Balk?

[mikebran]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

F1 has done nothing illegal when takes a sign while straddling the rubber

.

Wow. I'm standing on my head, listening to Abby Road backwards and the OFFICIAL RULES OF BASEBALL STILL SAY

..shall take signs from the catcher while in contact with the pitcher plate

PLEASE INVITE ME TO THIS GAME...


Pitcher is clearly straddling rubber, leaning in and taking signs.

Base coach: Hey Mr. Official, doesn't he need to be in contact with the rubber to take signs.

Official: He's not doing anything illegal, so go pound sand

Base coach: muttering.. I swear I read that once, oh well, the umpire is always right!

[UmpJM]

Originally Posted by mikebran

Wow. I'm standing on my head, listening to Abby Road backwards and the OFFICIAL RULES OF BASEBALL STILL SAY

..shall take signs from the catcher while in contact with the pitcher plate

Mike,

They certainly do.

However, I cannot find the part that says he cannot (also) takes signs while he is NOT in contact with the rubber.

As long as he DOES take signs once he does get on the rubber, he has not violated the rule you cite.

JM

[MrUmpire]

Originally Posted by UmpJM (nee CoachJM)

Mike,

They certainly do.

However, I cannot find the part that says he cannot (also) takes signs while he is NOT in contact with the rubber.

As long as he DOES take signs once he does get on the rubber, he has not violated the rule you cite.

JM

Shall—used to express a command or exhortation b—used in laws, regulations, or directives to express what is mandatory "it shall be unlawful to carry firearms"

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by MrUmpire

Shall—used to express a command or exhortation b—used in laws, regulations, or directives to express what is mandatory "it shall be unlawful to carry firearms"

But, just because you "shall" do something, does not mean you can't also do something else.

If F1 takes signs off the rubber, then takes them on the rubber, he has complied with the directive that he "shall" take them on the rubber. (The wording doesn't say "shall take signs only while on the rubber" for example.) In any event, it's somewhat pointless, imo, to argue the fine meanings of some of the phrases.

This saying could apply to FED and OBR rules: “I know that you believe you understand what you think I said, but I'm not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant.”--Robert McCloskey

[MrUmpire]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

But, just because you "shall" do something, does not mean you can't also do something else.

A dangerous argument. The rules also say a batter is awarded a base on four balls. I guess that doesn't mean he can't also be awarded a base on three balls.

I prefer to accept the common usage of the language. The rulesmakers said SHALL, and I believe they meant it.

I understand the lack of specific penalty, nonetheless, by rule they SHALL take signs from the rubber.

[jwwashburn]

I posted it and have been away from the computer all day.

I think the rule is poorly worded. If you "cannot" do something then, there has to be a consequence.

I called my friend and he told me a little more. The BU actually tried the "Don't do that." and the coach asked for time and said "There is no penalty in the book that deals with this."

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by jwwashburn

I called my friend and he told me a little more. The BU actually tried the "Don't do that." and the coach asked for time and said "There is no penalty in the book that deals with this."

"That's correct, coach. However, the book does provide a penalty for refusing to comply when I direct him not to do that again."

[Rich Ives]

Originally Posted by MrUmpire

A dangerous argument. The rules also say a batter is awarded a base on four balls. I guess that doesn't mean he can't also be awarded a base on three balls.

I prefer to accept the common usage of the language. The rulesmakers said SHALL, and I believe they meant it.

I understand the lack of specific penalty, nonetheless, by rule they SHALL take signs from the rubber.

The rule says

Pitchers shall take signs from the catcher while in contact with the pitcher’s plate.

So if he's getting signs from the catcher he must do it from the rubber.

But where does it say he can't get signs from someone else?

Where does it say he has to be on the rubber when getting a sign from someone else? The rule seems to only cover signs received from the catcher.

Do you think it means he must get a sign i.e. is giving/getting a sign required?

[cbfoulds]

Originally Posted by MrUmpire

Shall—used to express a command or exhortation b—used in laws, regulations, or directives to express what is mandatory "it shall be unlawful to carry firearms"

And your point?

It is, indeed, mandatory that F1 [at least appear to] take a sign [from F2] while engaged/ on the rubber.

