[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by GarthB

Mark:

I have forwarded the situation I am addressing to three respected FED clinicans. I've heard back from two so far. One agrees with me that this would simulating his the beginning of his pitching and would be illegal deception. Balk.

A second sort of agrees with you by saying:

Garth:
You are right in that there is no specific penalty givren for taking signs while not in contact with the rubber. Also, the book is very adamant that pitching restrictions begin when the pitcher is in contact with the rubber (it USED to be when he took his signs, but not all pitchers take signs, so that was tough to enforce).

But then he adds:

That being said, I believe that you can negate the put out by essentially claiming that the pitcher “gained advantage through illegal action.” Although there is no specific penalty for the illegal action, he cannot benefit from it either. I would simply state that the rule states that the pitcher shall take signs while in contact with the rubber, and that his pick-off was not valid.

I'll let you know when I hear from the third one.

Garth:

Once again, what NFHS Rule applies? I can't believe a rules interpreter would make such a statement: "You are right in that there is no specific penalty givren for taking signs while not in contact with the rubber. ... That being said, I believe that you can negate the put out by essentially claiming that the pitcher “gained advantage through illegal action.” Although there is no specific penalty for the illegal action, he cannot benefit from it either."

If the action is illegal, what NFHS Rule says it is illegal?

MTD, Sr.