The Official Forum

The Official Forum (https://forum.officiating.com/)
-   Baseball (https://forum.officiating.com/baseball/)
-   -   Thats a Balk - by the numbers (https://forum.officiating.com/baseball/50929-thats-balk-numbers.html)

SAump Tue Jan 13, 2009 08:50pm

Thats a Balk - by the numbers
 
Quote:

There are 15 ways to balk.

1. switches his pitching stance from the windup position to the set position (or vice versa)
without properly disengaging the rubber;
2. when going from the stretch to the set position, fails to pitch;
3. throws from the rubber to a base without stepping toward
(gaining distance in the direction of) that base;
4. throws from the rubber to a base where there is no runner and no possibility of a play;
5. steps or feints from the rubber to first base without completing the throw;
6. pitches a quick return pitch, that is, intending to catch the batter off-guard;
7. pitches or mimics a part of his pitching motion while not in contact with the rubber;
8. drops the ball while on the rubber;
9. after a feint or throw to a base from the rubber, fails to disengage
the rubber before reengaging and pitching;
10. after beginning to pitch, interrupts his pitching motion;
11. begins to pitch while the catcher is out of the catcher's box when giving an
intentional walk;
12. while pitching, removes his pivot foot from the pitching rubber, except to pivot;
13. inordinately delays the game;
14. pitches while facing away from the batter;
15. after bringing his hands together on the rubber, separates them except in making a
pitch or a throw;
16. stands on or astride the rubber without the ball, or mimics a pitch without the ball

Source: Rules and quirks -- The Hardball Times
Should I have a list like this on the ballfield?

Does this violate that unwritten rule about taking a rulebook onto the field?

Side note: Check out, "Twenty-three ways to get a man (any man) on first base."
Research "8. Batting out of turn" by following the "catalogued" link to Retrosheet.
I provided the link above.

briancurtin Tue Jan 13, 2009 09:00pm

"Should I have a list like this on the ballfield?"
Yes, and hand one to each of the coaches at the pre-game.



In case it isn't clear: No.

waltjp Tue Jan 13, 2009 10:36pm

Think if the time you can save. Before the manager even makes his way to the stop step you can tell him, "That's a number 7, Skip."

justanotherblue Wed Jan 14, 2009 12:51am

Keep working on it.. there are more than 15, a good rule of thumb to go by. If you can't describe it, don't call it.

Blue37 Wed Jan 14, 2009 08:26am

What about #9? I am at work without books, so I cannot look it up. I did not know that was a balk. It is one of the "technical" balks that is not called?

tip184 Wed Jan 14, 2009 10:08am

You've got to know the rules when you walk onto the field. Looking down a list of all possible balks after every pitch with a runner on base just isn't going to cut it.

Kevin Finnerty Wed Jan 14, 2009 11:58am

Quote:

Originally Posted by justanotherblue (Post 568256)
... a good rule of thumb to go by. ... don't call it.

I call only the balks that are unavoidable.

UmpJM Wed Jan 14, 2009 12:10pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kevin Finnerty (Post 568383)
I call only the balks that are unavoidable.

Kevin,

Since all balks are "avoidable" - I know this because I regularly see pitchers pitch and make pick-offs without balking - I have no idea what you are trying to convey by this statement.

Nonetheless, I believe I disagree with your assertion.

Would you care to clarify?

JM

Durham Wed Jan 14, 2009 12:23pm

He means he only calls the extremely obvious balks if I am not mistaken.

Kevin Finnerty Wed Jan 14, 2009 12:26pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by UmpJM (nee CoachJM) (Post 568390)
Kevin,

Since all balks are "avoidable" - I know this because I regularly see pitchers pitch and make pick-offs without balking - I have no idea what you are trying to convey by this statement.

Nonetheless, I believe I disagree with your assertion.

Would you care to clarify?

JM

Balks that are so obvious that they must be called. Calling the balk is unavoidable.

I hate calling balks and I hate it when a game turns on a borderline balk call.

Kevin Finnerty Wed Jan 14, 2009 12:27pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Durham (Post 568400)
He means he only calls the extremely obvious balks if I am not mistaken.

Thanks, Durham

(I answered before I read your post) ;)

TussAgee11 Wed Jan 14, 2009 01:15pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kevin Finnerty (Post 568402)
Balks that are so obvious that they must be called. Calling the balk is unavoidable.

I hate calling balks and I hate it when a game turns on a borderline balk call.

What about calling a borderline strike 3 that changes the game? Don't do that either?

SanDiegoSteve Wed Jan 14, 2009 01:45pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by TussAgee11 (Post 568434)
What about calling a borderline strike 3 that changes the game? Don't do that either?

