9 strap

[Gimling]

Is the 9 strap allowed in a game since is an injury protection tool?

[834k3r]

16 minutes ago, Gimling said:

Is the 9 strap allowed in a game since is an injury protection tool?

I have no idea what a "9 Strap" is.

[beerguy55]

I think you're looking for OnlyFans.

[beerguy55]

In all seriousness, it's an injury prevention tool only because it's marketed as such, in hopes of getting around any potential rule issues in baseball, to get some sales.

The same strap is a swing correction tool in golf.  They can't make the injury argument there, and the likelihood is it would not be allowed in any sanctioned golf tournament.

It's a swing correction tool, regardless of how they try to disguise it.

FAQ – 9 STRAP TECHNOLOGY

If they can get away equating to an elbow pad, or a thumb protector, then fill your boots.  I. personally, do not agree in any universe it is a safety product, even if there are some secondary, unintended benefits.

[Velho]

fwiw, this would be disallowed in LL with the 2025 rules changes.

Edit: banned as an "alterations to the bat". Done, I believe and knowing LL, in the name of safety.

[MadMax]

Why wouldn't it be allowed? 

Is it attached to the bat? No. Thus, it doesn't violate any rules regarding modifications to the bat, or an illegal bat. 

Additionally, there are no rules directly prohibiting batting gloves (or variations therein), or wrist braces, or elbow guards, or any other adjacent equipment or attire. This 9-Strap is analogous to any other batting gloves or, as @beerguy55 said, one of those thumb vibration plugs. Play on and swing away. 

[MadMax]

57 minutes ago, Velho said:

banned as an "alterations to the bat".

But it's not an alteration to the bat. It's a strap worn on the hands very much equal to batting gloves. When you take the bat out of the hands, does this strap come with it (and stay attached to the bat)? No. Then this isn't an alteration / addition / modification to the bat. 

[Velho]

42 minutes ago, MadMax said:

1 hour ago, Velho said:

banned as an "alterations to the bat".

But it's not an alteration to the bat. It's a strap worn on the hands very much equal to batting gloves. When you take the bat out of the hands, does this strap come with it (and stay attached to the bat)? No. Then this isn't an alteration / addition / modification to the bat. 

Preaching to the choir Max. That's why I used the "quotes".

A lot of gymnastics would be necessary to allow this strap in LL given that thumb protectors are explicitly defined as "an alteration to the bat" by LL. See below.

When you control the language you control the discussion.

[SeeingEyeDog]

I just would like to add to @Velho and @MadMax...if that interpretation ("it's a bat alteration because it's part of the bat") were permitted, that would have some serious, serious implications to OTHER rules and other parts of the rulebook.

This is an extreme example but, there was a pregnant woman a few years ago who was given a ticket because she was driving on a road that was marked as "HOV-3 ONLY". She had ONE passenger sitting next to her in the car. Her argument was...I'm pregnant, my unborn fetus counts as a passenger and I have another passenger ex-utero, therefore I have 3 people in the vehicle and I should be able to legally use this road. When it went to court, the judge said yeah, no...that's not a thing, found her guilty and the woman paid the fine and that was the end of it.

As is the culture of this forum, please leave the politics out of the discussion...just consider for a moment the serious implications to future legal actions and interpretations and case precedent had that judge found her "argument" to be correct and provide a legal ruling that an in-utero fetus can be a qualifier for HOV laws and regulations. Words and context matter...

~Dawg

[umpstu]

10 hours ago, SeeingEyeDog said:

I just would like to add to @Velho and @MadMax...if that interpretation ("it's a bat alteration because it's part of the bat") were permitted, that would have some serious, serious implications to OTHER rules and other parts of the rulebook.

This is an extreme example but, there was a pregnant woman a few years ago who was given a ticket because she was driving on a road that was marked as "HOV-3 ONLY". She had ONE passenger sitting next to her in the car. Her argument was...I'm pregnant, my unborn fetus counts as a passenger and I have another passenger ex-utero, therefore I have 3 people in the vehicle and I should be able to legally use this road. When it went to court, the judge said yeah, no...that's not a thing, found her guilty and the woman paid the fine and that was the end of it.

