I think what you're forgetting is the <b>offense</b> is not a part of the balk rule. What counts in the OBR is what -- <b>and when</b> -- the pitcher "does his thing."

In Appendix 27 of the JEA, Evans has 24 plays. In every play we read the pitcher "pitches through" or "throws anyway." As I pointed out in my first post (and without rechecking the JEA, I might add - grin), it's the difference between a continuing play and continuous play. Quoting Evans:<ul>The pitcher balks stepping back off the rubber, and immediately, <b>in one continuous motion</b> [my emphasis], he wheels and throws the ball into the stands on a pick-off attempt. [Penalty: Ignore the balk.] (A-64)</ul>And again, Evans writes:<ul>The pitcher balks stepping off and then he throws (not pitches) the ball past the catcher all in one continuous motion. [All runners advance. Penalty: Ignore the balk.] (A-65)</ul>Allow me to add material from the Jaksa/Roder:<ul>If there is a balk <b>followed by a pause</b> [my emphasis] in which a pitcher does not try to pitch or throw, the ball becomes dead (but only when the umpire signals such) and every runner is awarded his advance base. (6th ed., p. 87)</ul>The important point made by the J/R is that if the umpire doesn't kill the ball, it's not retroactively dead at the point of the balk. The umpire, by not signalling a dead ball, has "announced" his view that the pitcher's action was "continuous."

It does appear that the evidence from authoritative opinion is mounting more and more on the side of "That's a balk! Time! You -- second base!"

Of course, as you pointed out in your first post, the FED umpire has it easy since the ball is always immediately dead. (BTW: That was also the OBR rule until 1954, which is the first year I stepped onto the field to call balls and strikes.)

What do you say to the runner when the pitcher balks, doesn't immediately throw, realizes he's (a) balked the potential winning run into scoring position, (b) will be taken pout of the game, (c) just lost his chance for the big endoresement deal, ... so, turns and throws the ball into the stands?

You say the same thing to the runner in the original play -- "It was a balk, not a continuous throw, so the ball is dead. Stay at second base."

Bob a general question for you

On a continuous action Balk scenario with CI, why not <b> SIGNAL AND CALL TIME IMMEDIATELY </b>, once either the BR is put out or runners on base are forced out?

By killing the play immediately after the BR is put out, all this other nonsense about balls being thrown out of play, runners passing one another, etc. do not happen. When all runners do not advance at least 1 base on CI, there really is no option, because if the coach wants to accept the play - the play is <b> The Balk </b>

Thanks Bob

Pete Booth

Pete, I think you posted this on the wrong thread. Were you trying to answer one of Jim Porter's "impossible" plays?

There's no option on a balk call. And Bob's point was <b>exactly</b> the point you're making. Unless the action is continuous from balk to pitch/throw, the umpire <b>will</b> call time and enforce the balk penalty by awarding the appropriate bases.

<i> Originally posted by Carl Childress </i>


<b> Pete, I think you posted this on the wrong thread. Were you trying to answer one of Jim Porter's "impossible" plays?

There's no option on a balk call. And Bob's point was <b>exactly</b> the point you're making. Unless the action is continuous from balk to pitch/throw, the umpire <b>will</b> call time and enforce the balk penalty by awarding the appropriate bases. </b>

Papa C my Bad - I was thinking of Jim P's "impossible plays" and wanted to know if the proper mechanic is to kill the play immediately once either the BR or lead runner (who is forced out) is put out, so that all the "stuff" that Jim P mentioned in his "impossible scenario" does not happen.

In other words, why allow all this confusion on the base paths once we know that the conditions of CI are not met and we have a Balk "to boot".

Thanks

Pete Booth

Two similiar balk situations
 

I have already had two odd balk situations this year using OBR rules.

Pitcher balks in the process of picking to first, runner is stealing and heads for second, first baseman throws ball into center field and runner is retired attempting to advance to third.

Runners on first and second, full count, pitcher balks (no stop) while delivering to the plate. Result of the play is ball four, batter/runner goes to first and both runners move up one base due to the walk.

Re: Two similiar balk situations
 

Dani: In the second play the call was dead on.

You (or someone) blew the first. The interpretation is this: If the pitcher balks and immediately throws, if the fielder (F3 in your case) catches the ball, the umpire should stop play at that point. (NAPBL 6.7-4)

Re: Two similiar balk situations
 

Dan,

I concur with Papa C. In fact, all authorities, interpretations, sources, case plays, case books, and official rulings agree.

