Balk, Balk Yells the Coach!!!

[Gre144]

I hope you guys gave me the right information because I used it to not call a balk in the following two situations.

Situation 1) R1 on first. F1 while on the mound throws the ball to F3 who is standing in his normal F3 position not near the bag and catches the ball in that exact same position without moving towards the bag.

Situation 2) R2 on second. F1 throws the ball to F6 who is standing in his normal F6 position not near the bag and catches the ball in that exact same position without moving towards the bag.

The varsity coach screams at me both times saying that the pitcher must step towards the bag. I said that he has to step at a 45 degree angle between the two bags which gives the pitcher the leeway to step halfway between any bag.

Did I make the right call? I would have called a balk in both situations before discussing them on a thread in this chat room. But after getting the opinion of many umpires, I canged my view on the definition of "stepping towards a bag" allowing the pitcher to step halfway between any two bags.

Your help is always appreciated.

Greg

[Edited by Gre144 on Jul 9th, 2001 at 05:20 PM]

[Tim C]

I am challenged by your "descriptions" so I'll identify them as I think they happened. Please correct me if I have missed your point.

1)R1 -- F1 throws to F3 who is "not near" the base. I picture this as a balk. If you are playing OBR it is definitely a balk UNLESS F3 was moving towards the base in an attempt to make a play (The Boobie Valentine play). The way I read your post F3 would have been somehwere else BUT near the bag. Balk to me.

2) R2 -- since it is impossible to balk to second not calling a balk seems perfectly correct. Since no throw at all is required to second in this situation I cannot picture anything wrong with what was done.

I guess what I don't see in your post is a reference to "direction over distance" -- there is no requirement of reference in the rules to having a 45* angle involved.

Again, I could be wrong on BOTH these if I have misread or misapplied your plays.

[Gre144]

Originally posted by Tim C
I am challenged by your "descriptions" so I'll identify them as I think they happened. Please correct me if I have missed your point.

1)R1 -- F1 throws to F3 who is "not near" the base. I picture this as a balk. If you are playing OBR it is definitely a balk UNLESS F3 was moving towards the base in an attempt to make a play (The Boobie Valentine play). The way I read your post F3 would have been somehwere else BUT near the bag. Balk to me.

2) R2 -- since it is impossible to balk to second not calling a balk seems perfectly correct. Since no throw at all is required to second in this situation I cannot picture anything wrong with what was done.

I guess what I don't see in your post is a reference to "direction over distance" -- there is no requirement of reference in the rules to having a 45* angle involved.

Again, I could be wrong on BOTH these if I have misread or misapplied your plays.

In reference to your response to part 1- In Fed, the requirement is for the pitcher to step with the non-pivot foot towards the bag. The question becomes what is the definition of steping towards the bag? Many umpires told me in the previous thread, on this exact discussion, that stepping towards the bag means that F1 steps no further than 1/2 the distance between the bags. In other words, stepping towards first would mean stepping in any direction from first to the 1/2 way point between either home or second base. You did not explain specifically why you thought that situation 1 would be a balk.

I did not call a balk because I considered the throw to F3, who was in his normal position off the bag, as going in the direction towards the bag even though F3 was not holding the runner on the bag. With this in mind, you said that it is impossible to balk towards second but according to the definition of a balk, F1 must step towards the bag. What if he throws towards second but does not step towards it,wouldn't that be a balk?

The following question must be answered:

What is the definition of stepping towards the bag?

I still need to know if most of you agree with me or not on the 2 questions that I proposed in the thread.

Greg

[Edited by Gre144 on Jul 9th, 2001 at 12:55 AM]

[Bfair]

Greg, while it sounds as if you are describing a legal step to the base, you must keep in mind that the pitcher, after legally stepping from the rubber toward a base, is not required to throw to any base EXCEPT first base.

Therefore, in your first example, F1 MUST throw to first base. If F3 was not at or close enough to first base to be considered as capable of attempting a realistic play on the runner after receiving the throw (attempt a tag), it would be a balk. It seems that F1 has thrown to the fielder, not to the base to which he is "required" to throw. Correct?

In your second example of turning to 2nd base and throwing to F6, this IS NOT a balk as F1 is not even required to throw to that base or to anyone, right??? Therefore, as long as his step to 2nd was legal and he doesn't then throw (in the same motion) to a base other than 2nd, no balk can occur.

Hope that will help to clarify something you may have misinterpreted earlier. Two facets to consider here, the legal step and the requirement (if any) to throw to the base.

Freix

[Carl Childress]

Originally posted by Gre144
I hope you guys gave me the right information because I used it to not call a balk in the following two situations.

1) R1 on first. F1 while on the mound throws the ball to F3 who is standing in his normal F3 position not near the bag and catches the ball in that exact same position without moving towards the bag.

2) R2 on second. F1 throws the ball to F6 who is standing in his normal F6 position not near the bag and catches the ball in that exact same position without moving towards the bag.

Greg:

Both the coach and you are missing the point of whether the move was a balk or not. The main idea here, at least as you describe the action, is that F3 must [step toward the base] "before throwing to the base." [my emphasis]

In short, this is the old argument about what happens when the fielder is playing off the bag.

