Balk ends NCAA game

[cmckenna]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by GarthB
[B]

Originally posted by Bfair
penal balks

They have medications for that now

(just thought this post needed a little humor. I crawl under my rock again.)

[Dave Hensley]

Originally posted by Bfair
While Yeast may have emphasized the need for officials to assure pitchers come to a complete stop, I doubt if he wanted his directive to mean situations where no advantage could be gained (such as perhaps a pitcher throwing from the set position with no runners on base).

Yeast would not need to concern himself with whether a no-stop balk should or shouldn't be called with no runners on base; there is an approved ruling in the NCAA rules that says the pitcher need not come to a complete and discernible stop with no runners on base.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by Bfair
So here we are in the NFL with 2 seconds left in the game and the offense trailing by 5 with the ball at the 15 yard line. Wideout is split wide left with the defender ready to block his release off the line.

The snap occurs, the defensive line stunts, and the offense makes a quick trap off the right guard with the runner breaking toward the right sideline and scoring to win the game.

But wait, there's a flag on the play !!!!!!!!
It seems there was a holding call made against the wideout over on near the left sideline !!!!!

Good call by rules?????????????
Good call by a veteran official?????????
You make the call............

********

It seems we have a similar incident here..........

Nope, a similar incident in the NFL would be a false start or an offside on a lineman at the beginning of the play. That's a technical-type foul similar to the balk that was called. It's also a technical-type foul that has to be called in football, no matter when it occurs.

Good call by the rules?--Yup!
Good call by an NFL veterano?--Yup!

Apples and oranges again.

[whatgameyouwatchinblue]

First off I agree with the balk.

What is funny to me is that there are people on here

jumping on the band wagon to call it as it is suppose to be

called.

Where as at the start of the season i was called a OOO for

calling a balk, by rule.

Garth B., DG which way should it be?
http://www.officialforum.com/showthr...0&pagenumber=1

[LDUB]

Your situation is different. It was a Federation game, and you balked the guy for rolling his glove. Rolling the glove, though illegal, is an accepted practice, and overlooked by some umpires.

That is very different than a no stop balk, after Yeast says to make the call no matter what the situation is.

[GarthB]

Originally posted by LDUB
Your situation is different. It was a Federation game, and you balked the guy for rolling his glove. Rolling the glove, though illegal, is an accepted practice, and overlooked by some umpires.

That is very different than a no stop balk, after Yeast says to make the call no matter what the situation is.

Ditto

[David B]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Dave Hensley

Originally posted by David B

What does it matter? It would have been the same result if he had called the balk on Ball 1, Ball 2, or Ball 3.

No one is talking about the final result. I'm talking about that if as an official you are going to call a picky technical balk then it should have been called on the first instance.

Why wait for two balks that you don't call and then call it on the third.

I don't know Mr. Yeast, but I would think that he as I cringed when he saw this call.

I read what the umpire in chief said in the paper, and it was a simple rule quote to back his partner.

The look on his face when he saw the balk called made all the difference.

Then U2 the UIC got stuck having to explain it to the coach. What would you expect him to say, he missed the call?

No by rule it was a good call. But as far as the game, it was a poor call in a very very good baseball game.

Thanks
David

[Carl Childress]

Originally posted by PeteBooth
Now we have a balk called on an intentional base on balls. Perhaps the rule will change to the FED ruling as early as next season.

IMO it had nothing to do with Gonads, but some umpire with a huge ego wanting to make the BIG call.

Pete Booth

Pete:

Thanks for bringing this thread to my attention. As I told you in my email, I would post my opinion.

I've done that. It appears tomorrow on the paid site.

But it's a free article, so anyone can read it.

Two reasons: The "opinion" is about 1800 words. It will read much better in magazine format than here at The Forum.

Second, I just wanted some people to stop by to see what they're missing over there.

Let me know what you think.

[GarthB]

Looks like Pete brought in the big gun.

[DG]

Originally posted by whatgameyouwatchinblue
First off I agree with the balk.

What is funny to me is that there are people on here

jumping on the band wagon to call it as it is suppose to be

called.

Where as at the start of the season i was called a OOO for

calling a balk, by rule.

Garth B., DG which way should it be?
http://www.officialforum.com/showthr...0&pagenumber=1

I saw the replay. I would not have called a balk.

[Rich]

Originally posted by GarthB
Looks like Pete brought in the big gun.

1800 words?

I saw the replay of the balk and there's no doubt that the pitcher bounced on the pitch. I'll be interested in your take, but I'd rather hear Yeast's -- when he's not talking into a microphone.

Tonight I went to a college summer league game in Madison that ended in the bottom of the ninth inning on a passed ball during an intentional walk. Weren't too many of the 6349 fans left in the park by this time (the game went 3:07), but I'm glad I stayed to see this.

[GarthB]

Originally posted by Rich Fronheiser

1800 words?

I saw the replay of the balk and there's no doubt that the pitcher bounced on the pitch. I'll be interested in your take, but I'd rather hear Yeast's -- when he's not talking into a microphone.

If you've read 51 Ways to Ruin a Game, you, most likely, have seen his take, in fewer words. Get ready to be proven wrong, again.

[Rich]

Originally posted by GarthB

If you've read 51 Ways to Ruin a Game, you, most likely, have seen his take, in fewer words. Get ready to be proven wrong, again.

Proven? Please.

[Bfair]

Originally posted by LDUB

There was R1 and the balk was called by U3 who was in C. The batter hit the ball, which was caught by F7.

Hmmmm........sounds like there was potential of an advantage to be gained over a possibility of R1 stealing.......

In the game under discussion, there's little chance R3 was stealing home or R1 stealing 1B (especially with the pitch being ball four of an intentional walk which would have forced R1 to 2B).

Sounds like the official in the example used by Yeast understood advantage/disadvantage of the technical rule.


Just a point,

Freix

[Bfair]

Originally posted by mcrowder
bfair - your football example doesn't apply at all. That call is not likely made at any point during the game, so not making it at the end of the game would be normal.

Change it so that it's the defender hitting the WR more than 5 yards downfield on a pass - a call that is made all game. Do you want them to NOT make that call on the final play of the game? I do, and I hope everyone does. Timing should not matter - if you're going to make the call in the 1st inning, make it in the last.

I believe you are incorrect.
Officials would make that call if it had potential impact within the game.

My same example but the runner breaks toward the left sideline............and the holding infraction at the left sideline IS CALLED.

Good call??????? Absolutely !!!!!!!

The difference----advantage gained in one instance vs. no advantage gained in the other.
The official understands advantage/disadvantage.

The comparison to an offsides penalty is moreso a comparison to the dropped ball off the rubber. When it's obvious it's hard to ignore. There is also advantage to be gained when a player lines up offside.

Just a point,

Freix





[Edited by Bfair on Jun 14th, 2005 at 05:02 AM]