Originally Posted by fitump56
There is no way that you can define "appearance".
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by David Emerling
Sure there is! If, in the umpire's judgment, the pitcher paused long enough (as if to get signs from the catcher), he satisfies the requirement.
|
Congrats, David, you have well defined the term "appearance" but incorrectly applied it, imo. We have no way of knowing what the true signals are, where they come from, etc. But we do have the judgment that if a pitcher makes certain time and trued movements that we can subjectively call this a "taking signs". As you know, savvy coaches in MFS teach not to "peer" in or bend over, this allows for levels of uncertainty in making the "appearance" decision.
As the level of ball increases in both ability and intelligent play, it can become very problematic to rely on "appearance", best not to rely on anything then. Happily, better plyers don't play with such foolish intentions, eh?
Quote:
In other words, the pitcher steps on the rubber, faces his catcher, then delivers the pitch. Fine!
After all, how do you define a "quick pitch?"
|
"Quick pitching" has never been a difficult call ime. F1's need to respect that Bs have certain leisures in preparing to hit, Ps have certain rythyms, all must dance together. If this rythym is purposefully violated, and in upper levels of ball it isn't often, then we have a QP.
Quote:
What is too quick? How can you categorically determine that the batter is NOT ready? These are all judgment calls.
David Emerling
Memphis, TN
|
They are but not difficult ones. It comes out of the flow of the game, you know this, it is a feel for things. I have never had problems with QPitching, the rythym of the F1-B is natural to ballplayers.
F1s with intellect know that upsetting that rythym is plain dumb. That is because ex-ballplaying umpires call B-Ss using the same rythyms, don't we?