To Postpone or Not to Postpone?

There's a rumor circulating that the Terminal Digits want to reschedule our game on Tuesday because they might be short a few players. The hideous waste of taxpayer funds known as Management Tango is sending most of our managers down to Phoenix for three days of ring kissing and navel gazing next week and at least a couple of these managers play for the TD's. I doubt there's any truth to the rumor about the postponement because Chiniqua hasn't been advised of any changes in our schedule and the game is just a few days away. The date of this Management Tango fiasco has been known for at least a month. But let's assume this rumor is true and we're going to be asked to postpone this week's game. Is this something we should do? Ordinarily, I'd say yes without any hesitation. This is recreational softball and it would be a drag that some of their players would have to miss a game. Also, James is in Singapore for two weeks with the Army Reserves and we'd be much better off playing with James than without him. So if they'd be willing to wait until James returns to play the game, a postponement would probably benefit us as well. But this isn't an ordinary situation. This is the same team that took advantage of two ignorant umpires to have three of our perfectly legal bats declared illegal and removed from our game so that we had to play the game with only two bats. (More on this later.) After a donkey punching maneuver like that, I don't see that we owe the TD's any favors. Maybe it's time for them to reap what they have sewn. Now, for the benefit of our team members who weren't with us then, let's have a look back at The Great Bat Controversy. In one of our games against the TD's last year, they decided to get cute and have the umpires inspect our bats. In our previous game, Brandon launched a homer over the leftfield fence and I guess the TD's found it difficult to believe he has that kind of power. Perhaps they would have tested him for steroids too if they thought the lab results would arrive in time. The umpires checked our bats and tossed three of them out of the game because they did not bear the ASA's 2004 certification mark. These bats had passed inspection before because the umpires recognized they were old aluminum bats, not the dangerous type the ASA is trying to keep out of play. But this pair of umpires declared them illegal. Interestingly, Brandon's bat with which he hit the homer was one of the two bats declared legal and allowed to remain in the game. The bats that were tossed out were older, single wall aluminum bats manufactured in the 1980s, long before the composite and other high-tech bats arrived on the scene. They were marked "Official Softball" which was the required certification mark when they were made. Two of these obviously older, game-worn bats were light and preferred by most of the women on our team. Even an inexperienced, unsophisticated umpire could plainly see they were ordinary aluminum bats. None of these bats were ever going to help any of us launch home runs or pose a threat to fielders even if we managed to dip into Barry Bonds's secret stash. Two of the bats were mine. One was an Easton S6 and the other was an Easton SX1. The third bat was Gary's. I don't recall the make and model number but it was a heavier model aluminum bat well over a decade old. As I mentioned earlier, these bats were not illegal and there was no need for them to be removed from our game. Here is an explanation from the ASA's website: ________________________________

ASA Bat Testing & Certification Program

The official bat in ASA Championship Play must meet all of the requirements of Rule 3, Section 1 and: 1. must bear either the ASA approved 2000 certification mark or the ASA 2004 certification mark as shown below, and must not be listed on an ASA non approved list, and

2. must be included on a list of approved bat models published by the ASA National Office; or 3. must, in the sole opinion and discretion of the umpire, have been manufactured prior to 2000 and if tested, would comply with the ASA bat performance standards then in effect. Beginning January 1, 2004, all bats in ASA Championship Play must pass the ASA 2004 bat standard. All bats having the 2004 certification mark will be allowed in ASA Championship Play. Bats that have the 2000 certification mark will not be allowed in ASA Championship Play unless they are listed on an approved bat list on the ASA website. For convenience, the ASA website has a listing of bats that do not pass the ASA 2004 bat standard. ______________________________________ There is a good reason for the ASA's bat testing and certification program. In recent years, advanced technology and materials have led to the manufacture of bats that provide enhanced hitting power. In the hands of a powerful hitter these high-tech bats can be highly dangerous, especially at the lower amateur levels such as ours. Finally, the ASA began testing these new titanium and carbon-aluminum composite bats and outlawed those capable of propelling the ball so hard and fast as to be a threat to pitchers and other players positioned close to the hitter. In our league, all composite bats, even those bearing the ASA certification marks, are banned. You may have noticed that item #3 allows the umpire to make the call on the inclusion of older bats. If they had ruled the bats were not manufactured before 2000 or that they had been modified, or believed they might be manufactured with materials that would not allow them to meet ASA certification, we would have no choice but to accept their judgment. They would have been wrong but we had to live with it. But that isn't what they ruled. They tossed the bats because they didn't bear the 2004 certification mark. This was an incorrect ruling. Unless someone invented the time machine while I was away, it's impossible for a bat manufactured in 1989 to bear a 2004 certification mark. Both the Easton S6 and SX1 were on the ASA's approved bat list. We tried to explain this to the umpires but they wouldn't listen.

The irony here is that by allowing the 2004 certification mark to be their only guideline, the umpires could allow any number of illegal composite bats to be used while they are banning perfectly safe and legal old aluminum bats. They are defeating the entire purpose of the ASA's bat testing and certification program. But I digress.

So we were left to play the game with only two bats. The TD's didn't feel confident they could beat us on the field so they had to pull a lame stunt to put us at a disadvantage. Fine. They still couldn't beat us and in the end, their skullduggery completely backfired. The following weekend Gary and I went on a shopping binge to load up the team with certified bats of every weight from 23 oz. to 34 oz. From that point forward, we had the equipment to allow each of our players to find a bat with which he/she was really comfortable. Now you have the background. Knowing this, have the TD's demonstrated the kind of sportsmanship that makes them deserving of a any favors?