Jim............
You seemed to have jumped to Carl's old play from "51 Ways to Ruin a Game". If you will note, I did not reference that specific play, but rather, I merely referenced the
concept. I'm not sure if I would agree with Carl in that specific play, but I would agree with Carl in the
concept.
Jim, look again at what I originally wrote:
When all are aware F1 is NOT starting his windup, he mistakenly steps back off the rubber with his nonpivot foot. While many say call that balk, the intent of the rule has not been compromised. I agree with Carl here, that it's something I am not going to see unless immediately accompanied by a pickoff throw, or unless so obvious that the people in Cleveland saw it. It's a technical infraction that is borderline booger pickin in my book. My experience in being alert to the other happenings at the time key me as to whether I call it or not.
In Carl's play, the coach yells out to his pitcher to change pitching positions. IMO, this has drawn attention to him, and now makes him the focus of the people watching from Cleveland. While it's possible I might balk such a pitcher for improperly disengaging, I'd have to weigh other factors. Certainly if R3 were standing on 3rd base, I'd not consider a pickoff move likely, and thus I'd not be apt to balk F1 UNLESS I felt those in Cleveland saw the improper disengagement. That's my choice as an official, or as an overly officious official---depending on how I see the situation. I'm not afraid of taking some heat from the offensive coach if that's what it means. I've learned to handle such situations.
OTH, taking the
concept of overlooking technical infractions where no advantage is gained and those in Cleveland don't see it.................
With R3 only. Ball is live and pitcher is in windup position and appears ready to pitch. As he looks to the plate, B5 has not entered the box, and F2 hasn't yet put on his mask. F1 elects to disengage rubber, but does so by stepping back with his nonpivot foot.
It seems to me that F1 may have just been a little ahead of the action and didn't want to stand on the rubber while others were preparing to continue. He may even have felt the ball was dead at the time even though it wasn't. He has made no attempt to deceive R3 nor to make a pickoff there.
So.......just between you and I, Jim, I'm sure not gonna ring F1 for a balk and send R3 home to DisneyWorld with this freebie of a technical infraction. It is not the spirit and intent of the rule. Furthermore, Jim, in amateur ball I see this type occurrence happen more than one might think. I'll also see a pitcher engaged ready to stretch, but when he looks to the plate (during a live ball situation) the others are not ready. Rather than stepping back off the rubber, he may disengage forward or to the side. I don't balk it.
The decisions of whether or not to enforce
technical infractions are made by the official for the specific play involved and encompass many varying factors. Those are decisions that will be made differently by different officials. Some will overlook more than others. Some will make mistakes by unnecessarily calling infractions that do not violate the intent and spirit of the rule, while the mistakes of others may be in overlooking too much that should not be overlooked. It's a learning curve that will improve (hopefully) with experience of the official. As stated earlier, mistakes will be made along the way---but learn from the mistakes. An official's ability to make the correct decisions in such instances can have a significant impact on his progress as an official.
Just my opinion,
Freix