Tim gave you the proper ruling for OBR games: Balk at first; nothing at second. (PBUC 6.4a)

It's also nothing at second in FED and NCAA. But at those lower levels it is not a balk when the pitcher throws off the base at first if it appears the first baseman MIGHT make a play. That is, the rules do not require that F3 be breaking for the base.

Explanation?

At first base the defense gains a great advantage if the pitcher does not need to hit a moving target on a timed pick-off play. That rationale, at the heart of the OBR rule, was rejected by FED and NCAA.

At second or third, when he steps the pitcher is not required to throw at all; so if he does throw, it doesn't matter WHERE -- as long as the base in the general vicinity is occupied (or he is making a play, i.e., driving back a runner). Happily, all three codes agree here.

[Gre144]

Originally posted by Carl Childress

Greg:

Both the coach and you are missing the point of whether the move was a balk or not. The main idea here, at least as you describe the action, is that F3 must [step toward the base] "before throwing to the base." [my emphasis]. It doesn't mention anything about F3 or any fielder besides the pitcher having to make an attempt on R1. I am not arguing with you because I know that you know a l

In short, this is the old argument about what happens when the fielder is playing off the bag.

Tim gave you the proper ruling for OBR games: Balk at first; nothing at second. (PBUC 6.4a)

It's also nothing at second in FED and NCAA. But at those lower levels it is not a balk when the pitcher throws off the base at first if it appears the first baseman MIGHT make a play. That is, the rules do not require that F3 be breaking for the base.

Explanation?

At first base the defense gains a great advantage if the pitcher does not need to hit a moving target on a timed pick-off play. That rationale, at the heart of the OBR rule, was rejected by FED and NCAA.

At second or third, when he steps the pitcher is not required to throw at all; so if he does throw, it doesn't matter WHERE -- as long as the base in the general vicinity is occupied (or he is making a play, i.e., driving back a runner). Happily, all three codes agree here.

So did I make the right call or not in situation 1 and 2 (Fed Rules)? I didn't call a balk in either situation.
It sounds like in situation 1,according to you, the first baseman must make an attempt to make a play.(When I read 6-2-4-b it sounds like the emphasis is on F1 making a playot more than me. I'm just trying to figure all this confusion out in my head.) In my case, F3 just caught the ball at his position off the mound. But the question becomes what is defined as making a play? Couldn't just catching the ball and then eying R1 be considered as an attempt in making a play by driving back R1 to first base?

If I made the wrong call in situation 1 or 2 could, please give your explanation?

[Edited by Gre144 on Jul 9th, 2001 at 05:38 PM]

[Gre144]

[Therefore, in your first example, F1 MUST throw to first base. If F3 was not at or close enough to first base to be considered as capable of attempting a realistic play on the runner after receiving the throw (attempt a tag), it would be a balk. It seems that F1 has thrown to the fielder, not to the base to which he is "required" to throw. Correct?

Freix
[/B][/QUOTE]

Could you tell me where it says in Fed that the fielder must attempt to make a realistic play on R1? 6-2-4-b only talks about F1 making an attempt on the runner. But assuming that F3 has to make a realistic play, couldn't we argue that any throw to F3 off the bag is a realistic attempted play on R1? The mere act of F3 catching the ball is enough to compel R1 to return to the bag. I think that the defensive coach could make the argument that any throw to F3 is a realistic play on the runner since the throw compels R1 to return to the bag.

I guess what I want to know is what is the Fed definition of a realistic play to drive bag a runner?
Greg

[Edited by Gre144 on Jul 9th, 2001 at 05:34 PM]

[Carl Childress]

Just "eyeing a player" ain't making a play. A play is either a throw or a legitimate attempt by a fielder in possession of the ball to retire a runner.

Not important in FED rules, as I already said.

There, the pitcher can throw to the fielder off any base: first, second, third.

NO BALK in either event.

[Tim C]

When did this become a FED ruling? I missed that in the original post I guess.

[Gre144]

Originally posted by Tim C
When did this become a FED ruling? I missed that in the original post I guess.

When did what become Fed ruling? I don't understand the question.

[David B]

Greg

Tee was talking about the thread. His interp was OBR and you were wanting FED.

I think once upon a time we discussed the play where the first baseman set up nearly in right field and F1 legally stepped and threw to F3.

This is legal under FED rules. I think the question was on a test or something.

Anyway that should help clarify the play at first. Under FED, it don't matter where F3 stands or what he is doing. Even if he's sitting in the grass etc., as long as F1 does everything legally.

Maybe I remembered that correctly. Now under OBR it's different as do the requirements for F3.

Thanks
David

Originally posted by Gre144

When did what become Fed ruling? I don't understand the question.

[Bfair]

Greg, I was answering per OBR when I posted.

However, to admit my error, I was unaware that this is interpreted differenly for Fed vs. OBR.

Again, another good reason not only to own, but to USE the BRD. Thanks for the handslap and the awakening, Greg.



Freix

[bob jenkins]

Originally posted by Gre144

I guess what I want to know is what is the Fed definition of a realistic play to drive bag a runner?
Greg

[Edited by Gre144 on Jul 9th, 2001 at 05:34 PM]

The FED definition is "umpire judgment". Was F3 moving toward the base? Was he within a "step and a reach" of being able to tag R1? Those are the things that I look at.

See case 6.2.4k