[zm1283]

Originally Posted by dash_riprock

There is nothing in the Rules or the MLBUM that says the pivot foot must be on the ground before the ball comes out of the glove in order for it to be a legal disengagement.

J/R says it is a legal disengagement if the pivot foot hits the ground "without interruption or hesitation and without a movement normally associated with his motion to pitch." This interpretation comes from 8.01(c) - the requirements for stepping and throwing to a base. Notably, 8.01(c) says the step must precede the throw, not some other event like the ball coming out of the glove.

In this example, the pitcher has done nothing that commits him to pitch. He has legally disengaged, but the umpire's judgment is that he has not, but rather executed a jab-step move resulting in a one-base award when he throws it away. There is no way any of his partners are going to step on that.

On the other hand, what if the pitcher had executed the identical move, but faked the throw? There is no way any Major League umpire is going to balk that (except maybe Balkin' Bob). Their judgment would be that the pitcher had legally stepped off.

Can they have it both ways? Sure. It all boils down to umpire judgment. It's a way for the umpires to enforce the 'no cheap bases' rule.

This is exactly my thinking, but dash put it better. No MLB umpire is going to balk him for doing the same thing he did but not throwing.