I'll just leave this here and let it percolate and marinate...
Jump to content
Posted 08 January 2016 - 03:45 PM
I'm hoping LL sends these out via e:Mail to all DAs tether than just have a link to them on the Roundtable Registration page.
I would think that most DAs that have already registered aren't going back to the Registration Page to see if there is anything new on there!
As for the Items on the agenda, I'm OK with a lot of them (a few I could take or leave).
Not sure what's pushing eliminating the on deck circle in the older divisions, have there been injuries, is it a safety issue?
Same goes for the fake bunt/hit away, has this been an injury issue?
Just teach the kids how to defend it, don't charge the plate just because the batter shows bunt.
Not sure what's pushing expanding the ages in 9-10, 10-11 and 11-12 Tournament Teams to go to 3 year groups.
I'm not a big fan of age 8 players in The Tournament all though I would think that very few 8s would make the 9-10 teams anyway.
Also doubt many 10s would make the 11-12 teams.
Don't like the items on removing the restrictions on when you can announce the Tournament Teams and when you can start tryouts/practices.
I think this gives an advantage to warm weather leagues.
I would just change it from June 15 to June 1 or June 3, whatever.
Most of the Proposed Agenda Items I submitted didn't make it - what a surprise !
Posted 08 January 2016 - 09:29 PM
I'm not sure I like:
Participating in more than one Division
Expanding Tournament ages to a 3 year window
Removing the June announcement date.
Seems like Little league is really looking to be travel ball
I'll preface that I didn't read the link but just the comments above but regarding Travel Ball, it really has to compete with TB at least around here because there is a travel ball team for everyone and I do mean EVERY one
Posted 09 January 2016 - 03:15 PM
A few early reactions on my end...
On-deck in the other levels... equates to talking out of both sides of our mouth. We want to talk about the future of the teen baseball program and we entertained the notion of allowing 19s in Big League to compete with Legion and Babe Ruth, but we are going to take out the on-deck circle. Ironicallly, with the way it is written, we would still have an on-deck circle in Intermediate Baseball, however... #sigh.
Fake bunt... how about if we establish a rule on how many times we can vote down a proposal before it gets a moratorium? It is in a better form than the last one (when it was a ban all the way up to the BIG LEAGUE level), but I still won't support it. And this will be the fifth time, I believe.
Same goes for one foot out of the box. We squashed this in 2014, why do we have to do it again? Do we have four-hour games going on somewhere because Johnny has a six-minute ritual before every pitch??? This is called game management by the umpire. We don't need a rule to mandate it. If you are working Little League games where more than half are taking over two hours, you (as the umpire) are the problem. Now, if someone wants to come to me and say "we want to keep the teen divisions consistent with Fed and NCAA", I might entertain the rule for the teen divisions. But I will not subject a 10-year-old to stepping out of the box rules. That's ridiculous.
Dual-rostering and the removal of June 15... the devil is in the details. IF we do it the right way, they can both be very beneficial. Our good friend Brian Nilson pointed out a very important piece to the June 15 item when he and I were having a sidebar this week: what is going to be the definition of determining eligibility? Because if the 60% rule is still part of that, it becomes a very complicated matter of when those kids become eligible. If it is not, then DAs can start signing affidavits in January (or whenever LL releases the affidavit for that season) and teams can begin playing in special games events very similar to travel ball-type teams. So, I think there is proposal is very skeleton and needs some work.
As for the dual rostering, I think this more of the "sudden rise in waivers" trend that make up some of these proposals. There was always that question of allowing someone to play juniors and seniors and could you relate it to pool play (which you couldn't do it without a waiver). The box was opened when we began dual rostering for majors / intermediate / juniors and in some divisions of softball. If it is done with certain constraints, it can be ok. For example, no, a kid in the minors shouldn't be dual-rostered to the majors UNLESS you are going to set age structures for minors / majors in the regulations. Then, you could allow a 9 or 10 to play both... because you are basing those divisions on age and not skill. I think in the teen baseball program and even with a few 12s, dual-rostering could work out ok. I have been greatly in favor in recent years of NOT sponsoring seniors and putting those kids into big league. If you had dual rostering, you could have a roster of 18 kids for big league that have five 17/18s and 13 15/16s that would also play seniors. You could be in a similar boat in junior / senior.
At the same time do we want a 4 to be able to dual roster tball and coach pitch? Do you have to write in a structure so that there is no more than one level of jumping? Because I can see someone wanting to jump their 11 year old into seniors because they think their kid is so amazing. So, as I said, I think if you can put together a detailed structure for it, there are some good pieces to it.
Three-year age structure for tournaments.. that's a combination of things, I think. More waiver requests again, keeping up with the neighbors so that it looks more like a 10U, 11U, 12U structure, and it might have something to do with trying to create more tournament participation. There are a lot of thin rosters and thin brackets going on... my district had 16 leagues last year and not a single-bracket was 16 teams.
Posted 11 January 2016 - 03:30 AM
Not sure why they want to dip down to get younger kids on the All Star teams. Perhaps to get more team$ playing.
"Stay in the box, kid", instead of the 7.13 like jumble of exceptions. Gee whiz.
Let 'em fake bunt.
Keep 15 June. It prevents a lot of nonsense. Not all, but some. And do they define "availability"?
Posted 11 January 2016 - 06:30 PM
I think the benefit of the "stay in the box" rules is that it is required in HS and we should be preparing them for that.
I also see great benefit if it stops the over coaching that absolutely occurs.
I far too often see a coach telling a kid to step out in the 1st inning with no outs, nobody on so that they can give Johnny a swing away signal.
Posted 14 January 2016 - 05:29 PM
I'd be in favor of the one foot in the box rule for Intermediate and older, not for small field. The offenders will simply have the kids place one foot outside the box and still go through the gyrations of agonizingly slow signals.
Posted 14 January 2016 - 08:09 PM
Posted 14 January 2016 - 08:15 PM
Posted 14 January 2016 - 09:06 PM
Posted 14 January 2016 - 10:56 PM
Posted 14 January 2016 - 11:26 PM
Same; we are in California and our local school year ends around June 2. People leave for summer camps or vacations after that, so we HAVE to complete our regular season in early May and our city tournament before Memorial Day weekend. Teams could be announced by mid-May if we had permission.
Posted 15 January 2016 - 07:52 PM
Posted 15 January 2016 - 08:41 PM
Posted 15 January 2016 - 10:37 PM
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users