Quick Pitch?

edhern · #1 (**permalink**) Tue Jun 11, 2002, 08:43pm

14 y/o NJBL game. Pitcher had a move from the stretch that was extremely fast. My partner and I used the discernable stop criteria. It was clear he stopped for a real fraction of a second (but it was discernable, not just a change in the motion) and then quickly delivered catching the batters off guard. The opposing manager wanted a balk call. I watched carefully and there is no time criteria how long he must be stopped. I am sure that this is not the first time he used the move and if he was getting balked, he would have dropped it. Good move or quick pitch?

Ed H

Rich Ives · #2 (**permalink**) Tue Jun 11, 2002, 10:11pm

Coming to a stop is only one part of the "quick pitch" equation.

The other part is in:

8.05 If there is a runner, or runners, it is a balk when_

e) The pitcher makes an illegal pitch;
A quick pitch is an illegal pitch. Umpires will judge a quick pitch as one delivered before the batter is reasonably set in the batter's box. With runners on base the penalty is a balk; with no runners on base, it is a ball. The quick pitch is dangerous and should not be permitted.

You need to apply BOTH rules.

jicecone · #3 (**permalink**) Tue Jun 11, 2002, 10:33pm

Trying using the "complete and discernible stop" (Fed) or the "complete stop" (OBR) and you wont have to interpret what discenible is. Either the pitcher came to a complete stop or not. I don't think a fraction of a second could be considered a complete stop. Although I sure there are some technical scienctific umpires out there thay may disagree with me.

Jim Porter · #4 (**permalink**) Wed Jun 12, 2002, 02:00am

Quote:

Originally posted by jicecone
Trying using the "complete and discernible stop" (Fed) or the "complete stop" (OBR) and you wont have to interpret what discenible is. Either the pitcher came to a complete stop or not. I don't think a fraction of a second could be considered a complete stop. Although I sure there are some technical scienctific umpires out there thay may disagree with me.

I basically watch to make sure the pitcher's free leg is not initiating a delivery before the hands have stopped. I don't care how long or short they stop, as long as they stop. Only then can that free leg begin the kick.

joemoore · #5 (**permalink**) Wed Jun 12, 2002, 02:30pm

I don't think a fraction of a second could be considered a complete stop. Although I sure there are some technical scienctific umpires out there thay may disagree with me.

Scientifically, in order to change direction he must stop. (Think a ball can't come down until it stops going up.)

I think if a full second was required, then they should say a full second.

I usually will call time out before the pitch if I think the pitcher is not giving the batter a chance to get set. But if the batter is just waving his bat too long and didn't get himself ready, that's too bad.

jicecone · #6 (**permalink**) Wed Jun 12, 2002, 03:47pm

"Scientifically, in order to change direction he must stop. (Think a ball can't come down until it stops going up.)
I think if a full second was required, then they should say a full second."

As I said "Im sure there are some technical scientific umpires out there that may disagree".

A ball will reach its apex when it acheves zero velocity and the earths gravitatioal pull take over. Does it theoretically stop? Yes. Now how you can compare a ball to a human being and their ability to change direction without stopping is beyond me.

I repeat, I dont think a FRACTION of a second (SHOULD or COULD) be considered a complete stop.

Mabey the rules could be changed to "the pitcher must come to a 2 mississippi stop". Just my opinion

Rich Ives · #7 (**permalink**) Wed Jun 12, 2002, 04:20pm

But a motion only needs to come to a dead stop if the change in direction is exactly 180 degrees.

jicecone · #8 (**permalink**) Wed Jun 12, 2002, 06:36pm

Rich, "Where in the world are you getting that from"?

What rule book talks about degrees? Was it a complete stop or not? Hmmmmmm!

Rich Ives · #9 (**permalink**) Wed Jun 12, 2002, 06:43pm

Physics 101

jicecone · #10 (**permalink**) Wed Jun 12, 2002, 10:03pm

Sorry Rich I took Physics 101 and 102 and you lost me .

Rich Ives · #11 (**permalink**) Wed Jun 12, 2002, 11:04pm

You have a ball that is moving in an arc up to the sky then back down (fly ball). Yes, it stops moving UP before it starts down, but it does NOT stop moving laterally. Only if there is no lateral movement will it stop completely. To get no lateral movement, it must be a 180 change of direction.

Same principle if it is dropped to the belly then started up again.

jicecone · #12 (**permalink**) Thu Jun 13, 2002, 07:33am

I'll go along with your take on the ball, but that cant be compared to the human body's ability to have it's parts change direction without stopping.

I guess now were really getting too technical though. What was the original question?

Ump20 · #13 (**permalink**) Thu Jun 13, 2002, 07:56am

Quote:

Originally posted by edhern
14 y/o NJBL game. Pitcher had a move from the stretch that was extremely fast. My partner and I used the discernable stop criteria. It was clear he stopped for a real fraction of a second (but it was discernable, not just a change in the motion) and then quickly delivered catching the batters off guard. The opposing manager wanted a balk call. I watched carefully and there is no time criteria how long he must be stopped. I am sure that this is not the first time he used the move and if he was getting balked, he would have dropped it. Good move or quick pitch?

Ed H

I think Jim Porter's advice about the foot rising up before the hands become set is a good barometer to watch for. Many pitchers do make a stop of the hands but after they have commenced their pitching motion by raising their lead foot. I see many umpires who put their hand up to protect the batter TOO EARLY which is TIME and prevents any other play such as a pickoff attempt. I will only signal TIME if the pitcher begins to actually deliver before the batter is ready. The possible quick pitch should not be governed by whether the pitcher legally stopped but whether he is deliberately putting the batter at a disadvantage and jeopardizing safety. In 2002 safety rules over everything else. Jim/NYC

jumpmaster · #14 (**permalink**) Thu Jun 13, 2002, 08:53am

I can handle strike zone philosophy, lessons on appearance, even chirps from the parents and coaches. . .but you guys and physics are going TOO far.

If the pitcher comes to a complete stop, what's the problem? As the blue, if in your judgement, this becomes a safety issue, why not hold the pitcher up? You control the rhythm of the game.

joemoore · #15 (**permalink**) Thu Jun 13, 2002, 09:11am

I repeat, I dont think a FRACTION of a second (SHOULD or COULD) be considered a complete stop.

Mabey the rules could be changed to "the pitcher must come to a 2 mississippi stop". Just my opinion

I guess I should have been clearer. One-half a second is a fraction. A one-half second stop is a discernible stop with no physics required. At the point you decide to count "Mississippi's" he has already made a discernable stop, that's why you're counting, right?

If he begins delivery (raises his leg) before stopping, it is a balk. If it is a quick pitch designed to catch the batter off-guard (assuming runner on base) it is a balk.