Quote:
Originally posted by Kaliix
If you read Mr. Evan's explanation, he says a couple of things which tell you exactly what you need to know. In the first sentence, he says the pitcher is required to step backward off the rubber, with the word backward highlighted. In the next sentence, he implies that the step in question was not mechanically legal. Two sentences later, he states, "This is one in which you explain that the pitcher failed to legally disengage. Instead of stepping backward off the rubber, as required..."
So if everyone here read the same explanation I have, why is there any doubt that to legally disengage the rubber, the pitcher must step backward, not up? (and yes you have to move upward to clear the rubber)
|
Hmmmmm................I wonder how consistent Jim Evans is in his separation of "up" from "back"........
A pitcher from the rubber in the set position needs to step directly to the base he is throwing or feinting to. So, if a LHF1 raises his leg up, and then steps and throws to 1B should we expect Evans to balk the move? I'd think not. Yet his elimination of upward within a stepping motion would justify it is not a step directly to the base.
IMO, there should be consistency here, and Evans' ruling is not one that maintains consistency in what is and what is not a "step" by a pitcher. IMO (which means nothing), if we allow a pitcher to raise his leg high in a step forward, we should also allow it in a step backward.
Just my opinion,
Freix