NCAA F1 Dropped Ball No One On Change

[Velho]

Already in effect but just came across this now. Anyone have insight into why the change? How was this being used to game the pitch clock?

https://ncaaorg.s3.amazonaws.com/championships/sports/baseball/rules/2025-26PRMBA_RulesChanges.pdf

[BLWizzRanger]

Maybe, the clock would reset if it was considered a no pitch and they closed the loop hole???

[dumbdumb]

12 hours ago, Velho said:

Already in effect but just came across this now. Anyone have insight into why the change? How was this being used to game the pitch clock?

https://ncaaorg.s3.amazonaws.com/championships/sports/baseball/rules/2025-26PRMBA_RulesChanges.pdf

which would give reliever extra time in the bull pen and maybe other things. even if it has not happened yet, glad they closed the loophole. my personal favorite part of the rule is 'intentionally or accidentally', which eliminates mind reading. hey ump it was accidental, like some other rules.

hey ump, it slipped, i didn't intentionally hit him, versus, yeh it didn't slip, i intentionally hit him (Cole Hammil). at least he had the intestinal fortitude to admit it and break the 'code' of not admitting it no matter what or who/whom it is.

[MadMax]

On 7/25/2025 at 8:00 PM, Velho said:

Anyone have insight into why the change?

Remember the anecdote that several of us college-keen umpires ( @Replacematt, @JSam21, etc.) shared, passed to us by a longtime D-1 umpire? 
“If you want to see a (college) rule change, enforce it as written.” 

Well, if we were to enforce it as written prior to this modification/clarification, then the dropping or mis-delivery of a pitch – wherein it rolls short of the foul line – would be… 🥁… nothing. Technically, by the letter of the existing law, we could not deem that a pitch clock violation. That “fumble” or “misfire” is defined, right there. 

So now, it is (truly) a pitch clock violation, just like a disengagement prior to the delivery of a pitch, and the expiration of the clock (with no runners on). 

[jimurrayalterego]

2 hours ago, MadMax said:

Remember the anecdote that several of us college-keen umpires ( @Replacematt, @JSam21, etc.) shared, passed to us by a longtime D-1 umpire? 
“If you want to see a (college) rule change, enforce it as written.” 

Well, if we were to enforce it as written prior to this modification/clarification, then the dropping or mis-delivery of a pitch – wherein it rolls short of the foul line – would be… 🥁… nothing. Technically, by the letter of the existing law, we could not deem that a pitch clock violation. That “fumble” or “misfire” is defined, right there. 

So now, it is (truly) a pitch clock violation, just like a disengagement prior to the delivery of a pitch, and the expiration of the clock (with no runners on). 

So that loophole was endemic? 

[JSam21]

18 hours ago, jimurrayalterego said:

So that loophole was endemic? 

I wouldn’t say that it was endemic, but it became clear to us that it could be used as a “reset” of the clock with no one on base when there was no way to have a reset with no one on base.