As is the culture of this forum, please leave the politics out of the discussion...just consider for a moment the serious implications to future legal actions and interpretations and case precedent had that judge found her "argument" to be correct and provide a legal ruling that an in-utero fetus can be a qualifier for HOV laws and regulations. Words and context matter...

~Dawg

I just watched a video on the 9-strap site. How on earth could anybody consider that an alteration to a bat?

[834k3r]

21 hours ago, Velho said:

Preaching to the choir Max. That's why I used the "quotes".

A lot of gymnastics would be necessary to allow this strap in LL given that thumb protectors are explicitly defined as "an alteration to the bat" by LL. See below.

When you control the language you control the discussion.

Just one more thing I'll file under "reasons I'm glad I'm not doing LL anymore."

[Velho]

10 hours ago, umpstu said:

I just watched a video on the 9-strap site. How on earth could anybody consider that an alteration to a bat?

You're being too rational, and missing the point. It's defined as such, so it is such.

[Velho]

30 minutes ago, 834k3r said:

Just one more thing I'll file under "reasons I'm glad I'm not doing LL anymore."

I feel you and know the many (and live) many of other reasons.

In a vacuum though... are you allowing the strap in your games? If not, what rule are you using to say no?

If you will allow it, is there a device you will draw the line at?

[SeeingEyeDog]

10 hours ago, umpstu said:

I just watched a video on the 9-strap site. How on earth could anybody consider that an alteration to a bat?

It's not and I am absolutely not advocating that it should be. I am merely pointing out the added unintended consequences of a rule interpretation.

~Dawg

[grayhawk]

10 hours ago, umpstu said:

I just watched a video on the 9-strap site. How on earth could anybody consider that an alteration to a bat?

Seems like "We don't like this, so we'll state a reason made out of whole cloth to ban it."

[beerguy55]

23 hours ago, MadMax said:

But it's not an alteration to the bat. It's a strap worn on the hands very much equal to batting gloves. When you take the bat out of the hands, does this strap come with it (and stay attached to the bat)? No. Then this isn't an alteration / addition / modification to the bat. 

Well, if the hands are part of the bat then this certainly is.

[beerguy55]

1 hour ago, Velho said:

I feel you and know the many (and live) many of other reasons.

In a vacuum though... are you allowing the strap in your games? If not, what rule are you using to say no?

If you will allow it, is there a device you will draw the line at?

First - I want to clarify something I said early - I simply do not consider this to be a safety tool, as the makers are trying to market it...they're doing that to try to get around any potential rules that would prevent the sale of their product OR to marry themselves to an element of the game that might not only make their product desirable, but mandatory. I disagree with that positioning - that does not mean I believe it's illegal.

It is indeed a hitting aid, first and foremost.

Would I allow it?  As others have said, it's no different than batting gloves.  In no universe is this an alteration of the bat.

Where would I draw the line...something that attaches the player to the bat - imagine a tool that forces your hands/wrists/fingers into their optimal alignment, and then locks them there...anything that would not allow the player to seamlessly release the bat.   That would be an alteration to the bat, IMO.   You wouldn't let someone duct tape their hands to the bat.

[Velho]

19 minutes ago, grayhawk said:

Seems like "We don't like this, so we'll state a reason made out of whole cloth to ban it."

My interpretation is they don't like the smoothed choke knobs since they increase likelihood of a flying bat (let's disregard the bats that are made that way in the first place). I speculate that they went to discuss implementation (which is a good and not always done thing so kudos to them) and is snowballed

"How can we ask umpires for a million games a year to tell the difference between the smooth choke-up and the squared off one?"

"Screw it, ban them all"

"What about those things on the kids' thumbs?"

"Screw that too. I don't even know what those are for"

[Velho]

3 minutes ago, beerguy55 said:

Where would I draw the line...something that attaches the player to the bat - imagine a tool that forces your hands/wrists/fingers into their optimal alignment, and then locks them there...anything that would not allow the player to seamlessly release the bat.   That would be an alteration to the bat, IMO.   You wouldn't let someone duct tape their hands to the bat.

We're on the same page. That's exactly the use case I imagined. I was simply playing devils advocate on what rule would you use to disallow it*? A velcro device that someone else applies that locks the batter into the bat wouldn't be altering the bat. "The bat is exactly as it came from the store, Mr umpire!"

* I'm rationalizing a positive of this LL rule that was applied roughly imo.

