FED Windup Question

[harmbu]

I need a rule reference on the play in a FED game:

R1 and R2. F1 is in the windup position. He starts his motion and stops. PU says he can do this and it is not a balk. Is he correct?

[Rich]

Originally Posted by harmbu

I need a rule reference on the play in a FED game:

R1 and R2. F1 is in the windup position. He starts his motion and stops. PU says he can do this and it is not a balk. Is he correct?

Huh?

No. 6-2-4d.

[bob jenkins]

I hope there's more to the story. Either PU didn't have him starting, or the "stop" was just some sort of hesitation during the (eventually) completed delivery that was interpreted differently or something.

[john5396]

Note that in Fed, if the batter either holds up a had to request time or steps out of the box, and that causes the pitcher to stop his delivery (6-42-4-d note), then there is no balk, the umpire should call time and reset the batter and pitcher.

[harmbu]

There is not more to the story. F1 completely stopped his motion and did not complete the pitch. PU specifically told the coach on offense that F1 can do this without penalty of a balk.

[umpjim]

Originally Posted by harmbu

There is not more to the story. F1 completely stopped his motion and did not complete the pitch. PU specifically told the coach on offense that F1 can do this without penalty of a balk.

Without runners this would be true although some would argue only in FED that it would be penalized with a ball. With runners this is a balk. F1 probably realized he shouldn't wind up in that runner config and stopped. Was no one yelling step off?

[ilyazhito]

Without runners, the action would be an illegal pitch in NFHS, because the pitcher failed to complete his delivery upon beginning it. In OBR, this would be nothing without runners, but I would tell the pitcher not to do this, because it would be confusing to the batter. With runners, the plate umpire in the OP is incorrect, and stopping a pitch is a balk.

I had a related situation as HP in a high school game with runners on 2B and 3B where the pitcher failed to come set when he threw a pitch that was fouled off. I called a balk, and awarded the runner on 3B home, and advanced the runner to 2B. My partner tried to talk me out of a balk, by saying that the pitcher is allowed to not come set with a runner on 3B. I told him that the configuration of runners on the bases is irrelevant for the enforcement of the balk rule. Because the pitcher was in the set position, and failed to come set, I called a balk.

[ilyazhito]

Originally Posted by umpjim

Without runners this would be true although some would argue only in FED that it would be penalized with a ball. With runners this is a balk. F1 probably realized he shouldn't wind up in that runner config and stopped. Was no one yelling step off?

For the pitcher, it's a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation. If he hears "Step off!" and does so after he starts his pitching motion, he will balk. Even if he stops his pitching motion to step off, it is still a balk, because he failed to complete his pitching motion. It's unfortunate, but the only legal option that he had was to continue the pitch, and hope that the catcher can throw out R2 trying for 3rd (best case) or that the batter fouls the ball off.

[umpjim]

Originally Posted by ilyazhito

Without runners, the action would be an illegal pitch in NFHS, because the pitcher failed to complete his delivery upon beginning it. In OBR, this would be nothing without runners, but I would tell the pitcher not to do this, because it would be confusing to the batter. With runners, the plate umpire in the OP is incorrect, and stopping a pitch is a balk.

I had a related situation as HP in a high school game with runners on 2B and 3B where the pitcher failed to come set when he threw a pitch that was fouled off. I called a balk, and awarded the runner on 3B home, and advanced the runner to 2B. My partner tried to talk me out of a balk, by saying that the pitcher is allowed to not come set with a runner on 3B. I told him that the configuration of runners on the bases is irrelevant for the enforcement of the balk rule. Because the pitcher was in the set position, and failed to come set, I called a balk.

So you are the guy that would argue that. But failing to complete the pitch is not addressed in the rule with no runners on. There is a blanket penalty you could use but most of us wouldn’t. In OBR do not warn the pitcher for confusing the batter. The batter knows what happened.

[Matt]

Originally Posted by ilyazhito

Without runners, the action would be an illegal pitch in NFHS, because the pitcher failed to complete his delivery upon beginning it.

No, it's not. This is covered under 6-2-4d (illegal actions with runners on,) not 6-2-1 (illegal actions.)

There was an idiot Facebook umpire (redundant, I know) that was insisting that the verbage in 6-1-2 made it an illegal pitch. I pointed out that 6-1-3 has no such wording, and thus to follow his logic, it would only be an illegal pitch in the windup and not the set.