New Balk - or not I'm not sure.

[Kaliix]

The pitcher can lift his foot up enough to clear the rubber and set it down. Obviously the leg has to be up 3"-6" before stepping back. If he brings it up in a manner suggesting that he is lifting his leg up like he would when he is pitching, it's a balk.

Originally posted by Matthew F

I see some grey area here and we also have some varying opinions, so I'm going to play devil's advocate..

The pivot foot must be lifted up (direction) before it goes back (direction), else how would a pitcher get his/her foot out of the hole in front of the rubber to the area behind the rubber?

So... to what degree of lifting the pivot foot do you allow before moving the foot back? 1 inch? 1 foot? Does speed of the disengagement factor in?

[Dave Hensley]

Originally posted by Bfair

This pitcher has done nothing illegal except telegraph that he must step backward with his pivot foot (which I assume he eventually did). It sounds amongst the worst pickoff moves ever made. Are we now to put parameters on how high or how low his pivot foot must rise in order to step backward off the rubber?

Well, yes. In disengaging the rubber, the pitcher is expected to do so with some normalcy. There is an instructional statement in 8.05 Penalty that is relevant to this situation:

Umpires should bear in mind that the purpose of the balk rule is to prevent the pitcher from deliberately deceiving the base runner. If there is doubt in the umpire's mind, the “intent” of the pitcher should govern.

In the situation as given, the pitcher is deliberately simulating a pitching motion with his pivot foot. How is this different from the pitcher who steps off while raising his hands over his head in a simulated windup motion? In both cases, the pitcher is deliberately deceiving the base runner with a BS move. Balk it and nip that s--t in the bud.

[Matthew F]

Originally posted by Dave Hensley

In the situation as given, the pitcher is deliberately simulating a pitching motion with his pivot foot. How is this different from the pitcher who steps off while raising his hands over his head in a simulated windup motion? In both cases, the pitcher is deliberately deceiving the base runner with a BS move. Balk it and nip that s--t in the bud.
[/B]

How is it different? I'll tell you... The pitcher only disengaged the rubber with their pivot foot (i.e. did not simulate a pitch).

I'm not sure how or why a balk should be called on a move expressly allowed in the rules. Granted the move was exaggerated (high and slow - is there a breakpoint on what is too high or too slow?), what other legal movements do we balk???

...a pitcher, coming to the set position, slowly brings his hands together high above his head and slowly brings thems down, then quickly steps towards 1st with their non-pivot foot and throws. Is this a balk since a legal move was performed in an slow, high and exaggerated manner?

I do remember one thing about balks that I was taught years ago and that was, If it fooled you and the runner (thought he was going to deliver a pitch and ended up throwing to first), it was probably a balk. So this may be a case of "having to see it" on my part.

[Kaliix]

Matt,
Here is why a balk should be called. The rules say the pitcher can step backward off the pitchers plate with his pivot foot. The rule does not say that the pitcher can lift his leg up to his chest, simulating a pitching motion, to disengage the rubber.

The pitcher didn't step backward off the pitchers plate, he lifted his leg two feet up in the air and then back.

Therefore he violated the rule and it is a balk.

Originally posted by Matthew F

How is it different? I'll tell you... The pitcher only disengaged the rubber with their pivot foot (i.e. did not simulate a pitch).

I'm not sure how or why a balk should be called on a move expressly allowed in the rules. Granted the move was exaggerated (high and slow - is there a breakpoint on what is too high or too slow?), what other legal movements do we balk???

...a pitcher, coming to the set position, slowly brings his hands together high above his head and slowly brings thems down, then quickly steps towards 1st with their non-pivot foot and throws. Is this a balk since a legal move was performed in an slow, high and exaggerated manner?

I do remember one thing about balks that I was taught years ago and that was, If it fooled you and the runner (thought he was going to deliver a pitch and ended up throwing to first), it was probably a balk. So this may be a case of "having to see it" on my part.
[/B]

[cbfoulds]

Originally posted by Kaliix
Matt,
Here is why a balk should be called. The rules say the pitcher can step backward off the pitchers plate with his pivot foot. The rule does not say that the pitcher can lift his leg up to his chest, simulating a pitching motion, to disengage the rubber.

The pitcher didn't step backward off the pitchers plate, he lifted his leg two feet up in the air and then back.

Therefore he violated the rule and it is a balk.

Remind me: WHICH rule says how high F1 can/can't lift his [pivot] leg when moving it from in front to behind the rubber?

[Kaliix]

Pardon my frustration, but how hard is this to understand?

8.01 (b) says the pitcher may "...step backward off the pitchers plate with his pivot foot."

Any normal definition of a step does not include someone bringing their knee up to meet their chest. That is not a step!

A step is when someone lifts their foot up enough to avoid dragging it on the ground. Maybe even a few extra inches, but no more. Watch anyone take a step and that is what they do.

Therefore, I'll say it again, the pitcher did not step backward off the pitchers plate with his pivot foot he brought it up to his chest first which is not a step backward. It is an exagerated lifting of the leg, followed by a step. That is a balk!