How are you making this leap in logic? There is no correlation, and it's an unfair comparison. I think Mr. Finnerty is saying to not go looking for ticky-tac balk calls, especially when the call could have game-changing ramifications.

Kevin Finnerty Wed Jan 14, 2009 01:53pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by TussAgee11 (Post 568434)
What about calling a borderline strike 3 that changes the game? Don't do that either?

That is as specious a comparison as one can make and still be related to baseball.

TussAgee11 Wed Jan 14, 2009 02:44pm

A balk is a balk. Just like a strike is a strike.

Its not going looking for boogers. Lets say JV or higher...

If I got a balk, I got a balk. I am always going to be 100% sure of it, but if I'm 100% sure on what you may deem to be "ticky-tack," I'm still calling it. 1st inning, 7th inning. I don't care. How could I and still think of myself as an umpire with integrity?

Sometimes, you just gotta let 'em hang. Shying away from the tough call, when I'm 100% sure of it, will not move me up in this profession. Justly making it will.

Kevin Finnerty Wed Jan 14, 2009 03:01pm

Oh, okay, I'm shying away from a tough call.

Yeah, I have a toughness problem. And a poor grasp of justice.

Anything else you can draw from your gross oversimplification?

A balk is not a balk like a strike is a strike. For every balk, there are at least 1000 strikes. Sometimes 2000. Or more.

Try another equation.

Durham Wed Jan 14, 2009 03:58pm

Umpires learn balks in stages. By this I mean we all go through phases and as we grow as officials our understanding of the game, our role, and what a balk is changes. I don't know everything about umpiring, but I do believe that balks are one of the last things that we master in this trade. I think the reason is we don't see them often enough, and our focus and game awareness grows as we do.

Where I am at now with my officiating I see almost ever balk that happens in a game, but I don't call everyone. I often use some preventative officiating, and I might mention it to a member of the defense that he is getting close, or I might mention it to the pitcher if he is close enough after a play or something. And like a football official giving the coach a chance to take care of an issue with one of his players before the flag flies on a similar event, I will use this approach when I can. If a coach makes mention of it, I will let him know that i will look for it, or ask him to tell me what he saw, if he says, watch the front knee, then the defense will often tell the pitcher to clean it up and the game moves on.

On the other hand, if the pitcher flexes that front knee or closes the front shoulder and freezes R1 for even a split second, I'll bang that thing right away.

There is no right or wrong answer to balks, there is only, what does the guy that signs your checks want you to call. Know that, and know your role in the game, and everything else will work out.

Kevin Finnerty Wed Jan 14, 2009 04:04pm

Finally, a serious dose of wisdom on the subject!

Thank you, Durham

UmpJM Wed Jan 14, 2009 04:27pm

Kevin,

What's not to like about making balk calls? I think it's fun!

Why would you call an "obvious" balk but not a "subtle" one if you saw it?

I prefer to just call it when I see it & not consider whether or not it was "obvious".

JM

TussAgee11 Wed Jan 14, 2009 06:14pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kevin Finnerty (Post 568506)
Oh, okay, I'm shying away from a tough call.

Yeah, I have a toughness problem. And a poor grasp of justice.

Anything else you can draw from your gross oversimplification?

A balk is not a balk like a strike is a strike. For every balk, there are at least 1000 strikes. Sometimes 2000. Or more.

Try another equation.

Does the rules say one is lesser than the other?

Better to prioritize your responsibilities, and if you end up seeing a balk, call a balk. I don't care if anyone else did. Its my JOB that if I see it, I call it.

An umpire's job is, at its basic element, to enforce the rules throughout the game. Nowhere in the book does it talk about "if the game is close." To me, this issue is similar to the issue at the end of basketball games in terms of the supposed "letting them play," which has become an official faux pas.

I rarely draw comparisons from the pro-game to amatuer ball, particularly because balk problems are much more widespread at the amatuer level. But through the grape vine, I have heard that it is better in the eyes of those who evaluate to have the balls to make a tough, non popular call that is correct in a tough spot than pass on it for whatever reason.

Frankly, other than prioritizing my responsibilities on any given play for mechanical purposes, each rule is just as important as the one that precedes it in the book. Some may come up more often, but they are all to be enforced.

tip184 Wed Jan 14, 2009 09:02pm

It's challenging enough to identify a balk and call it when you see it. Now combine that with having to make a judgment according to the level of play, inning, score, whether it decieved the runner, etc. I think it is too much to ask an umpire to consider all these factors when a player would learn more from having the balk called.

Many umpires will only call a balk if it is completely obvious. A lot of leagues don't want the "picky" stuff called. Calling the game according to how the team wants it called rather than how the rules state the game actually should be called is a challenge all umpires face.

