[Kaliix]

jicecone,
Saying you have to see "the move" is a cop out. "The move" - disengaging the rubber by lifting the leg, "straight up, knee to chest almost" is clear to everyone. There is no debate that I am aware of about what the move is.

I don't believe anyone said that making "the move" was "the begining or simulation of a pitch".

What was said is that "the motion" is associated with a pitch (or step to a base).

Motion is the keyword in the rule. Is the motion the same no matter which leg you do it with? Answer - Yes. That is all that is required to make the move illegal.

Is there any other legitimate reason to bring the leg and knee up that high, except to pitch or throw to a base? Answer - No.

Is "the move" a backward off motion? Answer - No. "The move" is clearly up/off first without moving backward. The term "backward off" is written together in the rule. There are no joining words like "and" (backward and off) or "then" (backward then off).

Is there a reason to allow two separate and distinct movements when the two motions are written together without any joining words? Answer - No.

Mr. Evan's reasoning and interpretation support the arguments made above.

Before you start referring to people as stupid, I would look in the mirror first.

Originally posted by jicecone

Your right Rich,

And so we can continue here. After reading the entire thread the point Evans made was,

"Not only is the action illegal, but this is where you get to play mindreader and tell the manager that you believe the pitcher's intent was to deliberately deceive (this time illegally). You are covered in the rule book with the case notes."

Well, I see it as a HTBT to "BELIEVE" it move, otherwise, there was NO balk. ANYONE, that thinks picking the pivot foot up in the manner discussed, is the begining or simulation of a pitch, should'nt be playing the game to begin with, because they are just too dam stupid.

Why am I not allowed to stretch an interpretation? I just read almost 9 pages of the same.

I'm amused!!!