Also, since he lifted his leg up to his chest, he was now not in contact with the pitchers plate. Since he was not in contact and was simulating a pitching motion while not in contact with the pitchers plate,Balk!

Either way.

Originally posted by cbfoulds

Remind me: WHICH rule says how high F1 can/can't lift his [pivot] leg when moving it from in front to behind the rubber?

[LilLeaguer]

Originally posted by 3appleshigh
R1 - Right handed pitcher.

Pitcher in stretch comes to the set position. Looks toward the base runner, (head turn only). Lifts his Pivot foot, straight up in the air as High as he can, (like a lefty pitcher would do with his free foot before deciding home or first base) then steps off and quickly spins to see what runner is doing.

Now I balked this, I said and still believe this particular fact, the pitcher did this action for the sole purpose of decieving the runner. I also believed at the split second, but am waivering now that the move is {"mimicing"} a motion naturally associated with a pitch.

Has anyone else ever seen this, is it a balk? What are your thoughts??

I don't think that the pitcher could have delivered a legal pitch after the pivot foot was lifted, so I don't see how this move mimics a pitch.

-LL

[cbfoulds]

LilLeaguer nailed you, K.

Originally posted by Kaliix
Pardon my frustration, but how hard is this to understand?

8.01 (b) says the pitcher may "...step backward off the pitchers plate with his pivot foot."

Any normal definition of a step does not include someone bringing their knee up to meet their chest. That is not a step!

A step is when someone lifts their foot up enough to avoid dragging it on the ground. Maybe even a few extra inches, but no more. Watch anyone take a step and that is what they do.

Therefore, I'll say it again, the pitcher did not step backward off the pitchers plate with his pivot foot he brought it up to his chest first which is not a step backward. It is an exagerated lifting of the leg, followed by a step. That is a balk!

Well- my Webster's New Collegiate defines a "step" as: an advance or movement made by one removal of the foot ... to advance or receed by raising and moving one foot to another resting place ... any combination of foot movements and body movements constituting a single unit or pattern [i.e.: dance step]..... None of which seems to exclude this "step". There is no definition of "step" in the Rule Book, so I'm afraid that you are just making this one ["normal definition of step"] up.
Ain't no rule says 3-6 inches is OK but 12 [or 18... or 36...] isn't.

originally posted by Kaliix
Also, since he lifted his leg up to his chest, he was now not in contact with the pitchers plate. Since he was not in contact and was simulating a pitching motion while not in contact with the pitchers plate,Balk!

Either way.

What "Pitching motion" was he "simulating" while not in contact w/ the rubber?

SURELY you are not claiming that lifting the PIVOT leg off the rubber was a "simulation" of the pitch while not-in-contact? Now, if he raised his arms/ "wound up" during this [admittedly "exagerated"] step w/ his pivot foot: OK, that's a balk; but it's for starting his delivery and not delivering to the plate. And, oops: the original sitch says nothing about F1 doing this. In fact, from the original post, F1's hands may never have moved from his "set".

As I originally [and now LilLeaguer] posted: lifting the PIVOT foot is kinda hard to make a part of anyone's pitching motion.

Got any actual RULE [from the Book, now - not "definitions" YOU make up] you think this might have violated? 'Cause he DID "step off backwards", and he DID NOT make any motion(s) naturally associated with his pitching delivery. I'll take a case-play cite, or the opinion of recogized or General Authority, but tortured logic and unpublished "normal definitions" that you are using aren't cutting it.

[Matthew F]

Do we also limit the height of "steps" mentioned elsewhere in the rules?

The rules state that a pitcher from the windup, may with his "free" foot, take one step backward and one step forward in delivering the pitch.

So does that mean every pitcher that lifts his "free" foot more than a few inches during a delivery from the windup position would be guilty of balk?!?
I don't think so.

[3appleshigh]

And I must say, I didn't balk it, nor did I think it was a balk at all after viewing it again. I think the first time just caught me off guard. also the senario in the game was very different and I saw the usefulness of the move, and have come full circle.

For a note, the move was done again at bases loaded, 3-2, 2 outs, to see if the runners would start early. And no it didn't work.

[Kaliix]

Answer this question, is raising your leg up to your chest, which means you are raising your leg a good two feet of the ground, a step bacward.

If that is a step backward, you've got no argument from me. You and I both know that ain't so.

There is no height given in your definition or the rule book. So we have to use our common sense. How do people normally step? Ask anyone to take a step backwards. If one out of a thousand lifts their knee up to their waist or higher to step backward, you'd be lucky.

All one thousand people would just lift their knee up enough so that their heel clears the ground by a few inches. Because that is the normal way people step, by convention.

And now your trying to argue that bringing the knee up to the chest is a step backward, when no one steps that way. That is excedingly weak.

The rule states the pitcher must STEP BACKWARDS. Not do the "El Duque"!

Does raising a knee up high, like to your waist or chest, look like a motion associated with a pitch? It doesn't matter which leg it is, it is still a motion associated with a pitch. The only time it wouldn't be, is if a pitcher continually slides steps from the set.

Originally posted by cbfoulds
LilLeaguer nailed you, K.

