Substitution Rule proposal

[JellyDogg]

No. I mean actually do harm to someone on the other team.

Let's say the Team B is losing 5-0 to Team A in the 6th. Both teams are only playing 4 girls.
Team B is up to kick. There is a close play at 1B, Team B's runner trucks Team A's female 1B, who sustains a concussion and cannot continue.
Team B wins by forfeit.

That's the way it is now, though I can guarantee if someone intentionally set out to injure someone else, that person would not be playing in the Circuit very long. There are those out there with a win-at-all-costs mentality, though, so you never know. You can combat that by playing more than 4 girls (there is no rule saying you have to play only 4). That would eliminate the incentive for the "accidental" plowing of said female 1B.

Besides, who would be dumb enough to play a girl at 1B?

[Sleeveless]

Like basketball during change of possession...

subs also help in certain situations. if you have a big kicker up at the top of the last inning, you can sub him for a get-on-base guy.

Or you can sub a player in later in the game for more defensive purposes

[Kickbot]

No. I mean actually do harm to someone on the other team.

Let's say the Team B is losing 5-0 to Team A in the 6th. Both teams are only playing 4 girls.
Team B is up to kick. There is a close play at 1B, Team B's runner trucks Team A's female 1B, who sustains a concussion and cannot continue.
Team B wins by forfeit.

That's the way it is now, though I can guarantee if someone intentionally set out to injure someone else, that person would not be playing in the Circuit very long. There are those out there with a win-at-all-costs mentality, though, so you never know. You can combat that by playing more than 4 girls (there is no rule saying you have to play only 4). That would eliminate the incentive for the "accidental" plowing of said female 1B.

Besides, who would be dumb enough to play a girl at 1B?

Ok, but now you're blaming the victim. "You only played 4 girls, so this is what you get."
And you're putting it on the refs to determine whether an injury was caused intentionally?
You'd have to punch somebody to draw that call.

Right now, there is an incentive to play only 4 girls and there is an incentive to injure one.
What I'm saying is that this rule encourages a dangerous situation that could be mitigated by just allowing substitutions.

And what is the benefit? How does not allowing subs make the game better?

[-BK-]

No. I mean actually do harm to someone on the other team.

Let's say the Team B is losing 5-0 to Team A in the 6th. Both teams are only playing 4 girls.
Team B is up to kick. There is a close play at 1B, Team B's runner trucks Team A's female 1B, who sustains a concussion and cannot continue.
Team B wins by forfeit.

That's the way it is now, though I can guarantee if someone intentionally set out to injure someone else, that person would not be playing in the Circuit very long. There are those out there with a win-at-all-costs mentality, though, so you never know. You can combat that by playing more than 4 girls (there is no rule saying you have to play only 4). That would eliminate the incentive for the "accidental" plowing of said female 1B.

Besides, who would be dumb enough to play a girl at 1B?

Ok, but now you're blaming the victim. "You only played 4 girls, so this is what you get."
And you're putting it on the refs to determine whether an injury was caused intentionally?
You'd have to punch somebody to draw that call.

Right now, there is an incentive to play only 4 girls and there is an incentive to injure one.
What I'm saying is that this rule encourages a dangerous situation that could be mitigated by just allowing substitutions.

And what is the benefit? How does not allowing subs make the game better?

It doesn't benefit anyone. It's a Waka rule put in place to to ensure that everyone plays... remember we're playing competitive kickball now

[Zak]

if line up are exchanged before the game it would be easy.
1. TWEASY
2. ZAK
3. SHANE
4. STU
5. TREY
6. JELLY DOG
7. ROBYN ( GIRL)
8. BK
9. BROOKE (GIRL)
10. chaz
11. AMY (GIRL)
12. THELMA (GIRL)
13. alex

ON BENCH

BOB
BILL
KAREN(GIRL)
MARY (GIRL)

" sub MARY in for our #12 kicker Thelma". If a captain cant getthis right then screw them, the ump should say that they are taking too long and cant sub

woohoo I'm kicking 2nd!

not for long, MARY is coming in to replace you in the second inning

not if you're playing 1st

[2_easy]

I like it. I actually like rules that make is more like Baseball / softball rules. They have had many many years to tweak the rules.

As like any rule change, some will hate it and complain, while others like it. But everyone will adapt.

[The Slam]

If you're "resting" them, why put them back in the lineup/field? Doesn't that defeat the purpose of "resting"?

Maybe put them back for a defensive reason? Maybe because you have a guy who kicks away coming up next and you want to play a guy who bunts and can get on? Maybe because three innings of resting is enough?

