I thought I knew this

[Jake80]

I thought I had this rule interpretation and terminology correct but was questioned about it so I am going to ask.

1. R1. Right handed pitcher comes set after the stretch. He hops in the air and while in the air turns so when he lands his pivot foot is behind the rubber and pointing toward home and nonpivot toward first base. While he was in the air he seperated his hands and landed with right arm back ready to throw. He never released the ball and I called a balk. Coach argues that this is a legal disengangement. I have always thought that the step must be directly back and the pivot foot must land before the hands seperate to be a legal disengagement before faking a throw to first. Is this correct?

2. I referred to the above move as a jump turn. Coache's idea of a jump turn is a hop off the rubber with the pivot foot landing in front of the rubber and the non-pivot foot behind the rubber. Is my terminology correct? Thanks for any feedback.

[largeone59]

I think you got this one right. A jump turn is considered a move from the rubber. Since he broke his hands before he "disengaged", then it is considered from the rubber.

[UmpJM]

Jake80,

1. The "in contact" pitcher has feinted to 1B prior to completing a legal disengage. He has balked under 8.05(b). Good call.

2. I've always heard this referred to as a "jump spin" move, but "jump turn" sounds fine to me. When executed properly, the pivot foot does in fact normally land in front of the rubber. I don't think it would be illegal (i.e. a balk) if the pivot foot landed behind the rubber as long as the "free" foot gained "distance and direction" toward 1B. However, this is considered a move "from the rubber", so if the move is to 1B, a throw is required. Landing the pivot foot behind the rubber does not make this a legal disengage.

JM

[cowbyfan1]

I agree, in front of the rubber or behind, if I see a jump turn or jump spin he better throw. If it is a step then turn he doesn't. I don't get overly uptight about when the hand seperation is on this move, as long as he does not throw until after he lands. Good call.

[Matthew F]

I was taught that with any "jump" turn to 1st, the pitcher should be considered in contact with the rubber (i.e. must throw and a ball out of play would be awarded one base).

I would also like to know if this correct? Exceptions?

[UmpJM]

Matthew F.,

That is correct. Both the "jump spin" and "jab step" are considered moves "from the rubber". If the move is made to 1B, there must be a throw and it must be to 1B (as opposed to an F3 who is not close enough to 1B to even attempt a play). If the pickoff throw goes out of play, any runners are awarded one base.

The only "exception" (really more of a "different case" than an "exception" in my mind) I can think of would be if the fielder receiving the throw did not "handle" the throw and, in his attempt to retrieve it, applied "additional impetus" to the ball which caused it to go out of play, the award would be two bases instead of one.

JM

[chris s]

Originally posted by CoachJM
Matthew F.,

That is correct. Both the "jump spin" and "jab step" are considered moves "from the rubber". If the move is made to 1B, there must be a throw and it must be to 1B (as opposed to an F3 who is not close enough to 1B to even attempt a play). If the pickoff throw goes out of play, any runners are awarded one base.

The only "exception" (really more of a "different case" than an "exception" in my mind) I can think of would be if the fielder receiving the throw did not "handle" the throw and, in his attempt to retrieve it, applied "additional impetus" to the ball which caused it to go out of play, the award would be two bases instead of one.

JM

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I am not agreeing with your exception here. You have 1 play, a throw from the rubber, 1 base. I guess if the F3 is a freaking retard and bobbles the ball, carries it to the fence and throws it over, maybe ya can award 2 bases. Food for thought, hope I never see any sh!! like that........

[UmpJM]

chris s.,

Let me offer an example. Let's say the F1 makes a good "jump spin" move to 1B and throws. The throw is a little offline and the F3 gets his glove on it, but the ball spins away. In his haste to retrieve it, the F3 inadvertently kicks the ball and it winds up in the 1B dugout. In the umpire's judgement the ball would have remained in play absent the kick.

In this situation, the proper award is two bases from TOKick. So, as I said above, this really isn't an "exception" to "one from the rubber" but really a different case. However, it could happen after a throw from the rubber.

Now, you hope you never see it. Actually, it's much more important that a defensive coach never see it - this sort of thing can take years off his life.

JM

[chris s]

Originally posted by CoachJM
chris s.,

Let me offer an example. Let's say the F1 makes a good "jump spin" move to 1B and throws. The throw is a little offline and the F3 gets his glove on it, but the ball spins away. In his haste to retrieve it, the F3 inadvertently kicks the ball and it winds up in the 1B dugout. In the umpire's judgement the ball would have remained in play absent the kick.

In this situation, the proper award is two bases from TOKick. So, as I said above, this really isn't an "exception" to "one from the rubber" but really a different case. However, it could happen after a throw from the rubber.

Now, you hope you never see it. Actually, it's much more important that a defensive coach never see it - this sort of thing can take years off his life.

JM

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~

Coach, I fully understand what you are getting at. Basically you are having a subsequent play....I am having trouble with finding the interp on this, I mean you got a good sit here, my prob is you got a TOP play. Kid is on the rubber, throws to F#, he boots it, whatever, I only got 1 base.The point is, F3 is still fielding original throw, now say he trys to nauil a guy and we have a subsequent throw, now we are looking 2 sacks

[UmpJM]

chris s.,

Having reread J/R on the subject, I can only say that you are correct and I am wrong! Well, sorta anyway. According to J/R the award is TWO bases, but it is from TOP, not TOK/deflection.

"A subsequent push of a pitch or in-contact throw occurs when such pitch or throw is errant, but would have remained on the playing field, and a fielder subsequently pushes (kicks, deflects, etc.) the ball (itself) into DBT or the ball becomes lodged due to the push or deflection. Each runner is awarded two bases beyond his TOP base."

