View Single Post
  #106 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jun 01, 2005, 09:37am
David B David B is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 1,772
Re: Re: after reading

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Dave Hensley
Quote:
Originally posted by David B
Quote:
So I agree with Evans that if I were to see this move I would call it a balk, but I would have to be convinced that the runner was deceived before calling it.
You should not wait to judge whether or not the runner was deceived by the pitcher's motion. The effectiveness of the move is not the salient point; rather, the intent of the move is what you must judge. If you judge the pitcher's move to be made with the intent to deceive the runner, balk it. Don't wait to see whether the runner bit or not.
Well I don't want to open another can of worms, but I consider this under the heading "mechanical balk"

I also would consider this under the realm of highly mechanical since everyone knows (or should know) when the pivot foot moves go back to the base.

So just as I don't balk when F1 obviously (with the F2 telling him step back) steps back with the wrong foot, I probably in this situation do the same.

If the runner was an idiot and got picked off, call it a balk, if the runner is not ignore it.

I'm not saying an umpire is wrong to call it, but just that in my many many years of calling, some things are just best alone and ignored.

Since its umpires judgement on a balk, I have that authority by rule IMHO.

Thanks
David