I look at it this way. If he steps towards 3rd and does not step off it is a feint as he is still in contact with the rubber. If at that point he spins and does not throw to first, keeping the foot in contact with the ruber, then I have a balk. If he does throw towards first and tosses it into DB area 1 base award.

If he steps towards 3rd and in doing so pulls the foot away from the rubber and then turns and steps towards 1st and does not throw I have nothing. If he throws and it goes into DB area, 2 bases.

The whole point is is the foot actually in CONTACT with the rubber. Someone could bring up a jump spin (reality foot is off rubber, technically it still is) but he is not doing that it is a clear step, not a jumping motion.

Our local interpreter told me that, when pitcher feints to 3B, he disengages. Calling a balk on the "third-to-first" double feint (because it's a feint to 1B from the rubber) is a BS call and not an option.

So, under that interpretation I would have to award 2 bases on an overthrow to 1B after a feint to 3B.

If it's a FED interpreter, show him the case previously mentioned and ask him to explain.

If the pitcher feinting to third is considered to be disengaged, why wouldn't he, by the same token, be considered disengaged if he steps from the rubber toward first, and feints a throw. In this case, he's on the rubber, and it's a balk. So, I think your interpreter is wrong. You can't have it both ways.

If this were the case, all the pro interpretations would not require the pitcher to actually "break contact" before completing the throw to first. Breaking contact does not mean "disengaging," which is only accomplished by stepping backward off the rubber with the pivot foot.

I think you misunderstand.

<b>WHILE</b> making the throw to 3rd, obviously, the pitcher is engaged with the rubber. If the ball should be thrown out-of-play, it would be a one base award.

It is <b>AFTER</b> the pitcher has made the move toward 3rd that he is then considered disengaged.

My point has been that the consideration of whether the pitcher is engaged or disengaged is only pertinent when the pitcher chooses to do something from one of the two legal pitching positions, 1) wind-up or 2) set.

Once he has left one of those positions, for whatever reason, he is no longer a pitcher.

The pitcher fakes toward 3rd <b><i>as a pitcher</i></b>. That maneuver is complete. <b><i>Now he is an infielder.</i></b>.

Of course this was my original personal view. Apparently FED does not see it that way. According to FED, the pitching regulations (regarding engaged or disengaged) still apply even after the pitcher has made a previous pickoff attempt. On the <i>second</i> attempt (i.e. play), he is still considered a pitcher.

FED is making a ruling on the location of the pitcher's pivot foot even though the pitcher never steps BACK off the rubber which is what is <i>actually</i> required for a legal disengagement ... not your foot simply breaking contact with the rubber.

David Emerling
Memphis, TN

David,

I was responding to mbyron's post, not any of yours. But now I must disagree with your use of the word "disengaged" in this case. Simply breaking contact is not disengaged. Not in FED, not in NCAA, not in OBR. That is why the term "break contact" is used, and is required before throwing to 1st base on the play. The pitcher is not necessarily considered off the rubber just because he feints to 3rd. He must actually, physically break contact, or else he will balk if he throws to 1st.

I also disagree with you that once he feints to 3rd from the rubber, he's not a pitcher but an infielder. No, because he did not disengage from the rubber by stepping backward with his pivot foot. That is the only proper disengagement. That is why, if from the rubber, he steps toward 3rd, throws, the ball goes into DBT, that the award is only one base. If he then subsequently breaks contact with the rubber, then he is considered an infielder, but not until.

I probably didn't make myself clear enough.

In my view, there are THREE things that cause a pitcher to become an infielder while in contact with the rubber.

The pitcher becomes a fielder immediately after he ...

1.) Steps <b>BACK</b> off the rubber
2.) Makes a play on a runner. Either a pickoff attempt or a feint.
3.) Legally delivers the ball toward the batter.

So, when I say that the pitcher becomes "disengaged" from the rubber after making a fake to 3rd, that is just my way of say, "He might as <i>well</i> be disengaged," because it has the same effect as stepping BACK off the rubber.

True, it is probably a poor way of saying it.

Again, I acknowledge that FED doesn't see it this way.

Under FED rules, if the pitcher makes a fake toward 3rd, and in the process, breaks contact with the rubber, then turns toward 1st and throws the ball into dead-ball territory, the base award is <b>two</b> bases. This indicates that FED considers a legal disengagement to be something <i>other</i> than stepping straight back.

David Emerling
Memphis, TN

???

THere's a 6.2.4C in my 2006 case book that seems relevant to the play being discussed.

And when you say you have NEVER heard of a balk being called on this move, you mean that the umpire makes no discernment as to whether F1 is in contact with the rubber when making his move toward 1st. Correct?

In other words, it's simply not a balk, one way or the other.

That's how <i>I</i> would prefer to call it.

But, apparently I'm learning that I don't get to make that type of judgment. :)

David Emerling
Memphis, TN

The last tow sentences of teh ruling are relevant to the play being discussed. My quick reading seems to indicate that these two sentences are the same in each year's book.

It's not called because 99.9% of the time F1 comes off the rubber while stepping and feinting toward third.

My guess is that whether F1 comes off the rubber or not when feinting to 3rd has nothing to do with the umpire's decision to call (or <i>not</i> call) a balk when the pitcher feints to 1st.

I'll bet it has <i>everything</i> to do with the simple fact that nobody ever makes that call - one way or the other - notwithstanding the FED casebook examples.

David Emerling
Memphis, TN

And my interpreter is saying that in the remaining .1% we'll ignore the fact that he's still in contact, because you can bet that you're the only one in the ballpark who saw it.

The other thing to bear in mind is: you can't make much of a feint to 3B with your foot still engaged.

Make the expected call.

I had a good one yesterday: feint to 3B, BALK! Why? Well, it was R2 only, and he wasn't stealing... ha!

Step toward FED-landia
 

Feinting requires distance and direction. ONE must throw toward 1B without feinting, unless ONE legally breaks contact with the plate first. A wild throw in this manner is consistent with a one base award (direct throw) or two base award (breaking contact).

A pitcher may legally step and feint to 3B and then turn and step toward 1B in ONE continuous motion while over the pitcher's plate. FED rules allow a pitcher to feint towards F3 after feinting towards F5 without properly disengaging from the pitcher's plate. The pitcher remains the PITCHER and both runners should be aware of this LEGAL attempt to deceive them. A wild throw while engaged or NOT in this manner is only consistent with a ONE base award in FED-landia.

Tee and David,

Yes, mine is from 2005, as I have no 2006 book due to not working HS any longer.

I'm sorry I wasn't specific enough. I am not working HS baseball this season. I am working LL, JR, SR, Big League, Mustang, Bronco, Pony, Colt, Palomino, American Legion, USSSA, and Triple Crown baseball. If I run out of these games I will work MABL, NABA and MSBL adult games too.