MrUmpire Wed Jan 14, 2009 09:15pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by TussAgee11 (Post 568668)
Does the rules say one is lesser than the other?

Better to prioritize your responsibilities, and if you end up seeing a balk, call a balk. I don't care if anyone else did. Its my JOB that if I see it, I call it.

An umpire's job is, at its basic element, to enforce the rules throughout the game. Nowhere in the book does it talk about "if the game is close." To me, this issue is similar to the issue at the end of basketball games in terms of the supposed "letting them play," which has become an official faux pas.

I rarely draw comparisons from the pro-game to amatuer ball, particularly because balk problems are much more widespread at the amatuer level. But through the grape vine, I have heard that it is better in the eyes of those who evaluate to have the balls to make a tough, non popular call that is correct in a tough spot than pass on it for whatever reason.

Frankly, other than prioritizing my responsibilities on any given play for mechanical purposes, each rule is just as important as the one that precedes it in the book. Some may come up more often, but they are all to be enforced.


This post, unless I misunderstand it, makes you appear to be a "black and white" rules umpire.

Would that be correct?

Do you have this same philospohy, "Its my JOB that if I see it, I call it.", with every rule?

TussAgee11 Thu Jan 15, 2009 12:51pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrUmpire (Post 568737)
This post, unless I misunderstand it, makes you appear to be a "black and white" rules umpire.

Would that be correct?

Do you have this same philospohy, "Its my JOB that if I see it, I call it.", with every rule?

Here's my deal. I will prioritize my responsibilities in accordance with my anticipation for a particular play. For example...

I'm PU, R3, 1 out. Fly ball down the LF line. Guess what will be last on my priority list. The tag up at 3rd. I got a fair/foul and then a catch/no catch on my plate first. So when I get to my tag responsibility, how could I still be "black and white" with the rules? Unless I see something glaring here, R3 ain't getting called out, even if I suspect it was a second early.

Same idea goes for balks. Am I going to get balks that I am 80% certain about? Heck no. Only 100%. And if I'm 100% about it, chances are it was what some other posters claim would be "obvious." Maybe it won't be, but to me it was, and that's all I care about.

I'm talking JV/Vars and up.

Blue37 Thu Jan 15, 2009 04:14pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blue37 (Post 568287)
What about #9? I am at work without books, so I cannot look it up. I did not know that was a balk. It is one of the "technical" balks that is not called?

Guys, can you help me with this one? I got the books out when I got home and must be overlooking something, 'cause I could not find it. In 26 years I have never seen anyone call this or complain when it was not called.

BigUmp56 Thu Jan 15, 2009 04:52pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blue37 (Post 569133)
Guys, can you help me with this one? I got the books out when I got home and must be overlooking something, 'cause I could not find it. In 26 years I have never seen anyone call this or complain when it was not called.

From the J/R:

Balks

It is a balk if a pitcher:


9. Does not step to a base in throwing (or feinting a throw) to such base.



Tim.

MrUmpire Thu Jan 15, 2009 04:54pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by BigUmp56 (Post 569146)
From the J/R:

Balks

It is a balk if a pitcher:


9. Does not step to a base in throwing (or feinting a throw) to such base.



Tim.

From the OP:

9. after a feint or throw to a base from the rubber, fails to disengage
the rubber before reengaging and pitching;

tip184 Thu Jan 15, 2009 06:42pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by TussAgee11 (Post 568962)
Same idea goes for balks. Am I going to get balks that I am 80% certain about? Heck no. Only 100%. And if I'm 100% about it, chances are it was what some other posters claim would be "obvious." Maybe it won't be, but to me it was, and that's all I care about.

If you are 80% sure about it, then it probably was a balk. Trust yourself.

TussAgee11 Thu Jan 15, 2009 07:19pm

If I make 3 80% balk calls over the course of a week, I have a pretty low chance of getting them all right.

Baseball, most of are calls, there has to be a call (ball/strike, safe/out, fair/foul). Things like balks, OBS, INT, we make either a call or a no call, very similar to basketball. Basketball guys will tell you, only call what you know you have. Its not a trust issue, its an understanding of yourself and the limitations that surround you on the field.

Dissent within balk philosophy isn't anything new, I don't suspect we'll clean it up in this thread.

tballump Thu Jan 15, 2009 07:28pm

Dyou see it, dyou call it, dyou splain it. Thats all you have to do.

TussAgee11 Thu Jan 15, 2009 07:35pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by tballump (Post 569185)
Dyou see it, dyou call it, dyou splain it. Thats all you have to do.

