I'm sorry, but this backward logic is nonsense. Everyone here knows that part of the intent of this rule is to prevent quickpitching. In fact, this is the rule pointed to when you balk a quick pitch. By your backward logic above (and your explicit statements that taking a sign is not required, despite the fact that the rules say the pitcher shall do exactly that), if a sign is not required, then this rule does not, in fact, prevent quick pitching. The fact that it DOES illustrates why this logic is incorrect.

A rule that states that a player shall or must do something does not automatically mean that he must not or shall not do something else. The rules do not state that it is a balk is the pitcher takes signs from off the rubber - it simply states that he must, in fact, take signs from ON the rubber.

Wrong. My logic is flawless. This is not my opinion alone, it is shared by many. There is no requirement to take signs. Sometimes the catcher doesn't give signs at all. What, we are supposed to say, "wait a minute catch, you didn't give him any sign?" The rule is not there to make the catcher give signs to the pitcher, it is to prevent the pitcher from taking his sign off the rubber and quickly stepping on and pitching the ball.

It is quite evident that the rule means that if the pitcher takes any signs, it shall be from on the rubber. Any other way of looking at it is the flawed model. I got a very nice grade at the university in Logic, thank you much.

But by your logic, if F1 simply gets the ball from another fielder, steps up to the rubber and pitches, without taking any signs from ANYone, he's broken no rules. And we all know that is not correct.

No, we don't all know that. You know that. I know differently. As long as the pitcher does not pitch before the batter is reasonably set in the batter's box, he need not take any signs. The taking signs rule is there for in case he takes signs. Some pitchers I've seen have only one pitch. What the hell do they need signs for? There is no requirement that signs be actually given, just the manner in which they must be given..."shall be from the rubber." That naturally means "not from any other location."

We are going to have to agree to disagree. Use whatever method you want. Not one single manager or coach in 21 years of umpiring has ever questioned when I have instructed the pitcher to engage the rubber before taking signs.

I have never allowed pitchers to get their signs off the rubber and then quickly step on and pitch, and this is the only reason for taking the signs off the rubber. They try to hold the runners close by doing it this way and it is just plain wrong.

I agree Tim, I am also balking the pitcher and the only thing I can back that up with is a OBR statement "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," but certainly apppropriate here.

"Deceiving the base runner," which is the ONLY intent of this move.

It's plain wrong. I agree. But if this pitcher has only 1 pitch, as you say, you'll allow them to hold runners this way? That's inconsistent ... and just plain wrong.

Hold on. Perhaps you've forgotten the original post. We were talking about a pitcher who took his signs from off the rubber, stepped on the rubber, paused (whether to take another sign, or to simulate that - doesn't matter), and then pitched. How is the "intent of this move" to deceive the baserunner?

I can see stretching the rules you refer to in the case where a pitcher take signs (or simulated it) from off the rubber and uses that to dupe the runner off the base, and then fires to first without having to abide by the rules a pitcher who was ON the rubber would have to abide by. But to balk a pitcher simply for doing something not listed at all in the "it is a balk when..." section, when such action has no effect or intent to deceive the baserunner, is simply OOO, and against every clinic I've ever attended.

Here is J/R's take on this:

Pitchers:

• a) must take signs from the catcher while in contact.
• b) cannot habitually disengage the rubber after taking a sign,
• c) upon disengaging, must separate their hands.

No penalty is mandated or suggested for violation of (a) through (c). Such action is simply prohibited.

This very clearly intends for the pitcher to only take signs while in contact with the rubber, and at no other time.

Also, the following is a balk:

It is a balk when the pitcher:
15......... tries to deceive a runner or the batter by imitating and throwing a pitch while not in contact with the rubber, or by quickly stepping on the rubber and pitching without taking a sign. Such actions constitute an illegal pitch.

Notice that the penalty is for quickly stepping on the rubber and pitching. If the pitcher does not quick pitch the batter, no sign would be required.

Perhaps this stuff about "simulating taking a sign" just means pause to let the batter get reasonably set in the box. That's my take on it.

You may have aced Logic, but you are doing poorly in Semantics.

1st snippet:
"shall be from the rubber"... Quote marks usually indicate a quote. I hope we can agree that what you "quoted" is not, in fact, a quote of any Rule [at least none relevent to this thread]. What the Rule ACTUALLY says [Fed: 6-1-1] "[the pitcher] shall take his sign from the catcher with his pivot foot in contact with the pitcher’s plate. " [OBR: 8.01] "Pitchers shall take signs from the catcher while standing on the rubber."

NEITHER of those versions of the Rule says or logically implies that F1:
# Needs to take any "sign" at all...
# May ONLY take signs from the catcher...
# May ONLY take signs from the rubber....

The usual and customary interpretation has been, time out of mind, that TO PREVENT A QUICK PITCH, F1 must take, or simulate taking, a sign from F2 after coming into contact with the pitching rubber [or "plate"] and before pitching. To be clear:
*No actual sign need be given...
*F1 may take signs from F2, his coach, his daddy or g/f in the stands, or The Great Hairy Thunderer... and
* he can take those signs, if any, anywhere he damn pleases [one caveat - wait for it], as long as he takes or simulates taking a sign from F2 after contact w/ the rubber and before pitching.

The caveat is what Garth [and, I think I remember, Bob] is/are talking about: IN FED, straddling the rubber and looking in for a sign MAY be interpreted as motions associated with the pitch - a balk if performed/ simulated while not in contact with the rubber.

2d snippet:

"quickly step on and pitch, ... this is the only reason for taking the signs off the rubber." Not so, and this is demonstrated in the OP, where "signs" are taken OFF the rubber, then F1 steps on and takes [or appears to take] ANOTHER sign, in compliance with the Rule. There are MANY reasons why this is done, far too many to list; but one should suffice:

Scratching your nose on the rubber is a balk in FED ball [motion associated with pitch]: F1 gets balked for this ONE TIME, and if he's got a coach that insists on the catcher giving 311 "signs" before each pitch, he'll wait until the end of the meaningless chatter before he climbs into the position of peril.

No, the pitcher has to step on the rubber and allow the batter to get reasonably set in the box. This gives runners plenty of time to get their leads.

If I see a pitcher try to pull the quick step on and pitch act, I will surely not allow them to do it. I will call "Time" every time I see a pitcher try a quick pitch, whether it is intended to fool that batter or the runner, it makes no difference to me.

This may be a have to see it situation first, but if I feel in any way that the pitchers straddling of the plate is to deceive the runner, I'm balking him.

cbfoulds:

Please cite sources for your time-honored interpretation, because I don't see it in print anywhere. I've searched JEA And MLBUM and there is no such interpretation. Is this just traditional, regional, folklore, what? Show me one shred of a document that says pitchers can take signs from the catcher while off the rubber. I'm not talking about signs from daddy in the stands. Also, I am the one saying that there is no requirement to take a sign at all. As long as the batter is not quick pitched, the pitcher need not take any signs.

Four pages, and no one has stepped up to define what a sign is.

I don't believe this thread was ever about signals, signs, messages from heaven, osmosis or interpretive non-verbal analysis by a pitcher.

It just wasn't.

If Steve is referring to my posts, we stopped discussing the OP a long time ago.

I have been discussing ONLY a situation in which F1 is straddling the rubber leaning in to take signs as if he were to pitch, or at least come set. With a runner on, this an extemely deceptive move as it could easily appear to the runner that F1 is in contact.

Let me point out, that I have never seen this, and I have never called a balk for an F1 taking signs off the rubber.

However, I am not yet conviced that the move I describe is legal deception.