Well- my Webster's New Collegiate defines a "step" as: an advance or movement made by one removal of the foot ... to advance or receed by raising and moving one foot to another resting place ... any combination of foot movements and body movements constituting a single unit or pattern [i.e.: dance step]..... None of which seems to exclude this "step". There is no definition of "step" in the Rule Book, so I'm afraid that you are just making this one ["normal definition of step"] up.
Ain't no rule says 3-6 inches is OK but 12 [or 18... or 36...] isn't.

What "Pitching motion" was he "simulating" while not in contact w/ the rubber?

SURELY you are not claiming that lifting the PIVOT leg off the rubber was a "simulation" of the pitch while not-in-contact? Now, if he raised his arms/ "wound up" during this [admittedly "exagerated"] step w/ his pivot foot: OK, that's a balk; but it's for starting his delivery and not delivering to the plate. And, oops: the original sitch says nothing about F1 doing this. In fact, from the original post, F1's hands may never have moved from his "set".

As I originally [and now LilLeaguer] posted: lifting the PIVOT foot is kinda hard to make a part of anyone's pitching motion.

Got any actual RULE [from the Book, now - not "definitions" YOU make up] you think this might have violated? 'Cause he DID "step off backwards", and he DID NOT make any motion(s) naturally associated with his pitching delivery. I'll take a case-play cite, or the opinion of recogized or General Authority, but tortured logic and unpublished "normal definitions" that you are using aren't cutting it.

[Matthew F]

Lifting your leg up, isn't a step; It's simply just lifting your leg up!

Lifting your leg up AND placing it on the ground is a step. The question becomes, did the leg movement go forward or backward? Forward, it's a balk; backward, it's legally disengaging the rubber.

That's my take.

[Bfair]

Originally posted by Matthew F
Lifting your leg up, isn't a step; It's simply just lifting your leg up!

Lifting your leg up AND placing it on the ground is a step. The question becomes, did the leg movement go forward or backward? Forward, it's a balk; backward, it's legally disengaging the rubber.

That's my take.

I'm in total agreement with your comments, Matthew......

Apparently some umpires have difficulty understanding what is and what is not part of a pitching motion from the set position. Lifting the pivot foot from the set position is definitlely NOT part of a pitching motion. With that in mind, how can it be claimed that the pitcher is simulating a motion associated with his pitch? Since it's definitely not part of his pitching motion, why should there be any doubt in an umpire's mind as to whether or not it's a balk? WHY should one even apply a standard of pitcher's intent to deceive when in fact the pitcher has done nothing illegal other than, with exaggeration, initiated his step backward?

An analogy here to a pitcher having stepped back off the rubber and then raising his hands to start his windup is a poor analogy since the raising of the hands DOES simulate a motion associated with the pitch.

But let's assume you balk the pitcher.............
Please give us your explanation to the coach as to what rule in the book has been violated..........


Just my opinion,

Freix

[cbfoulds]

Originally posted by Matthew F
Lifting your leg up, isn't a step; It's simply just lifting your leg up!

Lifting your leg up AND placing it on the ground is a step. The question becomes, did the leg movement go forward or backward? Forward, it's a balk; backward, it's legally disengaging the rubber.

That's my take.

Uh-Huh. Until it comes down, it's not "...an advance or movement made by one removal of the foot ... to advance or receed by raising and moving one foot to another resting place....". After it comes down, it's a step. If it lands behind the rubber, it's a "step backwards" [assuming you started on or in front of the rubber]. Rule doesn't say "step normally", nor even "step like 999 out of 1000 random people would step": merely "step backwards". No interpretation, using common sense or otherwise, required.

And:

originally posted by Kalixx
Does raising a knee up high, like to your waist or chest, look like a motion associated with a pitch? It doesn't matter which leg it is, it is still a motion associated with a pitch. [emphasis added]

...that's just silly. Lifting the PIVOT leg is NEVER "associated with ..." ANY form of pitching motion; and the rule does not ask if what F1 does "looks like" a motion naturally associated with the delivery. Pitchers, esp. LHP are allowed all kinds of motions that "look like" the beginning of a pitching delivery, and aren't.
"Naturally associated with ...", in this case, is not the same thing as "capable of fooling a runner [or umpire] into seeing ...". [Although, I have to admit, "fooling the umpire" results in a lot of called balks, many of which are not balks-by-rule, but that's the risk they take if the move is "too good"]
You are reaallly reaching, K.

[Kaliix]

Okay try this.

Jaksa/Roder states, "A pitcher can disengage properly only if he steps his pivot foot backward of and off the pitching rubber. He must do so without interruption or hesitation, and without a movement normally associated with his pitch."

The problem is that the movement of the pivot foot has two directional movements to comply with. Up is one, back is the other. Since J/R states "backward of and off the pitching rubber", both have to be done when disengaging. Not only that, but the two movements are not assigned any particular dominance, so they have to be done equally.

If you look at the motion in terms of degrees, equal directional movements, backward and up, will form a nice 45° angle. For the knee to come up to the chest, both foot and knee are pretty much moving a 90° angle.

That's because you only moving up and not backward of...

See... :-)