When the pitcher balks while making a pick-off throw, if the throw is caught, time is called and the balk penalty imposed. Also, as we found out with Rich's play, if the pitcher does not complete the throw, the same conditions apply.

It is only when the pitcher balks and his one and only pick-off throw goes wild that we keep play alive and allow runners the opportunity to achieve bases beyond their awarded base(s) (when the pitch is not delivered, of course.)

<b>Carl Childress (quoted)</b>
<i>I think what you're forgetting is <u>the <b>offense</b> is not a part of the balk rule.</u> What counts in the OBR is what -- <b>and when</b> -- the pitcher "does his thing."</i> (my underline for emphasis)

__________________________________________________ _________


Again, Childress, <b><u>this statement</b> is totally wrong</u> and <u>utterly ludicrous</u> as it applies to OBR (which has what the primary discussion of this thread has concerned itself with). The offense <u>IS</u> part of the balk rule whether you wish to accept it or ignore it. One needs merely to look at the Penalty portion of the rule to realize it. It is the continuing actions of the defense and offense that determine whether a balk will be enforced or ignored. Following your logic, because a pitcher delivers a pitch and is done completing his pitch (defensive portion complete), that would mean an umpire should declare "Time" as you profess? We all agree (hopefully) that this is not done because it also <b>depends upon the continuing action of the offense---which, indeed, is therefore <u>part of the balk rule.</b> </u> All may find it in the rules or NAPBL.

Your statement, however, is effectively true as it applies in Fed since it is an IMMEDIATE dead ball and the acts of the offense have no bearing whatsoever upon the enforcement of the balk.
__________________________________________________ _________

<b>NAPBL 6.7 (quoted): </b>
<i>"... The ball becomes dead when the umpire calls "Time" following the call of balk, and <u>the call of "Time" is to be made only when play stops."</u> (my emphasis)</i>

<b>NAPBL 6.8 Penalty for Balk (quoted):</b>
<i>"Under Official Rule 8.05, the penalty for a balk shall be: The Ball is dead <b><u>(when play stops)</u></b>, and each runner shall advance one base without liability to be put out <b><u>unless</b></u> the batter reaches first on an hit, an error, a base on balls, a hit batter, or otherwise and all other runners advance at least one base, in which case the play proceeds without reference to the balk.

Note that in cases where a pitcher balks and throws wild to a base or home plate, a runner or runners may advance beyond the base to which he is entitled at his own risk."</i>

__________________________________________________ _______


Childress, you wish only to recognize the batter as an operative part of the offense. Please realize that the runner, too, is an opertative part of the offense.

Please note that NAPBL states in both sections that <b>when play stops</b> is when "Time" should be called by the umpire. It does not state to call "Time" in the middle of the play when <u>only the defense</u> has stopped, as professed by Childress (and in direct contradiction to the NAPBL).

<b>Initial play presented by Rich F.: </b>
<i>PLAY: R1, outs irrelevant. <u>R1 breaks for second just as F1 starts a pickoff move</u> to first. Surprised by R1, F1 quickly fakes to first while engaged, but almost immediately turns and throws the ball into center field trying to retire R1 at second base.</i>

<B>SO IN SUMMARY :</B>
---we have a play in progress
---F1 balks (play still in progress)
---F1 turns & throws ball to centerfield (play in progress)
---R1 continues to run (play in progress)
---NAPBL says do not call "Time" until <b>"play stops"</b>
---Childress kills play ? Why??

Now, Childress, what exactly is unclear regarding NAPBL and their statement <b>"when play stops"</b> that you don't understand and therefore must go to JEA to get "authortative opinion" to clarify?

Childress, I can agree with your interpretation in principle only because 99.9% of the time when the balk is declared by the umpire the players cease their action. The coaches don't know the rules that well and a veteran umpire can typically sell his knowledge of the rules on the field without a $$$$ithowse developing. Yes, Childress, even me, believe it or not.

Just my opinion,

Steve
Member
EWS

Steve,

Whew. And I mean, "Whew!"

I gotta hand you one thing - - you're very good at manipulating language around your idea of what is correct.

You went through a lot of trouble for nothing, Steve. You've gotten confused between a balk with play being kept alive because of a <b>batted ball</b> and a balk with play being kept alive because of an <b>overthrow</b>.

The two just aren't the same.

