2025 NCAA rule changes.

[Richvee]

Only 21 changes. 
For those of us doing lower level D3, JUCO 2 man games.. We’re almost “official timekeepers” more than an umpires.
https://ncaaorg.s3.amazonaws.com/championships/sports/baseball/rules/2025-26PRMBA_RulesChanges.pdf 

[grayhawk]

"Rationale: A clarification for what is considered stepping in front of home plate during these types of play situations. "

This one must be a direct result of the play in the CWS where F2 stepped in front of the plate to receive the pitch on a steal of home. The morons out there claimed he was legal because he didn't step ON the plate.

I figured the change to the batter's box rule would come. It's pretty much obsolete with the pitch clock in force. Who cares what the batter does as long as he's in the box, attentive to the pitcher with 10 seconds left?

Quote

Pitching Violations 9.2.i To allow the pitcher to throw unlimited warm-up pitches between innings within 120 seconds.  Rationale: This rule change provides the pitchers the opportunity to determine the amount of warm-up pitches deemed necessary within the prescribed between-innings time period (120 seconds).

So now, instead of saying "two more," we will probably just give updates on the clock. I wonder if the umpire with the clock will have to verbalize, "30 seconds" and "15 seconds" so the defense gets the ball back to the pitcher on the rubber ready to pitch when the clock expires.

[Richvee]

I do like how NCAA will clarify/change wording to rules when questions arise. They did it with the “step back or to the side” wording for the windup as well. 
My only concern remains the time changes and additions. 
8 seconds, not 10 for the batter to be ready,( so my ref smart isn’t right anymore. )
120seconds between innings, unless it’s a new pitcher. Then it’s 150 seconds. 
30 seconds between batters… 

That’s a lot of timing to be keeping on the field. Especially at many levels with no official time keeper, and a useless refsmart given all the different variants. 

[Velho]

21 minutes ago, grayhawk said:

"Rationale: A clarification for what is considered stepping in front of home plate during these types of play situations. "

This one must be a direct result of the play in the CWS where F2 stepped in front of the plate to receive the pitch on a steal of home. The morons out there claimed he was legal because he didn't step ON the plate.

Had same thought. Language won't change those folks mind though. That F2 straddled the plate and, arguably, wasn't past the front edge of the plate before reaching the ball.

[grayhawk]

3 hours ago, Richvee said:

I do like how NCAA will clarify/change wording to rules when questions arise. They did it with the “step back or to the side” wording for the windup as well. 
My only concern remains the time changes and additions. 
8 seconds, not 10 for the batter to be ready,( so my ref smart isn’t right anymore. )
120seconds between innings, unless it’s a new pitcher. Then it’s 150 seconds. 
30 seconds between batters… 

That’s a lot of timing to be keeping on the field. Especially at many levels with no official time keeper, and a useless refsmart given all the different variants. 

All levels are supposed to have visible clocks next season, so theoretically, you shouldn't need the RefSmart anymore. D2 & D3 are both required to have them. NAIA? Anyone's guess. I work two JC conferences and I know at least one of them has committed to visible clocks.

[scubabob34]

10 hours ago, grayhawk said:

All levels are supposed to have visible clocks next season, so theoretically, you shouldn't need the RefSmart anymore. D2 & D3 are both required to have them. NAIA? Anyone's guess. I work two JC conferences and I know at least one of them has committed to visible clocks.

***FOR DIVISION III RESPONDENTS ONLY***
Effective January 1, 2025, the use of one or more visible clocks will be permissible during the 
game to enforce all timing rules for Division III.

Note: All pitch/between innings clock timing requirements shall continue to be followed and 
enforced during play.

Rationale: Due to the potentially burdensome expense for purchasing, installing and 
operating/staffing the visible action clock, as well as feedback during the original adoption of 
the required action clock, permitting the use of the visible clock for institutions that wish to 
use it is sufficient for the effective application of the playing rule.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So it looks like D3 permissible, but not required -- and I talked to a NAIA coach that is on their rules committee...he said same as D3...looks like RefSmart timers will need to be reprogrammed AGAIN!

 

[grayhawk]

1 minute ago, scubabob34 said:

***FOR DIVISION III RESPONDENTS ONLY***
Effective January 1, 2025, the use of one or more visible clocks will be permissible during the 
game to enforce all timing rules for Division III.

Note: All pitch/between innings clock timing requirements shall continue to be followed and 
enforced during play.

