In 25 words . . .

[UmpJM]

rei,

Have you seen this, from the MLBUM:

(i) It is legal for a right-handed pitcher to begin a pick-off move to first base by first moving his foot in the direction of third base provided that he makes a legal step toward first base with the non-pivot foot before throwing there and provided that the move is continuous and without interruption. A pitcher who makes such a pick-off move is considered to be in contact with the rubber when he makes his throw to first base.

or this, from J/R:

Following are two steps that are legal.

A. "Jab" Step (of the pivot foot): In cases of a right-handed pitcher throwing to first, or a left-handed pitcher throwing to third, or any pitcher throwing to second, a pitcher can take a "jab" or "stutter" step with his pivot foot before stepping to the base with his free foot. ....

It's legal. If you balked it all day, you would be wrong (and protestable) all day.

JM

Originally Posted by UmpJM (nee CoachJM)

rei,

Have you seen this, from the MLBUM:



or this, from J/R:



It's legal. If you balked it all day, you would be wrong (and protestable) all day.

JM

I see. So what pages in the NCAA and NFHS rule books did you get these out of?

[UmpJM]

rei,

The NCAA and NFHS rule books (not to mention the OBR) do not say anything about the "Jab Step" move. The J/R quote above is from the "rule Differences Edition", which diligently notes differences between OBR and NCAA. There is no difference noted.

This is the most authoritative opinion I have been able to find on the subject.

Have you got anything other than your (mistaken) interpretation that it is illegal?

JM

Originally Posted by UmpJM (nee CoachJM)

rei,

The NCAA and NFHS rule books (not to mention the OBR) do not say anything about the "Jab Step" move. The J/R quote above is from the "rule Differences Edition", which diligently notes differences between OBR and NCAA. There is no difference noted.

This is the most authoritative opinion I have been able to find on the subject.

Have you got anything other than your (mistaken) interpretation that it is illegal?

JM

For FED, I believe you should review the balk rule before you claim I am "mistaken".

[UmpJM]

rei,

Been there, done that. Of course, reviewing the OBR balk rules could also lead one to the erroneous conclusion that a "jab step" move is illegal.

BTW, are you in Tee's association?

JM

Originally Posted by UmpJM (nee CoachJM)

rei,

Been there, done that. Of course, reviewing the OBR balk rules could also lead one to the erroneous conclusion that a "jab step" move is illegal.

BTW, are you in Tee's association?

JM

What was describe, regardless of what label you give it, is a balk under NFHS rules. Until NFHS say otherwise, I will balk a move like that.

Yes, I know Tim well enough.

Originally Posted by SAump

You're not gonna tell your supervisor about your plans to continue to balk a legal move {if it turns out to be legal}. If you're not sure that the quotes he provided were false, you shouldn't cast stones. Having the stones to balk a move like that should also have the stones to allow it if you hear it from supervisors you trust. How many times will you hear the rulebook has 200 and something errors before you learn not to lose your stones too soon? I would never balked a jump turn or a jab step to 1B. Not saying you are wrong. I am saying I disagree with your interpretation of the very FED rules you quoted. Can't say I was always right either. Would gladly overturn my "opinion" on the matter if told to do so by my supervisor, with or without proof.

Don't believe me? Check out the 2005 NCAA balk bulletin and the disaster that soon followed. The umps called more technical balks that year and by the end of the season, the spirit of the balk rule was back in effect. Same thing happened to the MLB Questec strike zone. The MLB umps called more rulebook high strikes that year and by the end of the season, the spirit of the belt-high strike rule was back in effect. Coaches get pissed and call above your head. Supervisors cut their losses when umps are proven wrong. Do you think the MLB ump who called the high strike said he would continue calling that way?

Simply, I believe that the move is deceptive to the base runner. While I do not have the Fed book handy either right now, I do not think it will be very hard to show that it IS in fact a balk in NFHS rules.

I don't not give a lick how the "pro's" interpret the rule. I umpire no games that play under OBR rules.

Originally Posted by SAump

You're not gonna tell your supervisor about your plans to continue to balk a legal move {if it turns out to be legal}. If you're not sure that the quotes he provided were false, you shouldn't cast stones. Having the stones to balk a move like that should also have the stones to allow it if you hear it from supervisors you trust. How many times will you hear the rulebook has 200 and something errors before you learn not to lose your stones too soon? I would never balked a jump turn or a jab step to 1B. Not saying you are wrong. I am saying I disagree with your interpretation of the very FED rules you quoted. Can't say I was always right either. Would gladly overturn my "opinion" on the matter if told to do so by my supervisor, with or without proof.

Don't believe me? Check out the 2005 NCAA balk bulletin and the disaster that soon followed. The umps called more technical balks that year and by the end of the season, the spirit of the balk rule was back in effect. Same thing happened to the MLB Questec strike zone. The MLB umps called more rulebook high strikes that year and by the end of the season, the spirit of the belt-high strike rule was back in effect. Coaches get pissed and call above your head. Supervisors cut their losses when umps are proven wrong. Do you think the MLB ump who called the high strike said he would continue calling that way?