There is, however, nothing in the Rules that PROHIBITS F1 from taking a sign before engaging, nor taking one from the dugout, his dad or girlfriend in the stands, or The Great Hairy Thunderer; AS LONG AS he ALSO takes [or appears to take] a sign from F2 while engaged and before pitching.

Since anything other than a quick pitch will be interpreted [by any competent umpire] as "taking a sign", the mandatory portion of the Rule is complied with.

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by mikebran

Wow. I'm standing on my head, listening to Abby Road backwards and the OFFICIAL RULES OF BASEBALL STILL SAY

..shall take signs from the catcher while in contact with the pitcher plate

Yes, but does Maggie May get any dirtier when she's played backwards? Holy I am the Eggman, Batman!

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by mikebran

Wow. I'm standing on my head, listening to Abby Road backwards and the OFFICIAL RULES OF BASEBALL STILL SAY

..shall take signs from the catcher while in contact with the pitcher plate

PLEASE INVITE ME TO THIS GAME...


Pitcher is clearly straddling rubber, leaning in and taking signs.

Base coach: Hey Mr. Official, doesn't he need to be in contact with the rubber to take signs.

Official: He's not doing anything illegal, so go pound sand

Base coach: muttering.. I swear I read that once, oh well, the umpire is always right!

Your "coach-umpire" conversation is correct. Furthermore, when F1 is straddling the pitching plate he is an infielder and not a pitcher. Now let us go one step further:

"F1 is clearly straddling the pitcher's plate, leaning in and taking signs. F1 then makes intentional contact with the pitcher's plate, leans in and takes or simulates taking signs from F2." Has F1 violated any thing in NFHS Rule 6?

OR

"F1 is clearly straddling the pitcher's plate, leaning in and taking signs. F1 then makes intentional contact with the pitcher's plate, and immediately throws a pitch to the batter." Has F1 violated any thing in NFHS Rule 6?

The answer to the former is NO, and the answer to the latter is YES.

MTD, Sr.

[MrUmpire]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

Your "coach-umpire" conversation is correct. Furthermore, when F1 is straddling the pitching plate he is an infielder and not a pitcher. Now let us go one step further:

"F1 is clearly straddling the pitcher's plate, leaning in and taking signs. F1 then makes intentional contact with the pitcher's plate, leans in and takes or simulates taking signs from F2." Has F1 violated any thing in NFHS Rule 6?

OR

"F1 is clearly straddling the pitcher's plate, leaning in and taking signs. F1 then makes intentional contact with the pitcher's plate, and immediately throws a pitch to the batter." Has F1 violated any thing in NFHS Rule 6?

The answer to the former is NO, and the answer to the latter is YES.

MTD, Sr.

You seem to believe that because a penalty is not specifically mentioned, that a written statement in the rulebook doesn't exist.

That is incorrect.

There are several such statements in the book, the requirement of the pitcher taking signs from the rubber being just one.

Feel free to ingore the rule if you'd like, but to insist it isn't there is BS.

[umpjong]

Originally Posted by MrUmpire

You seem to believe that because a penalty is not specifically mentioned, that a written statement in the rulebook doesn't exist.

That is incorrect.

There are several such statements in the book, the requirement of the pitcher taking signs from the rubber being just one.

Feel free to ingore the rule if you'd like, but to insist it isn't there is BS.

I think you are looking for boogers. (or splitting hairs)

The intent of the rule is to keep the pitcher from quick pitching. How many pitchers only throw one pitch and get no signs from the catcher? As long as he gives the batter ample time, its well within the intent of the rule.

[Kevin Finnerty]

Originally Posted by umpjong

I think you are looking for boogers. (or splitting hairs)

The intent of the rule is to keep the pitcher from quick pitching. How many pitchers only throw one pitch and get no signs from the catcher? As long as he gives the batter ample time, its well within the intent of the rule.

Just batters?

Runners also need ample time and are generally taught not to leave the bag until the pitcher's on the rubber.

It's deceiving and it's against the rules for more than one reason.

[Rich Ives]

Originally Posted by Kevin Finnerty

Just batters?

Runners also need ample time and are generally taught not to leave the bag until the pitcher's on the rubber.

It's deceiving and it's against the rules for more than one reason.

Runners are (should be) coached that the can start their lead as soon as the pitcher is on or astride the rubber - because it's a balk if he doesn't have the ball. Even if he quick-pitches, the runners willl still have their lead established.