What if you think you saw it, but can't be sure? I'm thinking about something that may happen in the corner of your eye or just out of your vision (perhaps a front side balk that your pard' may have missed from behind the plate). Just askin'

tballump Thu Jan 15, 2009 07:44pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by TussAgee11 (Post 569187)
What if you think you saw it, but can't be sure? I'm thinking about something that may happen in the corner of your eye or just out of your vision (perhaps a front side balk that your pard' may have missed from behind the plate). Just askin'

Answer

Am I going to get balks that I am 80% certain about? Heck no. Only 100% to quote you earlier.

UmpJM Thu Jan 15, 2009 08:02pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by TussAgee11 (Post 569181)
If I make 3 80% balk calls over the course of a week, I have a pretty low chance of getting them all right.

Tuss,

If I follow your logic, you would actually have a better than 50% chance. Do the math! :rolleyes:

Quote:

Baseball, most of are calls, there has to be a call (ball/strike, safe/out, fair/foul). Things like balks, OBS, INT, we make either a call or a no call, very similar to basketball. Basketball guys will tell you, only call what you know you have.
I believe the analogy is inapt for the point you are trying to make. The basketball principles you allude to primarily have to do with officiating contact in basketball games. While there is often (but not always) contact in interference and obstruction sitches in baseball, the underlying rules - and principles of application - are very different between the two sports.

And balks don't have much to do with contact at all. Balks are more like basket interference or traveling or backcourt violations in basketball. You have to know the rules and apply them to what you see. Advantage/disadvantage doesn't enter into it.

Quote:

Its not a trust issue, its an understanding of yourself and the limitations that surround you on the field.
To me, it's a "trust in yourself" issue. I believe that balks are generally "undercalled". Primarily, because the umpires don't have confidence in their understanding of the balk rules and/or the presence to call it when they see it.

I have found this to be one of the more challenging aspects of learning how to umpire for myself. It's still an area of focus on improvement for me. I don't believe I've ever called a balk that "wasn't", but I know I've seen definite balks that I did not call. I am dissatisfied with myself when that happens, and it happens less than it used to.

Quote:

Dissent within balk philosophy isn't anything new, I don't suspect we'll clean it up in this thread.
There are certainly a lot of different philosophies on calling balks. Personally, I subscribe to the one that says balks are "level dependent" - I would use different criteria to rule on whether or not a pitcher had balked in a 13U game than I would in a HS game - but the rule would be the same.

Anything above HS Frosh that I work, the expectation is that balks will be called. So, I try to call them when I see 'em. "80%" is sure enough for me.

Unfortunately, a lot of umpires use "balk philosophy" as an excuse for not understanding and properly officiating the balk regulations. And the coaches!?!? I can't believe some of the stuff I hear!

Anyway, try calling some more balks (only if you see 'em, of course). It's fun!

JMO.

JM

BigUmp56 Fri Jan 16, 2009 04:03pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrUmpire (Post 569149)
From the OP:

9. after a feint or throw to a base from the rubber, fails to disengage
the rubber before reengaging and pitching;

And your point is?


Tim.

MrUmpire Fri Jan 16, 2009 04:35pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by BigUmp56 (Post 569489)
And your point is?


Tim.

Your statement of "9. Does not step to a base in throwing (or feinting a throw) to such base" which you offered as an answer does not necessarily equal the OP statement of the OP, "9. after a feint or throw to a base from the rubber, fails to disengage the rubber before reengaging and pitching", which is what was being questioned.

That's all. Nothing important.

BigUmp56 Fri Jan 16, 2009 06:08pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrUmpire (Post 569503)
Your statement of "9. Does not step to a base in throwing (or feinting a throw) to such base" which you offered as an answer does not necessarily equal the OP statement of the OP, "9. after a feint or throw to a base from the rubber, fails to disengage the rubber before reengaging and pitching", which is what was being questioned.

That's all. Nothing important.

I see what you mean. Good catch. Although, I have to say that I've yet to see a pitcher feint or throw to a base without their pivot foot disengaging the rubber.

Tim.

SAump Fri Jan 16, 2009 10:28pm

MLB 805(c) continued?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Blue37 (Post 569133)
Guys, can you help me with this one? I got the books out when I got home and must be overlooking something, 'cause I could not find it. In 26 years I have never seen anyone call this or complain when it was not called.

Consider it a quick "return" effort to prevent a runner from establishing a lead prior to a pitch. Suppose a pitcher would feint to force the runner to return to base. Then the pitcher would set up quickly, "count" and fire home before the runner could re-establish his lead. That's a balk.

Disclaimer: Applied "disengage" rule to demonstrate requirement. I took liberty with similar rules covering "different" balk situations. I could be wrong here.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:23pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1