Iiitbtsb
 

I know there are many threads on this so, if you could lead me there. Or a quick yes or no.

OBR

R2, pitcher comes set. Spins on his pivot foot for a pick-off attempt but ends up stepping toward 3rd while FEINTING a throw to 2nd, runner was not moving.

I read the OBR rule but it states throwing....etc

I was PU and called a balk for failing to step toward 2nd when throwing or feinting.

Did I blow it? I'm beginning to think I did.

Thanks.

OBR, pitcher must step before he THROWS, but a step is not required for a legal feint.

FED, a step is required in both cases.

Uhhh... Bob,

It (a "step", that is) IS if I'm calling the game!

JM

Not quite correct Bob.

The official interpretation from the PBUC staff is that, just like the FED, the pitcher must step before a throw or a feint.

Interpretation 248-359: OBR- "The pitcher must step toward the occupied base whether throwing or feinting."

I stand corrected. NCAA a step is not required for a legal feint. OBR is like FED, based on off. interp.

Good catch guys.

Reference please.

I got this out of the 2006 BRD, at my desk at work. Could be it's been revised since then?? NCAA: Pitcher must step before he throws, but the step is not required for a legal feint. (9-3c).

NCAA 9-3(c):
A balk shall be called for the following action:
"c. While in a pitching position, throw to any base in an attempt to retire a runner without first stepping directly toward such base; or throw or feint a throw toward any base when it is not an attempt to retire a runner or prevent the runner from advancing;
(1) The pitcher, while touching the pitcher’s rubber, must step toward the base, preceding or simultaneous with any move toward that base. The pitcher is committed, upon raising the lead leg, to throw to the base being faced, to second base or to the plate. When throwing or feinting a throw to a base not being faced, the pitcher must step immediately, directly and gain ground toward that base."

Looks to me like the pitcher has to step while feinting.

I totally agree with what Dave is saying, and I've called balks on this very thing. However, I am in a quandry vis a vis the BRD.

IMO, Carl has had this wrong in every BRD since about 1995 (and maybe earlier). (That statement is not intended to diminish the overall value of the book.)

You got it right. This is a balk because F1 stepped (feinted) to an unoccupied base (third).
Regards,
Tom

Yes, and that means it was a balk to 3rd base, not 2nd, so IIITBTSB still applies.

:confused:
OK, I give up. What does "IIITBTSB" mean?

JJ

Iiitbtsb
 

"It Is Impossible To Balk To Second Base"

To which the Tim C. corollary is that if the balk is based on the failure to step towards second, then it is not a balk "to" second.

And with that, I can finally agree, you can't balk to second.:cool: Because he stepped toward third, instead of second. :D

I can't resist trying to come up with one.

What about when the pitcher spins around and steps toward second, feints to second, and 2nd base is unoccupied and R1 not even moving. The balk advances R1 to 2nd. Is this a balk to 2nd base?

Well... one school of thought is: No, it is a balk for, among other things, failing to deliver the pitch after beginning the delivery. [Here it gets kinda circular - F1 wasn't engaged in a pick-off or play, 'cause R1 wasn't moving, so what he did MUST have been begin a delivery ....] So the accepted formulation [to avoid being labeled a stubborn, pendantic SOB] is
IIITBT[occupied]SB. "Liberals" add II[almost]ITBT[occupied]SB, because somewhere, someone will immagine some off-the-wall TWP, which can only happen on a Thursday with the moon full and the SS distracted by wiping the fireants off his Jawbreaker.......... you know.

Tee can mess around with the semantics pretty well to defend his IIITBTSB stronghold. Just try. You will fail. haha!