Signals from the coach to the pitcher

[mbyron]

This is an OBR rule, and is intended to prevent a quick pitch: the scenario to be prevented is one where the pitcher can hold a runner on base by straddling the rubber, take his sign, then step onto the plate and pitch before the runner can get any significant lead.

It is not the purpose of the rule to prevent anyone else from giving signs to the pitcher. So, properly interpreted, the rule would read, "If he takes a sign from the catcher, the pitcher shall do so while standing on the rubber."

As an umpire, I do not get involved in semeiotics, so I will not be looking into dugouts and watching every defensive player on the field to see whether they might be doing something that could be considered a "sign." I don't care whether the opponent complains: if they say that you're relaying signs from the dugout I'll say that's not illegal, and besides it doesn't look like signs to me.

To answer your questions:
1. OBR (and presumably USSSA) provides no penalty for taking signs from F2 off the rubber; it's a "don't do that." A quick pitch is an illegal pitch, of course.
2. Yes.
3. See above. FED and NCAA have the same rule, though the penalty is different (ball/balk in FED, ball in NCAA).

[HokieUmp]

Originally Posted by mbyron

3. See above. FED and NCAA have the same rule, though the penalty is different (ball/balk in FED, ball in NCAA).

mb,

Can you give me the FED reference for that? I had a partner call a balk in an AAU game using FED rules, because F1 was off the rubber taking his sign. I spoke to him later in the game, to verify that's what he called it for. I disagreed at the time, but the moment had passed, anyway.

I tried looking it up in the rulebook that day, but all I found was the part that said what the pitcher was supposed to do - take his signs on the rubber - and no part that said Penalty: XXXX. I thought I looked carefully, but I guess I didn't.

Thanks!

[dash_riprock]

The FED penalty for the "quick pitch/taking signs" (defined in ART 1) is on p. 42 "PENALTY (ART. 1, 2, 3):"

I agree with mb about the intent being to prevent the quick pitch. The only signals I care about are between me and my partner.

[JJ]

This is one of those "mountain/mole hill" things. Because it's hard to discern if a pitcher is indeed taking signs "off the rubber", the only thing the umpire should be concerned about is if the pitcher is quick-pitching. I've seen pitchers appear to be taking signs from a catcher when in fact he isn't taking signs at all, or is taking them from a bench coach. As long as he isn't quick-pitching, IMHO it's much ado about nothing. Maybe that's why OBR doesn't list a penalty..

JJ

[RPatrino]

Couple of things, 1) how complicated are your signals that you can't trust the catcher to accurately relay them to the pitcher. Solve this problem, make your signs simple, flash them to the catcher and have him relay them to the pitcher. You can also have your pitcher "peek" at you while you are giving the signs yet still have him get them 'officially' from the catcher. 2) If you are an umpire that worries about this infraction, GET A LIFE, and 3) what is semeiotics, and do I need a prescription for them?

[Rufus]

Originally Posted by RPatrino

Couple of things, 1) how complicated are your signals that you can't trust the catcher to accurately relay them to the pitcher. Solve this problem, make your signs simple, flash them to the catcher and have him relay them to the pitcher. You can also have your pitcher "peek" at you while you are giving the signs yet still have him get them 'officially' from the catcher.

Trust me, not that complicated (I'm not smart enough to come up with something too complex!). The thing I've found with 11U is that they are good at taking small amounts of information in and processing it. Only as we get to the end of the season are they able to start stringing things together ("Oh, the warm up we do with three shuffles then a run is related to how we lead off and steal? Who knew?")

My primary catcher is unreliable with the basics of catching so I don't trust him to accurately relay what I'm calling either. I could work on it but, like I said, I didn't know it was a problem until yesterday. The season is almost over and my desire to add something new to the mix is limited.

[RPatrino]

Here's an other thought, why not have the catcher/pitcher call their own game? I've always wondered why coaches have to call every pitch. If he only throws a fastball and change-up, teach him when and how to use those pitches and let him learn the strategies of the pitch placement and speed changes. Just my 2cents. I coached for 15 years and almost never called a pitch. This is a learning environment, after all.

[Rufus]

Originally Posted by RPatrino

Here's an other thought, why not have the catcher/pitcher call their own game? I've always wondered why coaches have to call every pitch. If he only throws a fastball and change-up, teach him when and how to use those pitches and let him learn the strategies of the pitch placement and speed changes. Just my 2cents. I coached for 15 years and almost never called a pitch. This is a learning environment, after all.

I go back and forth over this, to be honest. Sometimes I think they are capable of it (I know my son and I talk contantly about pitch selection and why you throw certain pitches at certain times) but then there are other times when I think they are having trouble just hitting the glove so why not take something off their plate in terms of mental energy.

The other thing is while my son and I get to spend a bunch of time talking about pitch selection, I don't get to spend that same time with the other pitchers due to practice restrictions. I will admit, however, that when things start going south I will go out to them and say "No more signs, just 4-seam fastballs to the mitt."

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by HokieUmp

mb,

Can you give me the FED reference for that? I had a partner call a balk in an AAU game using FED rules, because F1 was off the rubber taking his sign. I spoke to him later in the game, to verify that's what he called it for. I disagreed at the time, but the moment had passed, anyway.

I tried looking it up in the rulebook that day, but all I found was the part that said what the pitcher was supposed to do - take his signs on the rubber - and no part that said Penalty: XXXX. I thought I looked carefully, but I guess I didn't.