Of all those quotes from the NAPBL that you provided, you seemed to have left out the one <b>definitive</b> quote.

By golly, Steve, I don't see how it can be any clearer. If the fake or feint as posted by Rich is not a clear cut case of a pitcher who, "balked and did not throw the ball," then I don't know what is. The very definition of a fake or feint requires that the throw is not made.

You've got to get over this idea that the offense creates the live ball in this situation. It does not. The offense has absolutely nothing to do with it. The <b>only</b> question is whether the pitcher, who balked on his pick-off throw, threw wild on that pick-off throw.

- If he doesn't complete the throw, time is imposed by the umpire, and the balk penalty enforced.

- If he completes the throw, and the ball is caught, time is imposed by the umpire, and the balk penalty enforced.

Where does the offense figure in to this?

Nonetheless, Jim Evans makes it perfectly clear (if the NAPBL Manual wasn't good enough for you.) His rulings make perfect sense, and your arguments do not. It is that simple a matter.

Pretty straight forward - right from NAPBL
 

Wow. I wasn't expecting this kind of a discussion.

The answer on this play is, "That's a Balk! Time! That's a Balk! You! Second base!"

Reference the NAPBL passage quoted above.

The pitcher did not throw. The action was not continuous. The play didn't throw Carl, although it caught up some other fine umpires.

I posted this play, cause it threw quite a bit of people at the meeting. They focused on the protection of the runner on the wild throw into the next base and the fact that the runner was in jeopardy going into third.

A good discussion, except the pitcher threw a dead ball into center field. A valid discussion if the pitcher had balked and thrown it away without pausing/feinting.

Rich



[Edited by Rich Fronheiser on Mar 1st, 2001 at 04:05 PM]

It's apparent we're going to A2D on this play. On the "dead ball balk" side are Szalapski, Benham, Porter, Willson, Childress, Jenkins, Booth, Evans, and Jaksa/Roder. On the "keep playing" side is Steve. That doesn't mean you're wrong, but it should cause you to do some rethinking. Remember the old saying from Satchel Paige: "If it's you against the world, bet the world."

Perhaps you're pinning too much on how you read the NAPBL. You're quoting it correctly, of course, but you're putting the emphasis in the wrong places. The NAPBL says that time should not be called until the play stops.

I agree!

But there are two plays in Rich's original situation. Play 1 occurs from the time the pitcher balks until he does not continue. (Remember? Rich said "<b>almost</b> immediately." [my emphasis] The authorities say "continue," which is "immediately.") Play 2 occurs when the pitcher wheels and throws the ball away.

It's that PAUSE (spoken of by all authorities, including me -- grin) that signals the end of one play and the start of the next.

For example: Try this play, which I'm borrowing from dani:<ul>R1 stealing. F1 balks but throws through. R1 tries for third and is thrown out. Now you would say that looks like one play. The pitcher never hesitated, the runner never stopped, and yet....</ul><ul>NAPBL 7.3-4: If the balk is followed by a pickoff throw to a base that is <b>caught</b> [original emphasis] by a fielder, call "Time" the moment the fielder catchers the ball. Then enforce the balk.</ul> So even the NAPBL recognizes that though the <b>offense may continue running following a balk</b>, there are events that force the umpire to stop play. One is when a catcher cathers a pitch or a fielder catches a throw. The other is when the pitcher does not pitch or throw through.

For example, Evans speaks of a play where there are two out and R1, with a full count on the batter. The pitcher balks but "pitches through anyway." It's a wild pitch. The batter swings and misses. R1 reaches third, but the B-R is thrown out at first. Evans:<ul>Since the batter did something on the play to become a B-R, he must be included in the umpire's thinking in figuring out this play. [Since the B-R did not advance a base, go back and penalize for the balk: R1 to second, B-R returns with a full count.] (A-64)</ul>I believe if you read through all the JEA plays you would begin to see how the professional authorities, including the NAPBL, define "pitching" or "throwing" through.

I hope this has been of help.

This was way fun!
 

Reading these two pages was fun! I'm fairly wishy washy..so I swung from one side to the other. The finality seems to be the lastest NABPL quote from JP.... If the pitcher balks and doesn't throw..it's over. Which seem to say the fake to 1st is BY DEFN, a no throw dead ball sitch. (Assuming the ump is awake enought to call it.)

My Club Buddy put up the good "fight".. but 6.7 -1 tells me what I needed to know.

