[Jim Porter]

Moose,

Perhaps some have argued that the intent of the pitcher is the key in this scenario. I won't argue for that position because it is an opinion I have not held.

However, in response to your post, I will say that it is the intent of the rule, not the pitcher, which should be considered.

You point to the accidental ball drop as an example. The history of this rule tells us exactly why that is a balk, every single time. In the past, pitchers would fake accidentally dropping the ball to bring about a trick play to catch runners off-guard. Nonetheless, OBR 8.05(k) specifically states that a balk is to be called regardless of intent, whether accidental or intentional. That's why. No trick plays involving an "accidentally" dropped ball are allowed.

However, when a coach yells out, "Go from the stretch," and the pitcher steps off with the improper foot - what is the intent of that rule? It is there to keep the pitcher from illegally deceiving runners into believing he has begun his motion to pitch. But if everyone knows this pitcher is not beginning his motion, and they react accordingly, where is the balk?

The intent of the rule is clear. Our common sense and judgment should rule. That's why we're out there as impartial arbiters. That's why we get paid the big bucks - to make these tough decisions.

Some people believe we are beating a dead horse. Others believe this is about UT members versus non-UT members. I believe this is a hot topic for none of the above reasons.

It is a hot topic because it symbolizes the struggle we all face with with our own umpiring philosphies. This topic pits the black-and-white letter of the rules against spirit and intent, common sense, judgment, and discretion. It tests every umpire's boundary and draws a distinct line. And we are all finding out that our lines are in slightly different places.

For all you folks that have cried, "Foul," regarding this scenario when hearing from people like Carl Childress, Warren Willson, and myself - consider this: Has this topic made you think long and hard about your umpiring? Has it helped you define certain aspects of your job that you probably would not have defined otherwise? Has it made you go looking through the books and manuals at rules and parallel interpretations? If it has, then this thread has been wildly successful for you. And Carl, Warren, and myself have at least been successful at sparking the inspirations of the student-umpire inside you to research, learn, and grow on your own.

I'll say this has been a great topic.