Not if his "throw" simulates a pitch.

In that case he is in violation of 8.05 (g)...not to mention that action would also fit the defintion of an Illegal Pitch as stated in rule 2.00.

Sigh,

OK

Why the heavy sigh, Dave? This has been the ML interpretation for as long as I can remember, and I've been doing this since 1972.

Tell you what, I'll be seeing one of the top ML rule gurus in the country in a couple of weeks. If he has anything different on this, I'll send you the funds for a 12 pack.

Re: Hold up. . .
 

I messed up, I forgot he stepped off when I put that in.

I didn't miss that one, I cited rule 2.00 and the definition of an illegal pitch in my previous post.

Who is the Guru?

Newcastle Ale.

If your source backs up the popular decision and explains why rule 2.00 and the balk rule mentioned supercedes 8.01e, I will anabashedly and unequivocally support your, and everyone else,it seems,your take on this play.

Dave
****

Yes I agree he did step off.

Not necessarily. It could also be an illegal pitch. Read rule 2.00.

An ILLEGAL PITCH is (1) a pitch delivered to the batter when the pitcher does not have his pivot foot in contact with the pitcher's plate; ... An illegal pitch when runners are on base is a balk.

You are forgetting that it is able to balk while you are off of the rubber. Rules 8.05 (g) and (i) are violations by F1, while not in contact with the pitcher's plate, which result in a balk.

Why do you keep refering to 8.01 (e). This rule has nothing to do with balks. It is about throws by the pitcher, which go into dead ball territory.

8.01
(e) If the pitcher removes his pivot foot from contact with the pitcher's plate by stepping backward with that foot, he thereby becomes an infielder and if he makes a wild throw from that position, it shall be considered the same as a wild throw by any other infielder. The pitcher, while off the rubber, may throw to any base. If he makes a wild throw, such throw is the throw of an infielder and what follows is governed by the rules covering a ball thrown by a fielder.

Could you pleas tell me why this would supersede any balk rule?

Throwing the ball wild has nothing to do with it. 8.01e says something like, when he steps back off the rubber, he is just like an infielder. It is then stipulated that IF the ball is thrown wild...... etc. What if the ball isn't thrown wild? To the plate, to a base, to the center fielder, perhaps? It is still considered a throw, by Rule.

Ok, I know I'm on the fringes here but, this is getting to be fun.

Isn't there somewhere in the BOOK that states the the purpose of the Balk rule is to prevent the pitcher from DELIBERATELY deceiving the BASE RUNNER.

Hmmm, What does a runner do when the Pitcher steps back off the mound? Yep, he goes back to the bag. Stepping off like that is not deceiving the base runner. It might, however, although I doubt it, deceive the Batter, catcher and Umpire.

Garth, if you convince me, with the help of your Guru, that I am perhaps, just a little off base here (No pun intended) What libation do you prefer? This is sorta like a bet, isn't it?

I haven't been on these boards for quite some time. It's still fun.

Dave
****

I meant, "Back off the RUBBER.

I think the only thing Francona was arguing is that it appears the balk was not called immediately. The home plate umpire did not call it. I think it might have caught them off guard as you just do not see that, especially from major league players.

It is possible the runner on 3rd (Matsui) broke some to home and Mendoza stepped off and threw home to "make a play" but replays did not show that one way or the other.

But even if he broke he didn't actually go so it's still a balk. See my earlier post where I quoted the MLBUM.

A balk, by definition, is "an illegal act by the pitcher with a runner or runners on base, entitling all runners to advance one base." At the end of 8.05, it does state that the purpose of the balk rule is to "prevent the pitcher from deliberately deceiving the base runner."

The rules, however, go on to list those things that are considered attempts to deceive the runner and those illegal acts are balks.

If you stand on or astride the rubber without the ball, it is a balk. If you come set with your foot off the rubber (like Octavio Dotel did earlier in the year to balk in the winning run from third) it is a balk. The point is that there are ways to balk without being on the rubber.

The rules say that a player in the windup may "disengage the rubber (if he does he must drop his hand to his sides)." It doesn't specifically say it about the set position, but probably should. Otherwise you are either simulating a your pitching motion while not in contact with the pitching rubber or you delivered an illegal pitch as you threw home without being in contact with the rubber.

I Tivo'ed the game and went back and watched Mendoza's balk and he never dropped his hands after stepping off. He just threw like he was pitching to the plate (albeit with no leg kick). The fact that he "stayed set" and then threw home, made it look like a pitch. I think that fact, more than anything else, caused a balk to be called.

If he had dropped his hands to his sides, Francona likely would have had an argument.

Kallix, F1 does not have to separate his hands before throwing home as a fielder. He can legally step off and throw home to retire a stealing R3 without separating his hands. The rule you cite is intended to prevent the situation where F1 steps off, fails to separate his hands, steps back on, and pitches. This is a quick pitch. In other words the hands must separate before he pitches again, not before he throws.

Seems to me that Jim Joyce made a straightforward application of 8.05g. Mendoza stepped off and pitched. The motion was the same. You could try (w/ Francona) to make the case that he's allowed to throw to any base when not in contact, but his motion was a pitching motion and he had no reason to throw to home (a reason is not required by rule, but it would have helped Francona make the case that he was throwing home rather than pitching).

I liked the call. I would guess that Mendoza got stuck between doing two things: stepping off to freeze the runners (he was worried about R1 stealing), and pitching. Alas, he did both.

It means that he is just like an infielder for the purpose of baserunning awards.

If it isn't thrown wild, then this rule does not come into play. Just because F1 steps off the rubber does not mean he can not make a pitch. Read the definition of a pitch.

A PITCH is a ball delivered to the batter by the pitcher. All other deliveries of the ball by one player to another are thrown balls.

It says nothing about F1 being in contact with his plate. Therefore he can deliver a (illegal) pitch to the batter while off the plate.

Yes it does say that the intent of the rule is to prevent the pitcher deliberatley deceiving the runner, but there are some balks where he does not even decieve anyone.

Think about 8.05 (k) and (l). K deals with when F1 drops the ball while on the rubber. Now did he really decieve anyone? No, the runners would just return to there bases. But is it a balk? Yes. Same thing with L. L is about when an intentional walk is being given, if F2 is out of his box when the ball is pitched, it is a balk. Now F2 being an extra step to the side did not decieve the runner, but it is still a balk.

.

Yes you are correct, but I understand what Kalix means. Here is a play, F1 is in the set position, he then steps off, but keeps his hands and free foot in the same spots. He then procedes to stand in this position for several seconds. If the pitcher wants to throw home from the set, he must step off and do it immedieatly, or step off and drop his hands, and then he many throw when ever he wants.

If F1 steps off and holds his position, he is decieving the offense that he is still in contact with the plate. If F1 steps back and throws home immedieatly, no balk. If he steps back, waits 4 seconds and then decides to throw home, it is a balk.