Portsmouth team. That wa sa great job beating CT with all the other controversy swirling around them.
Also a great job by young Mr. Bean, especially in that first inning. Bases loaded no one out and he got out of it with out surrendering any runs. Not many kids in that situation could have gathered themselves up and done that.
Congradulations to the Portsmouth team. That wa sa great job beating CT with all the other controversy swirling around them.
Also a great job by young Mr. Bean, especially in that first inning. Bases loaded no one out and he got out of it with out surrendering any runs. Not many kids in that situation could have gathered themselves up and done that.
Let me add one more point to the discussion of field size... Little League changed the age cutoffs this year also. Cutoff for boys to be eligible is now April instead of August 1. That means many of these boys could be 13 years old for most of the season (at least for those of us that play a cold weather season of baseball!) and still be eligible.
Congrats to the entire Staten Island team with a win over NJ tonite to advance to Willisamsport. Did not realize this same Staten Island LL organization beat Mexico back in 1964 to win it all.
Good luck boys...
Good luck boys...
I saw the Staten Island team defeat a very talented Elmsford team (my LL alma-mater I guess you can say) during state play. They were very tight on defense and took good cuts at everything. The pitcher who threw for them in the regional final pitched in the game I saw as well and he was very good, as well as very big. Congrats to them and every other Little League team on their way to Williamsport!
Oh and before I skip over it- NHFundamentals-
You are right, during that time that was the rule. However my little sister, who is now 11, was playing in a district tournament softball game earlier on this year and they faced the same issue. In the 3rd inning, the team gained a lead of 10 runs but still had 3 girls left on the bench. They looked through the rulebook and found nothing on it in either the softball nor baseball sections. My dad and several other men, all on the board of directors of the Little League, looked in a different section of the book and found an amendment to the prior rule, stating that if weather or mercy-rule shorten a game, all bets are off in terms of madatory playing time.
You are right, though, the rule must have been changed very recently because I remember when I was in Little League (my last year was 2002) the rule was madatory is mandatory. I happen to like the new ruling, but that's beside the point. Everyone at my sister's game was very confused about the rulebook specifications at the time and the coaches were very nervous about forfeit.
You are right, during that time that was the rule. However my little sister, who is now 11, was playing in a district tournament softball game earlier on this year and they faced the same issue. In the 3rd inning, the team gained a lead of 10 runs but still had 3 girls left on the bench. They looked through the rulebook and found nothing on it in either the softball nor baseball sections. My dad and several other men, all on the board of directors of the Little League, looked in a different section of the book and found an amendment to the prior rule, stating that if weather or mercy-rule shorten a game, all bets are off in terms of madatory playing time.
You are right, though, the rule must have been changed very recently because I remember when I was in Little League (my last year was 2002) the rule was madatory is mandatory. I happen to like the new ruling, but that's beside the point. Everyone at my sister's game was very confused about the rulebook specifications at the time and the coaches were very nervous about forfeit.
mythreesons,
Very True, I was wondering as watched the young man from Georgia who was hitting over 80 consistently in his teams regional final, how many "phenoms" we would see this year at the LLWS that under the old rule would not have played this year.
JH,
The one universal constant about a rule book...It will always appear confusing. That is why is seems every question like that usually ends in a call to your district, then regional HQ and eventually Williamsport.
I have not seen a rule book since 2002, so I will accept what you said. As a manager though, you should strive to get all your players in early. If the game does go the distance, you don't end up in a situation like the VT coach got into.
I still believe moving to the 70' diamond would be best, but I'm quite sure it will not happen. It is going to be next to impossible to get all the LL diamonds across the country to change. Even doing something like just moving the fences back 20' can't be done in many places.
Very True, I was wondering as watched the young man from Georgia who was hitting over 80 consistently in his teams regional final, how many "phenoms" we would see this year at the LLWS that under the old rule would not have played this year.
JH,
The one universal constant about a rule book...It will always appear confusing. That is why is seems every question like that usually ends in a call to your district, then regional HQ and eventually Williamsport.
I have not seen a rule book since 2002, so I will accept what you said. As a manager though, you should strive to get all your players in early. If the game does go the distance, you don't end up in a situation like the VT coach got into.
I still believe moving to the 70' diamond would be best, but I'm quite sure it will not happen. It is going to be next to impossible to get all the LL diamonds across the country to change. Even doing something like just moving the fences back 20' can't be done in many places.
NH- I completely agree. Kids are just too big and strong to be playing on that level. There are kids that are easily 6'0" and weigh close to 200 lbs. What I don't understand also is how Little League can rightly justify moving the fences back when they moved the age limit up. They off-set each other, and the game will still feature too many HR, just like in years past. The mound should be moved back 5 ft., the bases 10 and the fences yet another 20-30' IMO.
Most of the teams around here (Iowa) play USSSA rules which seem much more appropriate to me:
Division Bases Pitching
8 & Under 60’ 40’
9 & Under 65’ 44’
10 & Under 65’ 46’
11 & Under 70’ 50’
12 & Under 70’ 50’
13 & Under 80’ 54’
Division Bases Pitching
8 & Under 60’ 40’
9 & Under 65’ 44’
10 & Under 65’ 46’
11 & Under 70’ 50’
12 & Under 70’ 50’
13 & Under 80’ 54’
StatManLV,
I would agree..its a more logical progression!
Here in the Northeast though, there are very few facilities designed to handle all those possible dimensions. There are a few places that have all dirt infields and can accomodate 60', 65' and 70' diamonds. Other than complexes like the one in Branford, CT though, there is no place that supports the 80' field.
At 13 here, for AAU and Babe Ruth, the kids jump up to the 90'diamond.
JH,
I was genuinely surprised to hear that LL had moved the fences at Williamsport. All these years the fences have always been the same (well 200' at local/state to 205' at regional/LLWS) from local to state to regional to the LLWS. If they moved them at Williamsport, why not move them back at all the regional sites too. From what I have seen on the ESPN broadcasts, the fences at all the regional sites can easily be moved back.
I would agree..its a more logical progression!
Here in the Northeast though, there are very few facilities designed to handle all those possible dimensions. There are a few places that have all dirt infields and can accomodate 60', 65' and 70' diamonds. Other than complexes like the one in Branford, CT though, there is no place that supports the 80' field.
At 13 here, for AAU and Babe Ruth, the kids jump up to the 90'diamond.
JH,
I was genuinely surprised to hear that LL had moved the fences at Williamsport. All these years the fences have always been the same (well 200' at local/state to 205' at regional/LLWS) from local to state to regional to the LLWS. If they moved them at Williamsport, why not move them back at all the regional sites too. From what I have seen on the ESPN broadcasts, the fences at all the regional sites can easily be moved back.
NH- The Branford complex is nice I've played there, but there is no other complex similar. Maybe an all-dirt field here or there in a few towns could accomodate, but not for everyone.
I was glad to hear they moved the fences back in Williamsport. I know in Bristol there is another field beyond the RF fence and a practice grass area beyond the woods in left field. The scoreboard in centerfield is all of 10 ft. behind the fence. I agree, though, the fences should be moved back in the regional events. Unless LL has some other reasoning for it, I don't know.
I was glad to hear they moved the fences back in Williamsport. I know in Bristol there is another field beyond the RF fence and a practice grass area beyond the woods in left field. The scoreboard in centerfield is all of 10 ft. behind the fence. I agree, though, the fences should be moved back in the regional events. Unless LL has some other reasoning for it, I don't know.
