Would you have called a balk?

[UMP25]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

It's been on the FED test before -- and the answer is that it's a balk (with runners on base). I've seen it called. I've never called it.

I think the FED's reasoning is that if F1 is looking in for the signs, he's acting like he is on the rubber. This influences the base runner's lead, and gives F1 some additional leeway that he wouldn't have if he were on the rubber. This is "too much" of an advantage for F1, so it needs to be penalized.

And under NCAA rules, it's a ball to the batter, with or without runners on base. That's less of a penalty, but I'd still just quietly tell the pitcher to make sure he's on the rubber when he takes the sign.

[Don Mueller]

It's also a balk if in the set position the pitcher separates his hands BEFORE clearly stepping back with his pivot foot.
However many times the pitcher is clearly separating while in the process of stepping back.
Do you balk this if the pitcher is simultaneously stepping off and separating?
I don't balk it and I've never had a coach comment on it.
I think it's the least known balk rule known to a coach.

[mcrowder]

Not a balk, not a balk, not a balk.

A rule stating that the pitcher must take signs from the rubber (and generally interpreted as "must at least simulate taking signs from the rubber") does NOT mean he cannot take signs from elsewhere first. This (by itself) is NOT a balk.

Now ... say he takes the sign, then steps on the rubber and immediately pitches without pausing, then he has failed to take or simulate taking signs from the rubber. THEN you have a balk.

[BigUmp56]

Originally Posted by mcrowder

Not a balk, not a balk, not a balk.

A rule stating that the pitcher must take signs from the rubber (and generally interpreted as "must at least simulate taking signs from the rubber") does NOT mean he cannot take signs from elsewhere first. This (by itself) is NOT a balk.

Now ... say he takes the sign, then steps on the rubber and immediately pitches without pausing, then he has failed to take or simulate taking signs from the rubber. THEN you have a balk.

Not in FED, Mike. It's a balk to take signs while not in contact.


Tim.

[Don Mueller]

Originally Posted by mcrowder

Not a balk, not a balk, not a balk.

A rule stating that the pitcher must take signs from the rubber (and generally interpreted as "must at least simulate taking signs from the rubber") does NOT mean he cannot take signs from elsewhere first. This (by itself) is NOT a balk.

I agree wholeheartedly!!

FED 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. In both situations, the umpire signals dead ball.
It isn't an illegal pitch unless F1 fails to take a sign from the rubber. IMO he can communicate with F2 all he wants prior to engaging the rubber as long as he at least pretends to after engaging.

Now if F1 does anything else in combination with taking the sign from off the rubber that simulates his normal pitching routine I do have a balk. Not technically because he's taking signs but because he's simulating his pitching routine from off the rubber and deceiving the runner(s).

[Don Mueller]

Originally Posted by ozzy6900

Now after all that, Steve, I'll answer your question: "Would I have called it?". My answer to you and the opposing coach is simple - I have no idea when F1 is in fact taking his sign! F1 can be standing there and F2 can be flexing his fingers for all I know (or care). Just as long as F1 does not Quick Pitch, there will not be a problem. Now I'll tell you this, if a coach complains to me once, both F1's from that point had better be aware that I and my partner will be watching the rest of the game. If F2 so much as flinches with F1 straddling the rubber, we will balk the hell out of F1 (and I've done it in several Varsity and sub-varsity games in the past).

Regards

[/SIZE][/FONT]
[/SIZE][/FONT]

Ozzy
How is it that before the coach complains you cannot discern or care when F2is giving signs, but after he complains you have crystal clear discernment?
IMO in this sitch, if it's worth calling after a complaint, it's worth calling before the complaint (or at least worth addressing)
I know there are some very subtle deceptive moves an F1 may have that we might not see or recognize and when brought to our attention we may then penalize if F1 continues, but to let a coach dictate a call on such a blatent act is giving him way to much influence.
And IMO it's a dead wrong call to balk for taking signs off the rubber unless he also fails to take a sign once he engages the rubber

(color added to Ozzy's quote for emphasis)

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Steven Tyler

Notice at the end of 6-1-3, it says for an illegal pitch (catchall phrase) it gives the penalty.

Go read the definition of illegal pitch in Rule 2. It doesn't require a pitch.

Taking the signs off the rubber, in my opinion is simply a rules violation. Why do you think it warrants a, "Don't do that" in OBR.

Good point. This must be the first example of a difference between the codes.


It *is* an illegal pitch in FED, by rule. Whether it's called or not is a different issue.

[LMan]

Originally Posted by Steven Tyler

Why do you think it warrants a, "Don't do that" in OBR.

Because OBR lists no penalty for the violation in 8.01

[mcrowder]

Originally Posted by BigUmp56

Not in FED, Mike. It's a balk to take signs while not in contact.


Tim.

Thanks for the input. Unfortunately that doesn't agree with the rulebook.

[mcrowder]

Originally Posted by Steven Tyler

I cannot understand why everyone is arguing so hard for a balk they never call.

Especially one that is not illegal by the rule in the book.

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by mcrowder

Thanks for the input. Unfortunately that doesn't agree with the rulebook.

From the BRD:

SIGN TAKEN OFF PITCHER'S PLATE

FED: The pitcher must take his sign from the "catcher" while on the pitcher's plate. (6-1-1) PENALTY: Ball (no runners), Balk (with runners). (6-1-1 Penalty)

NCAA: Same as FED. EXCEPT PENALTY: Ball. (7-5d) If the batter and all runners advance following a pitch from the illegal position (pivot foot not on the pitcher's plate), ignore the infraction. (9-2j Penalty).

OBR: The pitcher must take his sign while on the pitcher's plate. Penalty: None listed. (don't do that)

[SanDiegoSteve]

And no, I've never called it a balk either.

[BigUmp56]

Originally Posted by mcrowder

Thanks for the input. Unfortunately that doesn't agree with the rulebook.

In your opinion, which by the way doesn't weight very heavily with the BRD.


Tim.

[BigUmp56]

Originally Posted by Steven Tyler

The BRD also states that you cannot have coaches interference on a dead ball. I suppose if a base runner misses third or first on his way around the bases and the coach grabs him and throws him back to the base, the defense will not complain if they see the infraction and lose their right to appeal.

What does one have to do with the other?


Tim.

[ozzy6900]

Originally Posted by Don Mueller

Ozzy
How is it that before the coach complains you cannot discern or care when F2is giving signs, but after he complains you have crystal clear discernment?
IMO in this sitch, if it's worth calling after a complaint, it's worth calling before the complaint (or at least worth addressing)
I know there are some very subtle deceptive moves an F1 may have that we might not see or recognize and when brought to our attention we may then penalize if F1 continues, but to let a coach dictate a call on such a blatent act is giving him way to much influence.
And IMO it's a dead wrong call to balk for taking signs off the rubber unless he also fails to take a sign once he engages the rubber

(color added to Ozzy's quote for emphasis)

That's easy Don. I am not the pitcher so as I stated he could be staring at a "babe" for all I know while F2 is flexing his fingers. I'm not in F1's head.