Besides the fact that it's poor coaching, I see this all the time. I don't allow it as an umpire but I honestly can't find it in the official rule book. My belief is there have to be 8 players in fair territory when the pitch is delivered.

If this is an "illegal" pitch, what is the penalty, if any?

This has been discussed before. I believe every time it comes up, the consensus is ignore it till a coach complains, then enforce it strictly for both teams. The peanalty is not a balk though. It's you tell them to get into fair territory and not allow a pitch until they are.

Summary:
Don't enforce unless there's complaining
If so, enforce strictly
Don't allow a pitch, make them adjust first.

-Josh

Golly,
 

How many times?

Once again, at least once more.

Re: Golly,
 

Maybe what we need is a "pinned" thread for FAQ's?

Or just pin a link to sleazeteam's list of common rules myths.

Fair enough. Sorry if my question is redundant. I found and registered with this site yesterday. I saw nothing in the previous threads that touched on it.

Guidance from Mens League Umpire Training Tool
 

I came across my old reference guide from the Men's League and it points out in rule 4.03 that only the catcher may be in fair territory, which is clear. According to that study guide, however, it says "A first baseman straddling the bag with one foot in foul territory is considered to be in fair territory."

I'm still not sure I buy that one. Isn't it similar to a batter having both feet in the batter's box? Also, it seemed to me that the big leagues made that a point of emphasis a few years ago.

I guess I'll let them straddle the bag in foul territory.

Brings up the question of obstruction, however, which is a judgement call. The runner has the right to the base, while the fielder has the right to block the base while in the act of fielding. I believe the intent, however, would be that the first basemen must leave a path to the base for the runner leading off.

In FED ball, F3 is considered in fair territory as long as one foot is in. In OBR, both feet have to be in. There is no penalty however in OBR, its just a "don't pitch unless your in fair territory".

Mista Bone (more ----)
 

In your original post you asked the penalty:

If for some reason an umpire starts up with less than the associated number of players in fair territory there can be no play and it is one (of three) do overs in the Official Rules of Baseball.

Example:

For some unknown reason when the defense takes the field F9 does not join them.

With a count of 2 balls and 1 strike (or any other count) the umpire relizes that F9 is not on the field.

Play starts from "scratch" and is a "do over" . . . even if outs are or made or runners successfully required base it is ALL a do over from the start of the inning.

As for straddling the base . . . there must be 100 or more threads on umpires boards across the internet covering the issue.

My last post
 

I have been following the posts on this site for a couple of months. I really don't want to comment on anything on here as there are some umpires who feel that anything that has been brought up before should not be brought up again and it is there intent to denigrate anyone who does bring a subject up that has been discussed previously. While I have learned a lot from the site, I don't want to be put down for asking questions. It would be a lot more polite to have a disclaimer explaining that this site is for officials and questions about the rule books (OBR & FED primarily). Local league rules questions should be posed elsewhere. Holier than thou answers are a real pain. Bye!

[Edited by Stripes1950 on Jun 26th, 2005 at 01:09 PM]

Please,
 

Don't let the door hit ya . . .

Re: My last post
 

A pain to the moron who asked the question, yes. And a good laugh for the rest of us.

Re: Re: Golly,
 

Or perhaps the site administrators would see fit to "unlock" the forum search feature. They only locked it in the first place to prevent personal embarrassment from posters who call them on their inconsistencies.

Re: Re: Re: Golly,
 

I second Dave's (implicit) motion. The site could be a valuable research tool, but its limited functionality prevents that.