Thanks for making me reread this.

JM

[chris s]

Originally posted by CoachJM
chris s.,

Having reread J/R on the subject, I can only say that you are correct and I am wrong! Well, sorta anyway. According to J/R the award is TWO bases, but it is from TOP, not TOK/deflection.

Thanks for making me reread this.

JM

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~




defining momemt.......
coach, been at this almost 13 seasons, started with the little guys, you see all this stuff there.I gues you and J?R are refering to a subsequent action, I'm not buying into a throw from the rubber(booted out of play) is considered another play, true another throw is gonna be considered another plsay, yhus 2 sacke TOP........but mishandle and we awrad 2???

[UmpJM]

chris s.,

Perhaps I'm misunderstanding you; perhaps this would be a good time for a cup of coffee.

But, I certainly wouldn't expect you to take my word on this - after all, I'm just a coach. And whereas you've been "doing this" for thirteen years, I've only been doing this for 11 years.

Tell you what? Why don't you click on the link below and read some of the stuff there. If you're still not convinced that this is the proper ruling on the situation I described (BTW, it IS), let me know and I'll see if I can convince you.

http://www.rulesofbaseball.com

JM

[chris s]

Originally posted by CoachJM
chris s.,

Perhaps I'm misunderstanding you; perhaps this would be a good time for a cup of coffee.

But, I certainly wouldn't expect you to take my word on this - after all, I'm just a coach. And whereas you've been "doing this" for thirteen years, I've only been doing this for 11 years.

Tell you what? Why don't you click on the link below and read some of the stuff there. If you're still not convinced that this is the proper ruling on the situation I described (BTW, it IS), let me know and I'll see if I can convince you.

http://www.rulesofbaseball.com

JM

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~
Thanks for the link, I've been away for awhile, JR was not here back a few months. By not any way hammering you, your points arte well taken and I am not trying to hammer on you, just figgering it out......cheers coach!!!

[UmpJM]

chris s.,

No problem. Here's the rule:

"7.05
Each runner including the batter runner may, without liability to be put out, advance_ ...(h) One base, if a ball, pitched to the batter, or thrown by the pitcher from his position on the pitcher's plate to a base to catch a runner, goes into a stand or a bench, or over or through a field fence or backstop. The ball is dead; APPROVED RULING: When a wild pitch or passed ball goes through or by the catcher, or deflects off the catcher, and goes directly into the dugout, stands, above the break, or any area where the ball is dead, the awarding of bases shall be one base. One base shall also be awarded if the pitcher while in contact with the rubber, throws to a base, and the throw goes directly into the stands or into any area where the ball is dead. If, however, the pitched or thrown ball goes through or by the catcher or through the fielder, and remains on the playing field, and is subsequently kicked or deflected into the dugout, stands or other area where the ball is dead, the awarding of bases shall be two bases from position of runners at the time of the pitch or throw."

I had forgotten that the "Approved Ruling" clarifying my assertion was included in the text of the rule. I should have just cited the text of the rule rather than a "secondary source" in the first place.

Now, I've got a couple of questions for you (really for any of the umpires on the board).

As you point out, the "exception" I offered in response to Matthew F.'s question doesn't happen very often. Frankly, I can't remember ever witnessing such a "play" in any game I've ever seen. But, let's say it did happen (it certainly could happen).

If I, as the offensive manager, were to appeal your award of 2B for my R1 as insufficient under the rule, what would you do?

If I requested one minute to go get my rulebook from the dugout so that I could show you the rule I thought was being misapplied, would you grant permission?

If you found my appeal unpersuasive and denied my request to reference the rulebook, would you look at a rulebook if I informed you I was protesting based on my belief that you had misapplied the rule?

Now I'm sure that many of the umpires who frequent this board would have ruled correctly in the first place. But I'm guessing that many of you would have ruled as chris s. suggested.

So, be honest. If you didn't know the proper rule on the "exception" I posed, answer the questions. I'm interested in your answers.

JM



JM

[chris s]

Originally posted by CoachJM
chris s.,

No problem. Here's the rule:

I had forgotten that the "Approved Ruling" clarifying my assertion was included in the text of the rule. I should have just cited the text of the rule rather than a "secondary source" in the first place.

Now, I've got a couple of questions for you (really for any of the umpires on the board).

As you point out, the "exception" I offered in response to Matthew F.'s question doesn't happen very often. Frankly, I can't remember ever witnessing such a "play" in any game I've ever seen. But, let's say it did happen (it certainly could happen).

If I, as the offensive manager, were to appeal your award of 2B for my R1 as insufficient under the rule, what would you do?

If I requested one minute to go get my rulebook from the dugout so that I could show you the rule I thought was being misapplied, would you grant permission?

If you found my appeal unpersuasive and denied my request to reference the rulebook, would you look at a rulebook if I informed you I was protesting based on my belief that you had misapplied the rule?

Now I'm sure that many of the umpires who frequent this board would have ruled correctly in the first place. But I'm guessing that many of you would have ruled as chris s. suggested.

So, be honest. If you didn't know the proper rule on the "exception" I posed, answer the questions. I'm interested in your answers.

JM



JM

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~


Jm, as I said, been away for a while.I am a rule book guru, When did obr add the "kicked, deflected?" Or is this this a J/R interp...that is cool, but where I am at.......J/R evans ....Harry they get snubbed, pathetic cuz I agree with lots of thier sits....but this one, unles we got F3 making another play, not just booting it, I got one sack. My big thing......subsequent play