And, if I may digress, these two pages were refreshing in showing how intelligent umpires can DEBATE differences of opinion and interpretation and remain civil. As the elder statesman, Carl should lead by example here, and he did most excellently.

Mike B
EWS

<b>[QUOTE]Originally posted by Rich Fronheiser

<i>The pitcher did not throw. The action was not continuous. The play didn't throw Childress (and civilized people <u>without a chip on their shoulder call him "Carl" )</u>.....
......A good discussion, except the pitcher threw a dead ball into center field. A valid discussion if the pitcher had balked and thrown it away without pausing/feinting.</b></i>
__________________________________________________ ________

First of all, Rich, <u>I prefer</u> to call him Carl (as I usually did) and will do so as he has now referred to me as Steve. He was first to <b>choose</b> to refer through use of last name only, and, as stated in past, it is my intent to respond to Carl in same <b>manner</b> he chooses to address me.

Secondly, I agree that F1 threw a dead ball into center <b>if and only if an umpire <u>called time.</u></b> If not, it remains a live ball. It would have been nice if the author of the situation were to have typed "and the ump called time" during the "pause" the pitcher was taking before throwing into center. (grin) No pause, no time called.

Now, the question is whether time <b>should</b> be called. As you described, Rich, F1 turned and "almost immediately" turned and threw to center. Can you understand how some might interpret <b>your</b> statement as without a pause (as J/R would interpret as continuous)? <b>Trick questions</b> are not bad as long as they trick you on the situation, not the vagueness of the wording. <b>Vagueness</b> in the description of the situation is merely playing games---and, when <u>purposely</u> made vague, a relative waste of time to those here to discuss umpiring.
__________________________________________________ _________

<b><i>Jim Porter (quoted):

NAPBL 6.7: "The question arises as to when the umpire is to call "Time" to kill the ball after calling a balk. The following cases should help explain when play is considered "stopped'~ and at what moment the umpire should call "Time" following the call of balk:

1. If the pitcher balks and does not throw the ball, call 'That's a balk; time' and enforce the balk."</b></i>
__________________________________________________ ___________

<b>Jim, you left out the wording of NAPBL 6.7 that says:</b>
<i>"The <b><u>question arises</b></u> as to when an umpire is to call "Time" to kill the ball after calling a balk. The following cases <u>should help explain</u> when a play is considered "stopped" and at what moment the umpire should call "Time" following the call of balk>" </i>

Really, Jim, what <u>question</u> arises when in the situation provided you have a runner advancing <b>BEFORE</b> the balk was committed. If this were any other play would you consider this play as one in progress or stopped? The <u>example</u> prvided (in case you are in question) is good. Why would you be in question, however, if a runner is still advancing" I don't understand. The rule says don't call time until <b>"all play has ceased".</b> I know what that means (without question) and do not have to rely on on authoritative opinion to help me in that determination. <u>I know that if a runner is progressing and he started during a live ball, it is a play that has not yet ceased.</u> Therefore, I do not yet call time. If you have question if a play is occurring, you should rely upon your example case to "help explain".

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Carl Childress

<b>It's apparent we're going to A2D on this play. On the "dead ball balk" side are Szalapski, Benham, Porter, Willson, Childress, Jenkins, Booth, Evans, and Jaksa/Roder. On the "keep playing" side is <B><u>Steve</b></u>. That doesn't mean you're wrong, but it should cause you to do some rethinking. Remember the old saying from Satchel Paige: "If it's you against the world, bet the world."</b>

If it weren't for people willing to disagree, like Adams, Hancock, Franklin, Jefferson, and Washington we might all be sounding a lot more like Warren right now. (banish the thought---grin) I may be independent in thinking at times and certainly not afraid to discuss (and admit when proven wrong), but I am not wrong for logically disagreeing or even questioning when I do not understanding.

I agree with Carl. As I said before, this is a waste of time since it's so nit picky. A good official can sell it either way-------just as the rules, interpretations, opinions can obviously be taken either way.

Just trying to prove a point,
(and BTW, the offense is part of the balk rule)

Steve
Member
EWS

I edited that part, Steve, but not quickly enough.

I don't want to get into personal issues or personalities, but I let a rough afternoon get the best of me.

I didn't intend this as a trick question, really.

That's why I intentionally put in the word "almost". A subtle difference, perhaps. A trick, no.

I hope that this play had people diving into the NAPBL and looking at the interpretations regarding when OBR balk plays should be stopped and should be allowed to continue.

Rich