The Official Forum - Out of play on 3-1 move (FED)

The Official Forum (https://forum.officiating.com/)

- Baseball (https://forum.officiating.com/baseball/)

- - Out of play on 3-1 move (FED) (https://forum.officiating.com/baseball/25751-out-play-3-1-move-fed.html)

Confusing 3-1 move w/"Jab Step"

SanDiegoSteve,

The move NAPBL is mentioning is when the RH F1, in order to make a strong throw, "jabs" the ground with his pivot foot a few inches towards 3B, then makes a step towards 1B with his non-pivot foot and throws. This is not a feint. He must throw with this move or it's a balk.

The feint to 3B involves the non-pivot foot first (stepping towards 3B), then wheeling around to check R1. Once F1 feints to 3B, he is considered to have disengaged, no matter where his feet actually are in relation to the rubber. There is no balk.

Quote:

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

Sorry, I quoted the wrong interpretation here. Dang.

Yes, I know. This was the post I made on page 2 which admitted misinterpreting the situation.

Quote:

Originally Posted by dddunn3d

SanDiegoSteve,

The feint to 3B involves the non-pivot foot first (stepping towards 3B), then wheeling around to check R1. Once F1 feints to 3B, he is considered to have disengaged, no matter where his feet actually are in relation to the rubber. There is no balk.

dddunn3d,

Certainly agree with your comments regarding the "jab step" move.

However, I'm a little confused by your statement quoted above in light of the following language from OBR 8.05(c):

Quote:

8.05(c) ...It is possible, with runners on first and third, for the pitcher to step toward third and not throw, merely to bluff the runner back to third; then seeing the runner on first start for second, turn and step toward and throw to first base. This is legal. However, if, with runners on first and third, the pitcher, while in contact with the rubber, steps toward third and then immediately and in practically the same motion "wheels" and throws to first base, it is obviously an attempt to deceive the runner at first base, and in such a move it is practically impossible to step directly toward first base before the throw to first base, and such a move shall be called a balk. Of course, if the pitcher steps off the rubber and then makes such a move, it is not a balk.

Can you clarify?

JM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dddunn3d

Exactly!

The only thing I would add is that OBR considers it a balk if the pitcher fakes to 3rd while in contact with the rubber -and- maintains contact with the rubber -and- pivots around toward first while still in contact with the rubber. It doesn't matter if he feints or throws in this case. It's a balk by interpretation.

I imagine, the reason OBR considers this a balk is that they view this style of maneuvering as being an all-in-one type of maneuver - which is strictly forbidden. And I understand why they are concerned about this. To be fair to R1, F1 should not be allowed to make a move toward 3rd and, all in one fluid motion, continue making a move toward 1st.

Under OBR, the pitcher cannot make a very token and abbreviated motion toward 3rd as a prelude to throwing toward 1st unless he breaks contact with the rubber.

In any case, if F1 executes the 3-1 move legally, there is not going to be any instance of a one base award should F1 throw the ball out-of-play when when throwing to 1st. He's an infielder and it has nothing to do with whether he stepped BACK off the rubber or not. He's already made a play to 3rd.

I think I'm finally understanding the FED view on this play. They allow the pitcher to execute this maneuver while maintaining contact with the rubber OR while not maintaining contact. Either way is legal.

However, if the pitcher remains in contact with the rubber the pitching regulations apply. If he feints toward 1st ... it's a balk. If he throws the ball into DBT, it's a one base award.

If the pitcher does not remain in contact with the rubber and he feints toward 1st ... legal! If he throws the ball into DBT, it's a two base award.

It think what I've written above is all accurate and brings this to a conclusion.

If I have some element of this incorrect, somebody please correct me.

Thanks!

David Emerling
Memphis, TN

Quote:

Originally Posted by dddunn3d

The feint to 3B involves the non-pivot foot first (stepping towards 3B), then wheeling around to check R1. Once F1 feints to 3B, he is considered to have disengaged, no matter where his feet actually are in relation to the rubber. There is no balk.

I disagree. The pro interps say that the pitcher must break contact, not that the move itself is considered breaking contact. He still has to remove his foot from the rubber. That's why it's written into the rules and their interpretations.

Here is an example of a 3-1 move I have seen that would be illegal under both sets of rules.

You may have to stand-up and act out what I'm describing to fully understand it.

The pitcher steps with his left foot toward 3rd and then pivots around (to the left), on that same foot, toward 1st and throws or feints.

This is illegal under OBR because the pitcher did it "all in one motion."

This is illegal under FED because the pitcher, while still in contact with the rubber, made a move toward a base without preceding with a step in that direction.

Like I said, you'll probably have to act this one out. But I've seen pitchers try this move and I've balked it every time I've seen it ... maybe 3 or 4 times in all the years I've been umpiring.

David Emerling
Memphis, TN

Quote:

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

The pro interps say that the pitcher must break contact, not that the move itself is considered breaking contact. He still has to remove his foot from the rubber. That's why it's written into the rules and their interpretations.

The reason the pitcher has to break contact to perform the 3-1 move (under OBR) is to prevent it from being a continuous, all-in-one maneuver.

I believe this is just the OBR way of defining what criteria they are going to use for determining whether the pitcher executed the motion in one continuous fashion.

That's what they're trying to prevent.

Although this is a somewhat silly play, I present it for the purposes of highlighting what I think are the philosophical differences between OBR and FED on this issue.

Play: R1 and R2. F1 does an "inside move" toward 2nd base and makes no throw while stepping directly toward 2nd. F1's foot remains in contact with the rubber. Noticing R1 far off the bag, F1 then rapidly throws to 1st. The ball is thrown wildly and ends up in DBT.

OBR ruling - Despite the fact that F1's foot was in contact with the rubber when throwing to 1st, the base award is TWO BASES. The pitcher ceased being a pitcher after completing the move toward 2nd.

FED ruling - Because F1's foot was still in contact with the rubber when making the throw to 1st, the base award is ONE BASE. Also, had F1 only faked the throw to 1st, it would have been a balk.

Any opinions on these rulings?

David Emerling
Memphis, TN

I thought you were bringing this to a conclusion.http://smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/36/36_1_42.gif

Quote:

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

I thought you were bringing this to a conclusion.http://smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/36/36_1_42.gif

Help me! I'm a sick person.

Save me from myself! :)

David Emerling
Memphis, TN