Out of play on 3-1 move (FED)

[David Emerling]

SanDiegoSteve,

I'm glad you made those citations. I'm also glad I brought up this play because clearly, I have some major misconceptions about this.

I guess what we're actually seeing with the 3-1 play is that the pitcher fakes to 3rd, then turns around rapidly to see if he has a play on R1. If not, he does nothing. Supposedly, this is not a balk. (Although a pitcher who turns rapidly toward 1st and makes no throw would be consider to have balked, whether faking a throw or not - true?)

If, on the other hand, he fakes to 3rd, turns around rapidly to see if he has a play on R1, fakes the throw, then it is a balk.

Maybe this analysis revolves the conflict.

Although a pitcher who turns rapidly toward 1st and makes no throw would be consider to have balked, whether faking a throw or not - true?

Hmmm ...

Thanks!

David Emerling
Memphis, TN

[BigUmp56]

Dave:

I believe that you and Steve are discussing two different moves. The move that Steve is talking about, which is covered by the NAPBL is commonly refferred to as the "jab step."


J/R


“Jab" Step (of the pivot foot): In cases of a right-handed pitcher throwing to first, or a left-handed pitcher throwing to third, or any pitcher throwing to second, a pitcher can take a "jab" or "stutter" step with his pivot foot before stepping to the base with his free foot. The motion of the "stutter" step and the resulting step of the free foot must be fluid and continuous; if the two motions are not continuous, there is a balk. Of course, the latter step must bring the free foot at, and nearer to, the pickoff base.

So, on the jab step the pitcher is still considered to be engaged as I understand it and must complete the throw to first. Now what I think your talking about is the "wheel" move where the free foot for a right handed pitcher lands toward third and then the turn is made to first. This would disengage the pitcher and a feign to first would now be legal.


Tim.

[SanDiegoSteve]

You are correct Tim. I misread the NAPBL interpretation. But in FED, he is still considered on his plate on the wheel play.

[David Emerling]

Originally Posted by BigUmp56

Dave:

I believe that you and Steve are discussing two different moves. The move that Steve is talking about, which is covered by the NAPBL is commonly refferred to as the "jab step."


J/R


“Jab" Step (of the pivot foot): In cases of a right-handed pitcher throwing to first, or a left-handed pitcher throwing to third, or any pitcher throwing to second, a pitcher can take a "jab" or "stutter" step with his pivot foot before stepping to the base with his free foot. The motion of the "stutter" step and the resulting step of the free foot must be fluid and continuous; if the two motions are not continuous, there is a balk. Of course, the latter step must bring the free foot at, and nearer to, the pickoff base.

So, on the jab step the pitcher is still considered to be engaged as I understand it and must complete the throw to first. Now what I think your talking about is the "wheel" move where the free foot for a right handed pitcher lands toward third and then the turn is made to first. This would disengage the pitcher and a feign to first would now be legal.


Tim.

I think you're right, Tim.

At first, I thought Steve was citing something that specifically had to do with the 3-1 move. I was thinking, "Dang! I don't ever recall reading that." But now I see that you're correct - his citation is only addressing the "jab step."

So, Tim, do you disagree with the FED ruling as stated in casebook play 6.1.5.

Also, I notice that Steve's citation of FED 6-2-4 SITUATION C does not jive, verbatim, with my 2006 version of that caseplay.

David Emerling
Memphis, TN

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by David Emerling

Also, I notice that Steve's citation of FED 6-2-4 SITUATION C does not jive, verbatim, with my 2006 version of that caseplay.

David,

I was paraphrasing the ruling, I didn't quote it word-for-word.

Here is what it says in my 2005 book (I don't have the 2006):

"He might, while he is on his plate, step toward the occupied third and feint a throw, and then turn to step toward first and throw there with or without disengaging the pitcher's plate. If F1 steps and feints to first, he must first disengage the pitcher's plate or he is guilty of a balk."

[SanDiegoSteve]

Jim Evans says that the pitcher must break contact with the rubber with the pivot foot on the feint to 3rd on the 3rd to 1st move:

"On the "trick 3rd to 1st" move used by the righthander, the umpire should be especially alert for two criteria:
(1)
the pitcher may not break the back plane of the rubber with his free foot before attempting the feint to 3rd; and
(2)
in his feint to 3rd, he must break contact from the rubber with his pivot foot.
Breaking the plane would be a balk in violation of 8.01(a) and failure to break contact would be a balk in violation of 8.01(c)...not a direct step from the rubber ("while touching his plate")."

I don't see that in the rule 8.05(c) Case Book comments. It says you can't feint to third, and in practically the same motion, wheel and throw to first. It prohibits this because it is practically impossible to step directly to first. But it is possible to feint to third, in contact with the rubber, then maintain contact and step and throw to first. Two separate steps directly toward bases, yet not disengaging the runner.

I will do further research and come back later. I am more confused than I was yesterday, that's for sure.

[UmpJM]

Dave (et al),

It is my understanding that in all rules codes other than FED, a pitcher who tries the "fake to 3B & make a move to 1B" must break contact with the rubber on the feint to 3B or he has balked.

However, under FED rules only, a pitcher is allowed to keep his foot in contact with the rubber on the feint to 3B and then pivot and step & throw to 1B and it is NOT a balk.

So, under FED, if the F1 maintains contact & throws the ball out of play on the move to 1B, runners are awarded one base. If the F1 drags his foot off the rubber & then throws out of play on the throw to 1B, runner(s) are awarded 2 bases.

Now I have no idea why the FED folks have chosen to institute this daring "innovation" in the rules - personally, I wonder if the folks responsible for some of the FED rulings have ever actually seen a baseball game - but, it's their rules & I suppose they can make them whatever they want.

JM

[SanDiegoSteve]

According the MLBUM, the pitcher has to break contact before throwing to first, and according to Evans, before feinting to third.

If J/R has something different I'm going to scream!!!

[dddunn3d]

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.

[UmpJM]

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):

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

[David Emerling]

Originally Posted by dddunn3d

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.

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

[David Emerling]

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

[SanDiegoSteve]

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.

[David Emerling]

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

[SanDiegoSteve]

I thought you were bringing this to a conclusion.