So, I now have the Fed. book here.

Rule 6, ART3: "During these preliminary motions and during the set position until a delivery motion occurs, the pitcher may turn on his pivot footor lift it in a jump turn to step with the non-pivot foot toward a base while throwing or feinting as outlinned in 6-2-4 and 2-28-5, or he may lift his pivot foot in a step backward off the pitcher's plate.

I have been told time and time again that the Fed rules are mostly literal concerning what a pitcher may do. Thus, the rule book clearly explains what the pitcher may do with his pivot foot, and stepping towards 3rd with it IS NOT one of them.

With all that in mind. I will balk a pitcher who does this move until I see something in the NFHS rule book that explains that the pitcher, while on the rubber in the set position, can step towards 3rd base with the pivot foot.

Sue me if you can add that move to the simple rule above! Again, I could care less what they are doing in the pro game.

[Tim C]

This is a great conversation.

Yes, I know Rei quite well. We work together once or twice a year. Rei also was the plate umpire for the State Championship game of Oregon's largest school classification this past spring.

Rei is also a member of the college association and this is where this discussion started. I was with three members of the college group Wednesday night and our conversation came around to this specific issue.

One of the leading college umpires in this small group said that he would balk the "jab step" EVERY TIME!

Now Rei chimes in with the same feeling.

This is why I asked the question and am totally confused.

(Note: I have no idea what SAUmp is even saying in his "rising fastball" post -- facts are still facts, no matter what those words mean.)

Regards,

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by SAump

I think Mr Jenkins, Mr. Ives, Garth, TC, and others understand the respect I have for them.

To be frank, I understand very little about any of your posts.

[UmpJM]

Tim,

The reason I found Mr. Paronto's "3rd to 1st move" analogy so off point as a rationale for supporting the legality of the jab step move under FED rules is twofold.

First, it doesn't address in any way the concern expressed by those who believe the move should be balked. Namely, that the pivot foot comes off the rubber before the free foot starts a step to the base.

A pitcher's pivot foot always comes off the rubber when he delivers a pitch, throws a pick-off, or makes a (legal) feint to a base. Once he completes the legal pitch/throw/feint he is no longer "in contact" and is no longer constrained by the rules that constrain an "in contact" pitcher.

So, I don't think that those who (erroneously) believe that the jab step should be balked think that a pitcher's pivot foot can't leave the rubber to the "front side" on a pick-off - they just think it can't be the first part of the move.

Second, it's an especially unconvincing argument in the context of FED rules because the FED rule makers, in yet another display of the "rugged individualism" for which they are known, explicitly allow the pitcher to remain in contact with the rubber on the third to first move. (Ref.: FED 6.2.4c).

Personally, I think the jab step move is legal because it does not violate the letter of the rules and because it provides the defense with no unintended advantage. Since the only thing a RHP can (legally) do after making a jab step towards 3B is throw a pick-off to 1B, and only after subsequently making a legal step with his free foot, the runner's "rights" in having some forewarning (of an impending pick-off throw) intended by the rules are properly served.

Nonetheless, good discussion.

JM

[briancurtin]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

To be frank, I understand very little about any of your posts.

I thought you were Bob?

[SAump]

Old rules limited the pitcher in the set position to stand facing the batter with the entire pivot foot on, or in front of, and in contact with, and not off the end of the pitcher's plate, and the other foot in front the pitcher's plate. Even as stiff as the old rules were, the jab step and jump turn were utilized by pitchers all over the country. There were never any balks called. IOW, I never heard NCAA umpire associations discuss the illegality of this practice prior this post. But now I understand Papa C's position regarding umpires posting on the internet and his decision not to participate.

From what I understand, this same rule has been recently modified to allow the pitcher to stand off the end of the plate while in contact with part of the pivot foot and to lift the restriction placed on the other free foot. I think this was part of the MLB decision to tighten the outer strike zone and a compromise to allow the pitcher an angle toward the plate. So my question is, when the RHP initiates his jab step to 3B, doesn't it actually land in a position that could also be utilized by the other free foot of a lefty standing on the 3B edge of the pitcher's plate?
---------------
I wouldn't call a balk on RHP for placing his pivot foot in the same location a lefty would utilize in the set position. {24}

or

You called the balk. Go explain it to the coach now and see if he accepts your rationale or leaves his opinion on the field. {25}

[Steven Tyler]

Originally Posted by SAump

Call the balk. Accept the protest. It's your ASZ on the line. Go ahead and see what the protest committee tells you and bet your last paycheck on it too.

Last time I looked at a map, San Antonio is not annexed from the state of Texas. Texas does not allow protests in FED.

[SAump]

Originally Posted by Steven Tyler

Last time I looked at a map, San Antonio is not annexed from the state of Texas. Texas does not allow protests in FED.

Like saying Texas doesn't allow bad calls. Bad calls can result in negative outcomes for either coach or umpire. Start a new thread and tell us how UIL and TASO handle it {bad calls, ejections, protests}. They will always be good and bad calls, good and bad disputes about those calls, good and bad ejections, and good or bad repercussions to follow.