![]() |
|
|
|||
6-1-1
Quote:
...in 6-1-3: "PENALTY (Art. 1, 2, 3): The ball is dead immediately when an illegal pitch occurs. If there is no runner, a ball is awarded the batter. If there is a runner, such illegal act is a balk." |
|
|||
scblue -
You have correctly identified the penalty for an illegal pitch. The pitching rules do not take effect until the feet are in contact with the rubber. So how do you justify giving a penalty in the OP? |
|
|||
Quote:
|
|
|||
Quote:
He shall take his sign from the catcher with his pivot foot in contact with the pitcher's plate. From 6-2-5 ART. 5... It is also a balk if a runner or runners are on base and the pitcher, while he is not touching the pitcher's plate, makes any movement naturally associated with his pitch, or he places his feet on or astride the pitcher's plate Since taking the signal must be from the pitchers plate, to not do so constitutes an action naturally associated with the pitch without the pivot foot on the rubber. How do you catch it - sometimes just a nod of the head or shaking the head side to side to change a sign. A lot of guys don't call it for any number of reasons - it's a technical violation, etc. Some won't call it because they don't know the rule. If you call it a a frosh game you'll probably get an earful from the coach - "this isn't varsity, you know" If you don't call it maybe the other team will chirp in and say - "hey, isn't that a balk?" |
|
|||
BIGGUY I have a simple question
ARE YOU SERIOUS???
__________________
3apps "It isn't enough for an umpire merely to know what he's doing. He has to look as though he know what he's doing too." - National League Umpire Larry Goetz "Boys, I'm one of those umpires that misses 'em every once in a while so if it's close, you'd better hit it." |
|
|||
Quote:
Quote:
Who [name names, dammit, someone deserves serious internet embarassment] taught you this garbage? You SERIOUSLY need to buy and READ some umpiring references, such as the J/R, Carl's BRD, the PBUC manuals; ANYTHING but relying on the woeful founts of ignorance and misinformation you have depended on heretofore. Since taking a sign does not involve any movement of hands, arms, feet or legs, it cannot possibly be an "action naturally associated with..." a PITCH! C'mmon... you knew this didn't you? |
|
|||
Quote:
The rule does not say that it's a balk (or IP) for taking a sign from the catcher while off the rubber. I'll give you a billion dollars if you can find a rule that says that. It DOES say that you must take signs from the rubber - so if a pitcher takes signs from off the rubber, and then takes them (or appears to be taking them - which is what is UNIVERSALLY taught in all clinics (probably with the sole exception of YOUR association, which teaches some other bizarre rule-ignoring that you've mentioned in other threads)) from the rubber, he has done what he is required to do. Hang around here for a while, you'll learn something.
__________________
"Many baseball fans look upon an umpire as a sort of necessary evil to the luxury of baseball, like the odor that follows an automobile." - Hall of Fame Pitcher Christy Mathewson |
|
|||
Who [name names, dammit, someone deserves serious internet embarassment] taught you this garbage?
Probably the same person that taught him the obstruction rule.
__________________
Rich Ives Different does not equate to wrong |
|
|||
Quote:
__________________
GB Last edited by GarthB; Thu Mar 22, 2007 at 10:36pm. |
|
|||
Quote:
There IS a penalty for NOT "taking his sign from the catcher ..." [which is universally enforced as "appearing to take a sign from the catcher"] ... while in contact with the rubber and before beginning the pitching motion. The enforced intent of the rule is to prevent quick pitches, NOT to outlaw signs from the dugout, etc. SOOOO... as long as F1 "looks in" and APPEARS to take a sign from the catcher, while in contact and before pitching, DO NOT penalize him for any "extra" sign(s) he may get from elsewhere/when, and DO NOT concern yourself with whether F2 did or did not actually give a sign. |
|
|||
Fed Screws Up Again
Folks,
Try not to be too hard on the BG here. Everyone understands that FED writes the rules so any gerbil can learn the rules and umpire, and here is another case where a rewrite of the rule is needed to get rid of the confusion. If FED is going to make the rules simple to follow, the need to rewrite 6-1-1 to say something like: "The pitcher shall mount the pitchers plate and hesitate/take a sign before the time of the pitch in the windup position, or coming set in the stretch position". If you read the rule, you can see where people could make a mistake and call an illegal pitch. Shoot, most of us probably had a JV game where we almost threw somebody out because they misread the rule. I was blacklisted by a school because I didn't call this as an illegal pitch. |
|
|||
BG-
I am really having a hard time believing that you are serious. The obstruction argument was good, but this is waaaaayyyyy off base. ![]()
__________________
"They can holler at the uniform all they want, but when they start hollering at the man wearing the uniform they're going to be in trouble."- Joe Brinkman |
|
|||
Bob, Do you have a Reference?
Bob,
Over the years I have looked for a case book play or other way to verify that FED does consider this an illegal pitch/balk, since I know of nobody other than BG who would call it. I beleive our good frined Carl would call it a "technical balk", if I remember the discussion on the old yahoo umpire group years, and years ago (Unpire Talks, I thinlk the name of the group was, before eumpire). Any info is appreciated John |
![]() |
Bookmarks |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Straddling rubber to take signs | buckweat | Baseball | 49 | Wed Dec 21, 2005 05:54pm |
signs | ref5678 | Basketball | 7 | Mon Mar 07, 2005 02:02pm |
Taking signs off the Rubber | BayouUmp | Baseball | 31 | Mon Jul 26, 2004 11:00pm |
Taking signs from the rubber | CVLLBlue | Baseball | 19 | Tue Jul 09, 2002 02:37pm |
Signs | spots101 | Baseball | 1 | Sat Apr 27, 2002 05:29pm |