Rationale: Due to the potentially burdensome expense for purchasing, installing and 
operating/staffing the visible action clock, as well as feedback during the original adoption of 
the required action clock, permitting the use of the visible clock for institutions that wish to 
use it is sufficient for the effective application of the playing rule.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So it looks like D3 permissible, but not required -- and I talked to a NAIA coach that is on their rules committee...he said same as D3...looks like RefSmart timers will need to be reprogrammed AGAIN!

 

Ahh, didn’t see that. Bummer, I was hoping for visible clocks in all my games next season. 

[Richvee]

2 hours ago, scubabob34 said:

.looks like RefSmart timers will need to be reprogrammed AGAIN!

On a personal note, I dropped my refsmart timer last season and the toggle switch wasn't working. I actually took the metal box behind the toggle switch apart and, bent some pieces, added a little wedge so the switch would make contact, and then "rebuilt the metal box with some scrap metal, electrical tape, and crazy glue. I don't think refsmart's gonna be reprogramming mine.. I think I'm OK counting to 2 before dinging a batter for not being ready. 

And that reprogram will only cover the change for the batter to be ready in 8 seconds instead of 10. We will still need to time 150 seconds for a new pitcher, 30 seconds between batters.

And for those with visible clocks..I doubt many will have a clock operator. We'll be handed a cumbersome box with all kinds of settings and resets. 

[Richvee]

I don't want to sound like a complainer. I actually like the clock rules. I just don't like the fact that they're throwing all this on a base umpire.....In some cases the ONLY BU. 

[Jimurray]

""without gaining ground toward home plate and one step forward toward home plate with the free foot.” Rationale: To add clarifying language of gaining ground towards home plate."

I think you will need clarifying video examples for square windup pitchers who take a stutter step with the free foot to turn sideways in their delivery. That stutter step gains ground in varying degrees to 1B and HP.

[BLarson]

The first rule of 5.15.c is that we don't talk about 5.15.c

[MadMax]

Alright <claps and rubs hands together>! Time to tee off! 

Now, before I begin, none of what I’m about to say is directed at any of you specifically, or even generally. If I quote you, just consider that what you said “hit the correlating button”… 

Get the popcorn.🍿 

1 hour ago, Richvee said:

the change for the batter to be ready in 8 seconds instead of 10.

You saw this coming. As soon as MLB installed their 8-second rule, and made it stick, the NCAA took notice and was eagerly motivated to do the same. 

18 hours ago, Richvee said:

30 seconds between batters…

So, too, with this. I had actually heard about and bore passing witness to college umpires starting the action clock (20 seconds) as the (new) batter was approaching the box, not yet even in it yet, so as to “hurry things along” and counteract dawdling between batters. 

19 hours ago, Richvee said:

That’s a lot of timing to be keeping on the field. Especially at many levels with no official time keeper

Agreed x 1001. Know what a solution is, or at least a significant aid, to this is? 
3-man. We had 3-man in NAIA for a fleeting moment in 2019, and starting in 2020… know what killed it? The panic-demic. Then, that loss / regression-to-2-man was reinforced by the lost revenue and resources, and the reminder (to conferences) that due to Title IX, if baseball went 3-man, softball would have to be 3-man as well. Then it was further exacerbated by the officiating shortage we’ve got, nationwide. 

There’s a weird, disturbing dichotomy at play here, and I’ll address it after I rant for a moment… 

19 hours ago, Richvee said:

so my refsmart isn’t right anymore.

That’s a lot of timing to be keeping on the field. Especially at many levels with no official time keeper, and a useless refsmart given all the different variants.

 

5 hours ago, scubabob34 said:

looks like RefSmart timers will need to be reprogrammed AGAIN!

How ‘bout we throw those frustrating, overpriced, cryptic black boxes away? To be fair, I appreciate and respect the risk and effort that the designer and producer undertook to develop it; however, I completely deride and resist the directed compulsion that particular college umpires place upon us (as either underlings or colleagues) to buy and use one! Like it’s some kind of exclusive, hallowed divining rod or talisman, its possession and use bestowing on you the mark of a sanctified umpire! 🤨 

It doesn’t. 
What’s wrong with using a stopwatch ⏱️, if it accomplishes all the rule-timing requirements? Heck, what’s wrong with using a smartwatch? Sure, it might be a little bit awkward, but what if you’re discreet about it? Or, even better yet, what if someone adjacent to this whole topic develops an app that manages all these timings, and can rapidly rectify adjustments to the timings digitally instead of physically? “It’s a bad look” or “It’s bad optics.” We gotta drop this bull 💩 “feedback” or oversight. If you’re able to effectively use and adjudicate with a $10 stopwatch, why do you have to have (by your own purchase!!) a $80 featureless black box??!! 
If you yourself want to use (and deal with the complications of owning) a RefSmart, then by all means, do so. That’s your choice. Just do not require me to purchase something that has no demonstrable advantage over my solution.

