Would you balk this???
 

Fed Rules, R1 with RHP. F1 comes set, R1 early steals. F1 proceeds to kick left leg and executes an inside move to second. Throws without hesitation to second baseman covering the bag. My first inclination would be that no balk since a play was being made on the runner, but would like to hear what you guys think.

bisonpitcher,

As described, perfectly legal.

Personally, I'd like to add I'm pretty impressed by the F1.

What age, if you don't mind me asking?

JM

HS Varsity game. Not a game that I was working, but a friend of mine that coaches had this occur in a game this spring and he asked me. I told him that I wouldnt balk the pitcher. He said he has asked several well respected umpires in the area, (Including 2 assignors, one said balk other said no) and has come up with about a 50/50 split on the opinion.

Nothing about this is illegal. What else would you expect the pitcher to do? As long as he did not flinch, this is completely legal.

Peace

Not a balk. Good move. I've seen it done by savvy pitchers.

However, after reading some of the thoughts out there, and I do mean out there, that were expressed today, I have no doubt that someone will call it a balk. (But it's not. Really.)

My friend also asked if it would be the same for a lefty (i.e. a hanging read that is turned into an inside move when the runner broke for 2nd) and I said I wouldnt balk that. His arguement was that the pitcher would be breaking the plane of the rubber with a runner on first. I told him that as long as the F1 made a continuous motion that it would be legal in my opinion. I did say that if the pitcher either R or L handed wheeled inside without throwing that i would balk him for not making a play on the runner. Is this a correct assumption???

bisonpitcher,

You had me right up until...

I believe this would be legal as well.

If the runner is attempting to advance to 2b (umpire judgement), the F1 is perfectly legal in executing a "feint" to the "unoccupied base" that the R1 is attempting to advance to. As long as he does so "without interruption or alteration".

JM

But would him turning and then say chasing the runner be considered an "interruption"???

bisonpitcher,

Not so long as he landed his step more to 2B than any other base. Again, "without alteration or interuption".

JM

Ok I can see that. I was considering the disengaging of the rubber as an alteration, but I can see your point on that.

From FED 6-2-4b

f. failing to pitch to the batter when the entire non-pivot foot passes behind the perpendicular plane of the back edge of the pitcher's plate, except when feinting or throwing to second base in an attempt to put out a runner.

As long as motion is continuous, legal.

As I read this, the only issue that could cause this to be a balk would be the 'hanging read'. Remember, continuous and without interuption.

You nailed this one, and I do mean this one.

Good job!!

You could only hope to be as accurate as Garth.