Balk? Coming to Set...

[Don Mueller]

Originally Posted by GarthB

So, if at any time, on the mound, the pitcher should join his hands, that's a balk?

Is that what you're reading into 8.05g?
I have only spoke to a pitcher simulating his stretch while off the rubber.
You take it wherever you want.

[GarthB]

Originally Posted by Don Mueller

Is that what you're reading into 8.05g?
I have only spoke to a pitcher simulating his stretch while off the rubber.
You take it wherever you want.

No, neither of that is true.

I have no misconceptions of what a balk is. You are the one who described the OP as a balk.

There was no discussion of simulating anything in the OP. You made the assumption that one couldn't come to the rubber set without violating 8.05(g).

You are the one who has claimed that coming to the rubber set is a balk. I'm the one who follows the rules.

[Don Mueller]

Originally Posted by GarthB

No, neither of that is true.

I have no misconceptions of what a balk is. You are the one who described the OP as a balk.

There was no discussion of simulating anything in the OP. You made the assumption that one couldn't come to the rubber set without violating 8.05(g).

You are the one who has claimed that coming to the rubber set is a balk. I'm the one who follows the rules.

oh contraire
If you are straddling the rubber how can you possibly come set without first stretching?
When you are in the process of coming set, you are in your stretch.
If you are stretching and not on the rubber, I'd have to say that is a simulated stretch since it is not a legal one.

[GarthB]

Originally Posted by Don Mueller

oh contraire
If you are straddling the rubber how can you possibly come set without first stretching?
I know you're having trouble reading the OP but try again, it's only one sentence. When you are in the process of coming set, you are in your stretch.
If you are stretching and not on the rubber, I'd have to say that is a simulated stretch since it is not a legal one.

Oh, my God. You really don't understand the rule, do you? I thought you were just not thinking straight but would eventually get it. My mistake.

I won't interfere with your illusion any further.

Say, hi to Big Guy when you see him.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Don Mueller

oh contraire
If you are straddling the rubber how can you possibly come set without first stretching?
When you are in the process of coming set, you are in your stretch.
If you are stretching and not on the rubber, I'd have to say that is a simulated stretch since it is not a legal one.

I think, Don, that you are using the terms "straddling" and "stretch" differently than I use them.

There's nothing wrong with straddling the rubbber (except during a hidden ball trick). Many pitchers do so before engaging the rubber.

There's also no requirement to stretch (raising the hands to or above the hands as they are joined, befiore dropping them the whatever position F1 comes set -- in front of the chest, or waist high, for example). Many pitcher just join the hands at the appropriate level.

Most often, these moves are separate -- engage the rubber, then come set. In the OP, F1 combined the moves. It's a violation of "shall have the hands separated when engaging" rule -- a rule for which there is no penalty. It's a "don't do that."

If F1 comes set while completely off the rubber (making the runner think F1 is on the rubber), then you can make a case for "making a motion associated with the pitch." That's not what happened in the OP though, as I read it.

[Don Mueller]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

I think, Don, that you are using the terms "straddling" and "stretch" differently than I use them.

There's nothing wrong with straddling the rubbber (except during a hidden ball trick). Many pitchers do so before engaging the rubber..

I totally agree. I've never meant to insinuate that straddling is a balk, but just wanted to be clear where F1 was when simulating his pitching motion.

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

There's also no requirement to stretch (raising the hands to or above the hands as they are joined, befiore dropping them the whatever position F1 comes set -- in front of the chest, or waist high, for example). Many pitcher just join the hands at the appropriate level..

I think there's been misunderstanding on this point. I think that if a pitcher is engaging the rubber and brings his hands together, whether a long and belabored move or short and sweet, the act of bringing the hands together and pausing is considered his stretch. So every pitch from the set position must have a preliminary stretch motion, even if it's as simple as bringing the hands together.
Is there a definitive source that contradicts this?

I also realize that a pitcher can be off the rubber and put his hands together all he wants with out consequence. I've tried to be clear all along to be sure I said simulating the pitching motion or preliminary motion. I think reasonable folks can agree that there's a difference between simulating a stretch and set as opposed to just handling the ball in your glove.

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Most often, these moves are separate -- engage the rubber, then come set. In the OP, F1 combined the moves. It's a violation of "shall have the hands separated when engaging" rule -- a rule for which there is no penalty. It's a "don't do that."

If F1 comes set while completely off the rubber (making the runner think F1 is on the rubber), then you can make a case for "making a motion associated with the pitch." That's not what happened in the OP though, as I read it.

In the OP F1 clearly began his stretch while off the rubber, as breif as it may have been he did begin the stretch, I'm only asserting that technicllay I believe this is a balk. Certainly not one to call, as I alluded to very early on, but IMO a balk nonetheless.

If Evans and J/R say you can simulate a stretch while off the rubber I'll go with it. I doubt that they will.