Thanks!

See 6-1-1 (presumably this is on p. 42 of dash's rule book ).

I would not have called a balk in your situation. For one thing, the rule is poorly written: by the letter of the rule, it's a balk when F2 gives the infield signs for the R1/R3 situation and F1 is not in contact.

Given the poor quality of the letter of the rule, we have to rely on its spirit, which is to prevent a quick pitch (which is always a balk with runners on, in any rule code).

As I say, I don't know who's signaling what to whom, and I don't want to know. As written, the FED rule seems unenforceable. But I do know a quick pitch when I see one (and I know how to deal with that).

[dash_riprock]

Originally Posted by mbyron

See 6-1-1 (presumably this is on p. 42 of dash's rule book ).

The rule is 6-1-1, but the penalty is set forth on the next page, at the end of 6-1-3.

[HokieUmp]

Originally Posted by dash_riprock

The rule is 6-1-1, but the penalty is set forth on the next page, at the end of 6-1-3.

Let me see if I follow it then:

The penalty says "The ball is dead immediately when an illegal pitch occurs. If there is no runner, a ball is awarded ... If there is a runner, such illegal act is a balk."

The definition of an illegal pitch is "... an illegal act committed by the pitcher ..."

So the logic is: a pitcher taking the signs off the rubber is an illegal act, thus turning it into an illegal pitch (thanks to that vague definition above), thus making it a balk call.

Do I have that right? (Not trying to be sarcastic, I'm really trying to follow the logic, so I know what I'm debating.)

Having said all that, I don't agree one damn bit with it. I have multiple arguments against it:

1. It's just over-officiating. (That's the easy one, but depending on Official NFHS Dictate, that might not fly.)

2. The sentence right after the one about taking signals says "The pitching regulations begin when he intentionally contacts the pitchers's plate." So to me, if he's taking the signs off the rubber, he can't possibly be in violation of pitching regulations, so you can't balk him.

3. The penalty writeup is too vague, and doesn't seem to apply to that specific situation in 6-1-1. To me, anyway. And there's no other applicable penalty, so I wouldn't call anything.

From what I tried to find in the "Search" feature here a few weeks ago, I seemed to find postings that were mostly along the lines of "it's a 'don't do that' situation," and "I'm not balking that" more than any other response. Is there some official casebook notation, or newletter, or other NFHS directive that says "yes it is" or "no don't call that"?

Here's what happened to me. AAU U12 game, using FED rules. R3, XX out. Defensive coach - not HC, but one of the several in the dugout - hollers out about that. I tell him, "he's fine coach,"

"No, he's not!" (and more - I've already stopped listening.)

"He's fine. I'm not getting him."

And I turn to get ready for the next pitch. My mistake - and I admit it freely - was to not call time at this point and tell the kid "look, the rules do say you need to be on the rubber for the signs, so do us both a favor and do that, so he'll shut up." But I didn't, and we were getting ready for the next pitch.

So my partner (PU) immediately balks the kid next pitch. The coach "gets one over," and my partner shoves it in my ear, especially coming right after the exchange between me and the coach.

I wasn't sure that's what he got him for, so I asked an inning or two later. He said that's what it was for, and when I disagreed, he said it was a FED rule, and went through the logic of a runner not knowing when he can take a lead, and the pitcher being able to hold him close. My rebuttal to him was that although the rulebook says he can't do it, there's no penalty or action to take. He apparently felt the penalty after 6-1-3 applied.

But F1 wasn't trying to gain anything against the runner or batter. If anything, the kid was taking even longer than normal, not quick pitching. He'd take the sign, step back to the rubber, and still go through the prelim-stretch-set-pitch routine. So there was no advantage, so no reason to make a deal out of it. And this balked a run in, on top of it all.

So that's why I asked about the penalty in FED, because I didn't find anything to tell me I/we should balk the kid. And as I said, I don't feel like this penalty paragraph applies. Just my opinion.

[mbyron]

Why is the defensive coach complaining about a potential balk on his own pitcher?

[HokieUmp]

Originally Posted by mbyron

Why is the defensive coach complaining about a potential balk on his own pitcher?

I assume that's about my post from Friday. Sorry - just re-read it; should have said "offensive coach."

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by HokieUmp

Let me see if I follow it then:

The penalty says "The ball is dead immediately when an illegal pitch occurs. If there is no runner, a ball is awarded ... If there is a runner, such illegal act is a balk."

The definition of an illegal pitch is "... an illegal act committed by the pitcher ..."

So the logic is: a pitcher taking the signs off the rubber is an illegal act, thus turning it into an illegal pitch (thanks to that vague definition above), thus making it a balk call.

Do I have that right? (Not trying to be sarcastic, I'm really trying to follow the logic, so I know what I'm debating.)

Under a strict reading of the FED rules, and according to an old test question, yes, you have this right.

If the pitcher is "acting like he's on the rubber" (by bending over, one had at the side, looking in to the catcher, ...), then he should be on the rubber.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by HokieUmp

So my partner (PU) immediately balks the kid next pitch. The coach "gets one over," and my partner shoves it in my ear, especially coming right after the exchange between me and the coach.

Lovely. Let me tell you: As your partner witnessing this exchange, the pitcher would have to drop the ball or stop his motion mid-delivery for me to call a balk here. I'm surprised the other coach didn't get run for accusing the plate guy of letting the other coach make his calls.

How did the bus feel when your partner ran it over you?