![]() |
|
|
|
|||
|
Blue37:
You said: "By leaning in and taking the sign, he is indicating to the runner that he is engaged." Are you tellling me that the runner is not capable of seeing whether F1 is in contact with the pitching plate? If the runner can not tell that F1 is not in contact with the pitching plate, he needs to have his eyes checked and get glasses. My sons have played baseball since they were playing YMCA coach-pitch, and they have said time and time again, that they can tell when F1 is in contact with the pitching plate and when F1 is not. You said: "The runner, therefore, assumes that there must be a disengagement or step before there can be a pickoff throw." Once again, it is too bad if the runner's eye sight is not good enough to tell that F1 is not in contact with the pitching plate. You said: "If the pitcher makes a snap throw without the disengagement or step, he has gained an advantage." If F1 is in contact with the pitching plate he has to follow the rules of pitching. BUT, if F1 is not in contact with the pitching plate he is an infielder and can throw anywhere or feint anywhere he pleases. MTD, Sr.
__________________
Mark T. DeNucci, Sr. Trumbull Co. (Warren, Ohio) Bkb. Off. Assn. Wood Co. (Bowling Green, Ohio) Bkb. Off. Assn. Ohio Assn. of Basketball Officials International Assn. of Approved Bkb. Officials Ohio High School Athletic Association Toledo, Ohio |
|
|||
|
Can anyone please provide the rule/penalty under Fed? Our son plays in a travel team and they use Fed in that league (instead of USSSA/OBR like the recreational league I coach in). The umpire called a balk when the pitcher on my son's team took signs while not engaged with the plate. I didn't think it was right but, like I said, I'm more familiar with the USSSA/OBR rule that you all have discussed here.
Thanks in advance. |
|
|||
|
6-1-1:
*snip* "He shall take his sign from the catcher with his pivot foot in contact with the pitcher’s plate." *snip* The penalty is the same as OBR: "don't do that."
__________________
Cheers, mb |
|
|||
|
PENALTY (ART. 1, 2, 3): The ball is dad immediately when an illegal pitch occurs. If there is no runner on, a ball is awarded to the batter. If there is a runner, such illegal act is a balk.
Would not this in FED then be a ball/balk?
__________________
Ump Rube ----------------------------------------------------- Ump (uhmp) shorted form; an official in a sport who rules on plays. Rube (roob) slang; sports fan who listens to KFAN in Minneapolis, MN. |
|
|||
|
Quote:
There's much dispute on that point. Some argue as you do. Some have recollection of a FED test question from some years back that this is a balk. Some argue that since pitching restrictions haven't begun, the penalty in 1, 2, 3 can't apply. Some argue that it really is the same as the OBR rule, depsite how it might be worded (and all agree that there is some wording that's confusing). So, there's no clear cut answer. |
|
|||
|
I argue no: violating the provision of 6-1-1 requiring F1 to take signs while in contact is not a pitch. Thus it can't be an illegal pitch. Thus the penalty for an illegal pitch does not apply to this violation.
__________________
Cheers, mb |
|
|||
|
Quote:
2-18: An illegal pitch is an illegal act committed by the pitcher... (blah, blah, blah not relevant to this). I see it the same as the mouth-ball scenario, he has not pitched, but has done an illegal act.
__________________
Ump Rube ----------------------------------------------------- Ump (uhmp) shorted form; an official in a sport who rules on plays. Rube (roob) slang; sports fan who listens to KFAN in Minneapolis, MN. |
|
|||
|
Just ask FED for help
FED 6-1-1 "He shall take his sign from the catcher with his pivot foot in contact with the pitcher's plate."
The intention here is to establish the pitcher, apart from the other infielders. FED 6-1-1 "The pitching regulations begin when he intentionally contacts the pitcher's plate." The intention here is to establish the time frame when a pitcher becomes subject to all pitching regulations. One cannot call a balk until the pitcher has first made contact with the pitcher's plate. Valid justifications for which a proper balk penalty may be charged against the pitcher are found in FED rule 6-2-4. This rule requires the pitcher to be touching the pitcher's plate. FED 6-2-5 "It is also a balk if a runner or runners are on base and the pitcher, while he is not touching the pitcher's plate makes any movement naturally associated with his pitch, ... " Merely placing his feet on or "astride" the pitcher's plate does not qualify as movement associated with his pitch. Taking signs does not qualify as movement associated with his pitch. Now I do suppose that one could interpret "or he places his feet on or astride the pitcher's plate" with the ball in his hand as a prerequisite for a balk, but it would be difficult to justify a balk in the OP.
__________________
SAump
Last edited by SAump; Thu Jun 11, 2009 at 06:16pm. |
![]() |
| Bookmarks |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Balk/No Balk: LHP fients pickoff the 3rd base | Mike6221 | Baseball | 4 | Sun Jun 07, 2009 09:47pm |
| RHP in stretch facing 1st base (balk or no balk) | tem_blue | Baseball | 6 | Thu Jul 20, 2006 10:00pm |
| Stealing Home, P in Windup, Balk or No Balk? | johnnyg08 | Baseball | 2 | Wed Jul 05, 2006 10:12am |
| Was this a Balk ? I called it a Balk. | nickrego | Baseball | 20 | Fri May 12, 2006 06:07am |
| Balk, Balk Yells the Coach!!! | Gre144 | Baseball | 12 | Tue Jul 10, 2001 07:32am |