[MEATBALLKEVIN]

Everyone is looking at this differently. Im looking at it as being good for a couple reasons. A. it is a awesome new startegy to factor in. Remember you DONT have to do it. But if you choose to it can be great. say you are in a close game and you have a girl up that cant kick well you can take her out and sub her with a better kicker from the sidelines. Or if you had a girl up leading off that is not so fast and a faster bunting girl on the sideline you can sub them out. It would be awesome/ And can also bite u in the ass for doing it by putting a girl that cant catch so well in because you wanted her to kick. B. You can get more people playing time. Instead of having them take their cleats off and sit their for the finals they can be suited up ready for action just in case.

[2_easy]

Everyone is looking at this differently. Im looking at it as being good for a couple reasons. A. it is a awesome new startegy to factor in. Remember you DONT have to do it. But if you choose to it can be great. say you are in a close game and you have a girl up that cant kick well you can take her out and sub her with a better kicker from the sidelines. Or if you had a girl up leading off that is not so fast and a faster bunting girl on the sideline you can sub them out. It would be awesome/ And can also bite u in the ass for doing it by putting a girl that cant catch so well in because you wanted her to kick. B. You can get more people playing time. Instead of having them take their cleats off and sit their for the finals they can be suited up ready for action just in case.

I agree. Like I said. I like it when kickball rules get more similar to baseball / softball rules.

[JellyDogg]

And what is the benefit? How does not allowing subs make the game better?

It doesn't benefit anyone. It's a Waka rule put in place to to ensure that everyone plays... remember we're playing competitive kickball now

Actually, the WAKA rule allowed subs. If someone got hurt at FC, they could be replaced by someone not already playing in the game. They changed it this year to not allow subs (following the Circuit's lead).

I don't believe subs and infinite lineup flexibility go together. There is no necessity in the game that isn't already able to be accounted for. There is no crisis that doesn't already have a solution at every captain's fingertips.

All subs do right now is give captains an out for screwing up the small bit of strategy there is in the game right now, which is setting the active lineup.

[Lock It Up Heather]

Everyone is looking at this differently. Im looking at it as being good for a couple reasons. A. it is a awesome new startegy to factor in. Remember you DONT have to do it. But if you choose to it can be great. say you are in a close game and you have a girl up that cant kick well you can take her out and sub her with a better kicker from the sidelines. Or if you had a girl up leading off that is not so fast and a faster bunting girl on the sideline you can sub them out. It would be awesome/ And can also bite u in the ass for doing it by putting a girl that cant catch so well in because you wanted her to kick. B. You can get more people playing time. Instead of having them take their cleats off and sit their for the finals they can be suited up ready for action just in case.

I agree with this statement and think it could be great to have substitutions, but they should be limited to maybe 1 a game. Then it really is all about strategy and when it's the right time to use the sub.

[MEATBALLKEVIN]

Everyone is looking at this differently. Im looking at it as being good for a couple reasons. A. it is a awesome new startegy to factor in. Remember you DONT have to do it. But if you choose to it can be great. say you are in a close game and you have a girl up that cant kick well you can take her out and sub her with a better kicker from the sidelines. Or if you had a girl up leading off that is not so fast and a faster bunting girl on the sideline you can sub them out. It would be awesome/ And can also bite u in the ass for doing it by putting a girl that cant catch so well in because you wanted her to kick. B. You can get more people playing time. Instead of having them take their cleats off and sit their for the finals they can be suited up ready for action just in case.

I agree with this statement and think it could be great to have substitutions, but they should be limited to maybe 1 a game. Then it really is all about strategy and when it's the right time to use the sub.

1 per sex

[Zak]

Actually, the WAKA rule allowed subs. If someone got hurt at FC, they could be replaced by someone not already playing in the game. They changed it this year to not allow subs (following the Circuit's lead)...

Not quite, the WAKA rule before the change actually only allowed for "late players" to be added to the line up during the game. If a team was playing with 4 females in the line up and one broke her foot, a sub would be counted as a late player arrival and go in at the bottom of the line up, not just take her place. Techinically the way the rules were written at that time is that you could not sit players, but nobody paid attention to that little detail.

[JellyDogg]

Actually, the WAKA rule allowed subs. If someone got hurt at FC, they could be replaced by someone not already playing in the game. They changed it this year to not allow subs (following the Circuit's lead)...

Not quite, the WAKA rule before the change actually only allowed for "late players" to be added to the line up during the game. If a team was playing with 4 females in the line up and one broke her foot, a sub would be counted as a late player arrival and go in at the bottom of the line up, not just take her place. Techinically the way the rules were written at that time is that you could not sit players, but nobody paid attention to that little detail.