Another thing… why isn’t the NCAA out in front of this? We’ve got electronic communication for catchers from coaches, we have wrist-“watches” that indicate pitches to pitchers (or whatever else they do), and there’s been a recently developed app (HeadSet) that silos that communication as the desired 1-way means. Why isn’t the NCAA directing and subsidizing a technological solution? Why hasn’t there been a partnership struck between the NCAA and GameChanger (as an example), or Daktronics, for implementing a comprehensive means of timing these rules? 

I have no issue whatsoever with the rules themselves; I have issue with the how, especially in that it typically falls upon us. 

[Richvee]

22 minutes ago, MadMax said:

I have no issue whatsoever with the rules themselves; I have issue with the how, especially in that it typically falls upon us. 

👍100%

[grayhawk]

6 hours ago, MadMax said:

I had actually heard about and bore passing witness to college umpires starting the action clock (20 seconds) as the (new) batter was approaching the box, not yet even in it yet, so as to “hurry things along” and counteract dawdling between batters. 

I witnessed this with one of my partners, and I also witnessed the frustration by the teams in that game with his insistence to start the clock before it should have been started. Just don't be "that guy."

[Kevin_K]

19 hours ago, Richvee said:

On a personal note, I dropped my refsmart timer last season and the toggle switch wasn't working. I actually took the metal box behind the toggle switch apart and, bent some pieces, added a little wedge so the switch would make contact, and then "rebuilt the metal box with some scrap metal, electrical tape, and crazy glue. I don't think refsmart's gonna be reprogramming mine.. I think I'm OK counting to 2 before dinging a batter for not being ready. 

Some one has been channeling his inner  @MadMax?

[Jimurray]

21 hours ago, Jimurray said:

""without gaining ground toward home plate and one step forward toward home plate with the free foot.” Rationale: To add clarifying language of gaining ground towards home plate."

I think you will need clarifying video examples for square windup pitchers who take a stutter step with the free foot to turn sideways in their delivery. That stutter step gains ground in varying degrees to 1B and HP.

I had these from a LMB/OBR game I attended last year. Both legal in OBR. What say you in NCAA:

 

 

 

[grayhawk]

1 hour ago, Jimurray said:

I had these from a LMB/OBR game I attended last year. Both legal in OBR. What say you in NCAA:

IMG_2834.mov 19.34 MB · 2 downloads  

 

IMG_2833.mov 17.49 MB · 1 download  

 

I would say legal in the first (2834) and illegal in the second (2833).

[Jimurray]

1 minute ago, grayhawk said:

I would say legal in the first (2834) and illegal in the second (2833).

You would have to apply the rule wording but would you know why NCAA considers it illegal or an advantage?

[grayhawk]

3 minutes ago, Jimurray said:

You would have to apply the rule wording but would you know why NCAA considers it illegal or an advantage?

I really have no clue. The only thing I can think of is that stepping forward could confuse the batter that F1 might somehow be delivering the pitch with the step forward?

[Richvee]

47 minutes ago, Jimurray said:

You would have to apply the rule wording but would you know why NCAA considers it illegal or an advantage?

Because it's a hill they're willing to die on? Instead of changing the wording to "One step back, forward or to the side, and one step forward" 

Interesting enough, OBR says pretty much what NCAA wants enforced...and doesn't even mention a step to the side 

 

He shall not raise either foot from the ground, except that in his actual delivery of the ball to the batter, he may take one step backward, and one step forward with his free foot.

Obviously not enforced "as written" in MLB

[Jimurray]

11 minutes ago, Richvee said:

Because it's a hill they're willing to die on? Instead of changing the wording to "One step back, forward or to the side, and one step forward" 

Interesting enough, OBR says pretty much what NCAA wants enforced...and doesn't even mention a step to the side 

 

He shall not raise either foot from the ground, except that in his actual delivery of the ball to the batter, he may take one step backward, and one step forward with his free foot.

Obviously not enforced "as written" in MLB

The rules were written for classic windup pitchers and were worded to prevent “running into the pitch”. Now we have some, facing the batter, windup pitchers who turn sideways in their delivery using a stutter step. That is not running into the pitch. And nobody quibbles that the pitcher raises and rotates the pivot foot from the ground in violation of the wording. But you have call it the way the boss wants.