3) Is there any other ancillary movement before the pivot foot comes down?
Answer - Yes, the pivot foot went straight up for 18 inches to 2 feet. That's the part your missing.
Backward and off have to occur at the same time. Otherwise they are two separate and distinct movements and that isn't how the rule is written.
And I agree, the move shouldn't be deceiving. But the intent is to deceive. There is no other reason to pick your leg up that high when taking a 6 inch step back.
The move is by rule, not allowed in the windup. Why would you allow it in the set?
Quote:
Originally posted by Matthew F
Quote:
Originally posted by Kaliix
Unfortunately Dave, most people here didn't get it before, don't get it now and still won't accept it.
|
You have to admit (or hopefully, you are capable of seeing the other point of view) that this move, when broken down doesn't "seem" to be a violation.
1) Is the pivot foot being used to disengage the rubber? Yes
2) Does the pivot foot come down behind the rubber? Yes
3) Is there any other ancillary movement before the pivot foot comes down? No
4) Is this move deceiving? No (except to maybe the Russian Ballet Troupe)
Evans' rule interp combines 1 and 2 (as you did, K) and declares a high step an illegal disengagement and an action performed to deceive the runner.
If I ever see it, I'll call it. Doesn't mean I like it though.
On a side note... As one who was picked off 1st base by a LHP a few times, I wish "step towards a base" was taken as literally as "backwards off" 
|