Balk or No Balk ?

[Forest Ump]

Originally Posted by mbyron

So, basically you're asking us to back you up when you didn't even see the play?

Do you really think that F1 must gain an advantage for there to be a balk?

If that's how you read into this, perhaps. I think I was clear in asking if this move was a balk. I do think in some instances, and I'm not talking NCAA or HS Varsity, that you have to take into account is the pitcher getting an advantage or maybe better put, trying to deceive the runner. Do you consider that wrong for lower level ball?

[mcrowder]

Originally Posted by Forest Ump

If that's how you read into this, perhaps. I think I was clear in asking if this move was a balk. I do think in some instances, and I'm not talking NCAA or HS Varsity, that you have to take into account is the pitcher getting an advantage or maybe better put, trying to deceive the runner. Do you consider that wrong for lower level ball?

Once you've progressed this far into a tournament, you are no longer lowering your standards for "lower level ball". It is not true that every balk derives from an obvious advantage... and just because you did not see an advantage on this particular balk doesn't make it not a balk. This was a balk.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by Forest Ump

I do think in some instances ... that you have to take into account is the pitcher getting an advantage or maybe better put, trying to deceive the runner. Do you consider that wrong for lower level ball?

Yes, I do. The rules do NOT prohibit deceiving the runner, nor do they prohibit trying to do so. The rules deem certain moves by F1 illegal because they confer an unfair advantage on F1. Those moves are then illegal, regardless of F1's intent.

FYI, the word 'deceive' appears just twice in OBR (three if you count 'deceiving'), and only in rule 8.05 (the balk rule). The first instance is part of an example in 8.05(c), but the balk in that case is called for failing to step to first, not because of the deception.

The second instance appears in an explanatory note at the end of 8.05:

Umpires should bear in mind that the purpose of the balk rule is to prevent the pitcher from deliberately deceiving the base runner. If there is doubt in the umpire's mind, the "intent" of the pitcher should govern.

It is this note, I think, that leaves the impression that all attempted deception is illegal. Pro instruction, however, is that deception is part of baseball, and that the purpose of the balk rule is to prevent F1 having an unfair advantage in trying to pick off R1.

By that note, you might legitimately use deception as a criterion if there were doubt in your mind as to whether a move was a balk. In my experience, however, such doubt results much more commonly from umpires, coaches, and players not knowing the balk rule than from actual doubt as to whether a move violated the rule.

For my part, I do not call a balk unless I can explain to the coach in a few words what F1 did wrong (for instance: "started and stopped" or "no step" or "didn't come set"), and that explanation never involves the word 'deceive'.

I agree, btw, that in lower-level ball there are some balks that I would not call, but not because there's no attempt to deceive.

[johnnyg08]

You're going to see all of this stuff in Kiddie Ball...if you call the balk here...the least you can do is tell the kid what he's doing is wrong...I'm sure he's been doing it all season and nobody's said anything about it...(doesn't make it okay) but we're as much teachers in kiddie ball as we are umpires...everybody will appreciate that aspect as well...