[MadMax]

2 hours ago, Velho said:

You're being too rational, and missing the point. It's defined as such, so it is such.

“It” isn’t defined as such. Little League simply defined thumb protectors on their banned list, and this 9-Strap is not a thumb protector. 

Granted, they’re similar. If we look at their other two objects called out on the cited ban list – choke knobs and choke-up assists – are blatantly installed / applied onto the bat. Then, when LL includes thumb protectors on that list, and devoid any example images, I begin to wonder if there’s ambiguity in terms. That we and LL aren’t thinking of the same things. These confusions of term do exist; just look at “backswing interference” between NFHS and OBR. 

That LL citation doesn’t prohibit batting gloves, and the 9-Strap is much more akin to a batting glove than a thumb protector – however ambiguously LL is defining it. 

[beerguy55]

8 minutes ago, MadMax said:

 If we look at their other two objects called out on the cited ban list – choke knobs and choke-up assists – are blatantly installed / applied onto the bat. Then, when LL includes thumb protectors on that list, and devoid any example images, I begin to wonder if there’s ambiguity in terms. That we and LL aren’t thinking of the same things.

I tend to agree - it appears to me that whomever wrote this doesn't really know what they are, or doesn't know exactly how they are used/implemented.

I even wondered if maybe there is a thumb protector design that attaches to the bat rather than the hand, but I have not been able to find one.

Worse yet, this might have been written by some kind of zealot who hoped they could slide this in there, for some weird reason of "I hate those things", and nobody noticed.

 

If I'm a coach in LL I'm running this as far up the flag pole as I can, because it's plain wrong.

[Richvee]

Maybe LL is thinking along the lines of this guy..Saying kids under 13 really have no use for this. (not a valid reason to outlaw them IMO. Just throwing it out there as a possible reason. 

https://youtu.be/JezkhA4bHPg?si=PbaRaZIAsW_D39yV

[Richvee]

...And what happens when someone devises a thumb guard that is permanently attached to the batting glove?   

[beerguy55]

9 minutes ago, Richvee said:

Maybe LL is thinking along the lines of this guy..Saying kids under 13 really have no use for this. (not a valid reason to outlaw them IMO. Just throwing it out there as a possible reason. 

https://youtu.be/JezkhA4bHPg?si=PbaRaZIAsW_D39yV

Perhaps, but sliding it in as a bat alteration would mean that whomever did is probably in Congress, and thinks adding riders to unrelated bills is the way things need to get done.

[Velho]

2 hours ago, MadMax said:

“It” isn’t defined as such. Little League simply defined thumb protectors on their banned list, and this 9-Strap is not a thumb protector. 

Fair. Having just seen that rule change and - because they called out thumb protectors - internalizing the message was nothing past bat, bat wrap and batting gloves, my instinct was disallow it (rightly or wrongly). It's a coin flip if a LL ump would allow the Strap. (hell MLB stopped the game for how long because of Elly's knob electronic?)

 

My greater point was that things are defined as however they are defined. In this case, no matter the definition outside a LL field, on a LL field a thumb protector IS a bat alteration. In the strictest sense, as arbiter of the rules, that is the reality that needs to be applied (especially if challenged by the other coach). Doesn't matter if we like or agree with it. (acknowledging that yes, for years I've somehow never seen jewelry worn. It's the darnedest thing :)

 

1 hour ago, beerguy55 said:

I tend to agree - it appears to me that whomever wrote this doesn't really know what they are, or doesn't know exactly how they are used/implemented.

[snip]

Worse yet, this might have been written by some kind of zealot who hoped they could slide this in there, for some weird reason of "I hate those things", and nobody noticed.

I'm there with you as my mini-theatrical above speculated.

1 hour ago, beerguy55 said:

Perhaps, but sliding it in as a bat alteration would mean that whomever did is probably in Congress, and thinks adding riders to unrelated bills is the way things need to get done.

I'd wager we're giving them too much credit. Whether it's useful at younger ages or not, I've swung with the thumb adder. I like how it gets the bat in the right positioning in your hands.

I think the rule is a good intentioned simplification to make enforcement easier. IMO, If Strap9 was common, it'd have been included.

[Velho]

Well crap. Am I going to have to check kids feet next year?