Yeah, I'm just talking about the application of WAKA rules at their tournament. Kinda like how "directly behind the kicker" was applied as "behind the plane of the kicker."

[machinegunkelly]

I don't think it would be hard to implement, nor would it cause unnecessary delay to the game. And certainly it adds another element of strategy to the game. But ...

I'm siding with JellyDogg's points here. In baseball, you're limited to 9 hitting positions; in softball (depending on your league's rules), no more than 12. Those sports are at the point organizationally and professionally where they can sustain (and they must require) a completely closed offensive framework.

We eventually may move to a max lineup requirement and a more rigidly defined bench player system. Then again, keeping the flexibility in that number is very important at our current stage of development.

I also think it's a philosophical difference too ... many folks believe that the people you bring should be starters. The people you put into the lineup of a given game should be starters. As Sleeveless mentioned, teams build different chemistry and different offensive strategy/run-generating/lineup turnover cycles based on what they "feel" the magic number is 10 ... 12 ... 14 ... and so on.

As for getting your folks more playing time, that's more a function of the size of the roster you bring to travel anyways than it is whether there is a more narrow substitution rule.

It's not that I'm saying no to this idea. And I get that parallel sports allow mid-game changes to replace players that are slumping within game to players the captain thinks can spark performance. I think it is eventually where we get.

Side note: Also, where was this proposal during the Circuit summit ... I know folks are weighing in here and now, but the Summit exists to directly vet these ideas and to have the audience most concerned and most knowledgeable about the rules give you their best input on it ...

just thought of it...i think this could be a great new rule differnent from waka...i really dont see a downside to this at all..

[admin]

I'm loving the discussion this week.

However, I have to ask... where was this argument when I did a call for v2011 rule suggestions?!?!

Admin

[Sleeveless]

I was in Dallas the circuit summit weekend

I'm loving the discussion this week.

However, I have to ask... where was this argument when I did a call for v2011 rule suggestions?!?!

Admin

[admin]

Side note: Also, where was this proposal during the Circuit summit ... I know folks are weighing in here and now, but the Summit exists to directly vet these ideas and to have the audience most concerned and most knowledgeable about the rules give you their best input on it ...

just thought of it...i think this could be a great new rule differnent from waka...i really dont see a downside to this at all..

Just to clarify - I'm extremely happy you raised the question for discussion. Our point of "where was this the last six months when we were asking for discussion stems from the fact that we have a deadline to keep, a printer who is on hold now because we're going to draft up a possible rule change, and players/teams who have never played with our rules before that risk being confused if this is delayed. To stress, it won't be.

And, to clarify on the v.2011 rule book, when you register on Jan 4th, the new rule book will be finalized and posted.

Admin

[machinegunkelly]

i would like this rule put in the 2011 circuit rule book

[PittsBurgheR]

Side note: Also, where was this proposal during the Circuit summit ... I know folks are weighing in here and now, but the Summit exists to directly vet these ideas and to have the audience most concerned and most knowledgeable about the rules give you their best input on it ...

just thought of it...i think this could be a great new rule differnent from waka...i really dont see a downside to this at all..

Just to clarify - I'm extremely happy you raised the question for discussion. Our point of "where was this the last six months when we were asking for discussion stems from the fact that we have a deadline to keep, a printer who is on hold now because we're going to draft up a possible rule change, and players/teams who have never played with our rules before that risk being confused if this is delayed. To stress, it won't be.

And, to clarify on the v.2011 rule book, when you register on Jan 4th, the new rule book will be finalized and posted.

Admin

thanks for putting this out there Admin. I'm also concerned that we didnt get time to deliberate on it, or the wording. the entire reason we advertised the summit was for the rules committee to clarify and finalize the book for next season, those who chose to participate got their say, those who missed, either knew and planned ahead, or had to go quiet.

[Eliminator]

New to the forum, not new to kickball. I love this rule more than I can describe. Specifically for WAKA, some leagues require 26 players per team. In a developing kickball area like Boston is the teams get so thinned out, but the pitching can still be very strong. I've seen a few situations where a team does not even get through their entire lineup a single time.

For the everyday league and team this would help captains to keep everyone involved while for the competitive tournaments this would only increase the level of play and strategy.

[admin]

@ machinegunkelly

This is a great idea but due to the timing of the submission we didn't have time to get it into v.2011. We have added this for v.2012 to be debated.

FYI,
Admin