The never -ending question of interdenominational baseball, the negative versus the positive aspects, is with us once again as thoughts of spring training are entertained.
The ideal way to learn the answer to the question would be for each individual to attend the annual organizational meeting of team captains and coaches. Seeing this as physically and financially impossible for most people, I attended and will try to give a report as to what transpired at the yearly gathering.
The positive point is apparent to all. Good fellowship among sound moral men can be beneficial. The negative points of the Interdenominational League surfaced soon after discussion of the rules for the game were in progress.
Here listed are some of the major controversies: (ART.1,Rule 3) What constitutes a safe base hit? Captain no. 1 stated that without doubt the only thing a player must do to get a hit is to have both feet planted within the confines of the batter's box. When the question of the use of the bat in striking the ball was brought to his attention, his reply was that this was an act which should be performed by all players, but had nothing to do with getting a safe hit. After some lengthy dogmatic argumentation (with no resolve), the next rule in question was brought before the team captains.
(ART. 2 Rule 7) Can a player, after reaching base safely, ever be put out? Captain No. 1, with undeniable conviction, stated it was impossible to ever be thrown out after reaching base safely. When asked his opinion to the status of a player if he was unmistakably tagged out while running from first base to second, his retort was that obviously the hitter was never safe in the first place, thus supporting his position of "once safe always safe."
At this point in the meeting it was obvious to all that some common denominator had to be used to decide the rules of the game. It was suggested and approved that we use the standard rule book, since we all use it in our local leagues. The agreement as to the use of the standard rule book would seem to have ended all variance; however, there were those who questioned its authenticity. Then, of course, the possibility of printer error, injected words and phrases, etc. was discussed; not to mention the difference in interpretation of the various rules.
The final conclusion of the team captains was, in essence, that it did not make any difference which rules each team used since we were all trying to play the same game anyway.
After leaving the meeting I had to wonder what the attitude of the earlier team captains might have been-Paul, James, Peter, and John. ( It is amazing how coaches, team members, and captains attitudes have changed over the years.)
Question is, can interdenominational and restorational softball ever be successfully played in the same, BALL PARK?
The ideal way to learn the answer to the question would be for each individual to attend the annual organizational meeting of team captains and coaches. Seeing this as physically and financially impossible for most people, I attended and will try to give a report as to what transpired at the yearly gathering.
The positive point is apparent to all. Good fellowship among sound moral men can be beneficial. The negative points of the Interdenominational League surfaced soon after discussion of the rules for the game were in progress.
Here listed are some of the major controversies: (ART.1,Rule 3) What constitutes a safe base hit? Captain no. 1 stated that without doubt the only thing a player must do to get a hit is to have both feet planted within the confines of the batter's box. When the question of the use of the bat in striking the ball was brought to his attention, his reply was that this was an act which should be performed by all players, but had nothing to do with getting a safe hit. After some lengthy dogmatic argumentation (with no resolve), the next rule in question was brought before the team captains.
(ART. 2 Rule 7) Can a player, after reaching base safely, ever be put out? Captain No. 1, with undeniable conviction, stated it was impossible to ever be thrown out after reaching base safely. When asked his opinion to the status of a player if he was unmistakably tagged out while running from first base to second, his retort was that obviously the hitter was never safe in the first place, thus supporting his position of "once safe always safe."
At this point in the meeting it was obvious to all that some common denominator had to be used to decide the rules of the game. It was suggested and approved that we use the standard rule book, since we all use it in our local leagues. The agreement as to the use of the standard rule book would seem to have ended all variance; however, there were those who questioned its authenticity. Then, of course, the possibility of printer error, injected words and phrases, etc. was discussed; not to mention the difference in interpretation of the various rules.
The final conclusion of the team captains was, in essence, that it did not make any difference which rules each team used since we were all trying to play the same game anyway.
After leaving the meeting I had to wonder what the attitude of the earlier team captains might have been-Paul, James, Peter, and John. ( It is amazing how coaches, team members, and captains attitudes have changed over the years.)
Question is, can interdenominational and restorational softball ever be successfully played in the same, BALL PARK?
No comments:
Post a Comment