[Jim Porter]

Jim,

First off, little kids have nothing to do with this discussion. I don't know why you'd make such a disclaimer. Youth leagues have 16-18 year-old divisions, you know. And this discussion is just as valid for adult amateur leagues as well.

You said, Before the set, I almost always make that call of "Time!"

You do? Really? In that moment when the batter steps out, you can see that the pitcher is paying attention, the runners are all idle, and then you call, "Time"? You do this despite the fact that top instructors all over the planet recommend we call time as little as possible, and never when it's not absolutely necessary?

You also said, "I would be hard-pressed to think, in this instance, that the pitcher's balk was caused by anything other than the batter stepping out, but timing of the infraction is important. I have never seen a pitcher do that when the batter stays in the box, so my judgment is that there is some cause and effect at work here."

Sure there's cause and effect. The pitcher, "relaxed" when he saw that the batter left the box. This is not out of the ordinary. It even happens in MLB.

You also said, "I think your evaluation of the Hensley position is incorrect. F1 comes set..."

Already you've gone down another road, Jim. The pitcher in my situation never came set. He remained in the preliminary motion throughout.

My situation was not a case where the pitcher came set, began his delivery, and then aborted after seeing the batter step out. That's what 6.02(b) addresses. In my situation, the pitcher was quite aware that the batter stepped out when he relaxed, and then he balked. The balk was not caused by the batter's step-out.

But that's beside the point because the step-out was not considered illegal, according to 6.02(b). The pitcher had neither begun his wind-up, nor was he in the "set position". Both are requirements as listed under 6.02(b) for a batter to be considered as having illegally stepped out for purposes of that rule.

You guys want to apply a rule that is, by its own definition, inapplicable. I can see how this is easier for you than doing it the right way. It enables you not to call the balk, it enables you to keep your viewpoint that very technical violations always need to be called, and it allows you to continue this debate while retaining your position.

Jon Bible's quote in Garth's post contains the most valuable information regarding the calling of balks. It is what I was taught, it is what is right, and it is what we've been discussing for a month now.

"The balk rule, in my view, is perhaps the most misunderstood and misapplied rules... In implementing the balk rule one must keep in mind that there may be a variety of things that a pitcher does that technically may constitute a balk but that should never be called because they put no one at an unfair disadvantage"

Above is how MLB umpires call it, it's how NCAA umpires call it, and it's how we all should call it.

I prefer truth and reality over justifications and rule manipulations anytime, don't you?