Balk Talk

[Lapopez]

I have to give one this Friday and I've been cramming today. I may have various questions throughout the week. I'm going to start with a few now. In advance, I appreciate anyone's insight.

I'll be focusing on FED rules.

1. It struck me that FED is a bit more strict than OBR at least with respect to penalties. It seems that many things in OBR that would be balks with men on base are "don't-do-thats" with no one on base. But in FED, with no one on base, based on the penalty at the end of 6-1-3, these things are at least illegal pitches, with a penalty of a ball. Am I right about this?

2. I'm probably being a little picky here. FED 6-2-5: It is also a balk if...he places his feet on or astride the pitcher's plate, or postitions himself within approximately five feet of the pitcher's plate without having the ball. Isn't the part about being "on or astride the pitcher's plate" superfluous if it is already a balk if the pitcher is within five feet of the pitcher's plate?

3. I have an old list of balks that I'm sure I got off the internet. One of them is, "Steps toward occupied third and then turns to throw to first without first disengaging the rubber." This agrees with the Evans' video. But my list goes on to say, "The HS pitcher is allowed to make this move with or without disengaging the rubber." Is that true?

That'll do for now. Thanks again.

[johnnyg08]

A balk is a balk FED or OBR...the difference in FED for the most part is that nothing can happened after the balk. The pitcher must gain distance and direction to first base. In the 3B to 1B move, 3B must be occupied and before the move to 1B the pitcher must disengage the rubber before throwing to 1B...basically he can't feint to 3B and spin to 1B all in one motion. At least I think that's what you're talking about in your post.

[UmpJM]

Lapopez,

1. I, in general, I find FED balk rules a bit "pickier" than OBR rules. You are technically correct that under FED rules, actions which would be considered balks with runners on base are treated as "illegal pitches" with no runners on base - and penalized by a ball added to the batter's count.

In my experience, it is unusual for an umpire to "see" one of these infractions when there are no runners.

johnnyg's assertion that "...A balk is a balk FED or OBR..." is patently incorrect. There are a number of actions which are NOT a balk in OBR that ARE a balk in FED. There is also one action that IS a balk in OBR but is NOT a balk in FED.

His assertion that the ball is immediately dead upon a balk in FED (unlike OBR, where the ball may or may not become dead depending on what happens next) is correct.

2. I would agree that the pitcher would have had to get within "...approximately 5' of the pitcher's plate..." in order to be "on or astride", so the wording is a bit superfluous. I was told by Kyle McNeeley that the intent of the rule is to prohibit the pitcher from stepping on the "dirt circle" of the mound (a la NCAA) without the ball. The "approx. 5' " language was put in to accommodate schools with fields that have "skin" infields.

3. This is the one action which IS a balk in OBR and is NOT a balk in FED. OBR rules explicitly prohibit the F1 from remaining engaged on a "3rd to 1st" move, while FED rules explicitly permit it. Despite johnnyg'a assertion to the contrary.

If the pitcher does choose to remain engaged, he must THROW to 1B - not merely feint - and a legal step is to 1B is required.

JM

[Lapopez]

Originally Posted by UmpJM (nee CoachJM)

3. ... while FED rules explicitly permit it.

Would you please refer me to this? Thanks.

[UmpJM]

Lapopez,

FED (2009) Case Play: 6.2.4 Situation C: Ruling.

JM

[Lapopez]

Originally Posted by UmpJM (nee CoachJM)

Lapopez,

FED (2009) Case Play: 6.2.4 Situation C: Ruling.

JM

Thanks. I had just found it in Rules by Topic. I'm good with the first 3--Probably more tomorrow.

[johnnyg08]

thanks for pointing out what I failed to properly articulate in words...i need to continue to improve there...on the field I think I do a pretty good job (while always trying to improve)...maybe I'm reading #3 differently than you are reading it. I guess my assertion was leaning more toward that it can't be all one motion (move to 3B, and in the same motion spin and throw to 1B)...in other words, a all-in-one motion spin move would be illegal in FED too...no?

[dash_riprock]

As UmpJM said, FED allows F1 to throw to 1st while still engaged but he must step there first. Stepping to 3rd then to 1st is not going to be one continuous motion.

Under other codes, a step towards 1st is not required because F1 must be disengaged to make the throw. At that point, he's an infielder.

[cookie]

Lapopez,

Another major action that is a balk in Fed but not in OBR is the pick-off attempt from the Wind-up.

In Fed, from the Wind-up position F1 must disengage legally from the rubber if he wants to throw to an occupied base in a pick-off attempt. In OBR, from the Wind-up F1 can step directly from the rubber to an occupied base in a pick-off attempt (of course, prior to committing to the delivery to the plate).

[mbyron]

When I have to teach balks, I find it useful to begin by teaching what is permitted rather than what is prohibited. The following apply to FED rules.

From the set position with runners on, F1 must come set and then may:
1. pitch to the batter
2. legally disengage
3. step and throw or feint to a base (no feint to 1B)

From the wind-up with runners on, F1 may:
1. pitch to the batter
2. legally disengage

In my experience, 98.5% of balks result from violating these permissions and can be explained as such: "started and stopped," "no stop," "no step," etc.

Focusing on permission rather than prohibition will help novice umpires with the 98.5%.

[Lapopez]

4. I know the pitcher shall pitch while facing the batter. Maybe I need some background on this rule. How could and why would a pitcher violate this rule?

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Lapopez

4. I know the pitcher shall pitch while facing the batter. Maybe I need some background on this rule. How could and why would a pitcher violate this rule?

It's a relic that's "never" violated today. Ignore it during your talk (or use it as humor).

[UmpJM]

Lapopez,

I'm with Bob on this one.

The rule is a "hold over" from the days when the pitcher was constrained to a "box" rather than to contact with the pitcher's plate.

Some of the more creative pitchers developed "freak" deliveries, some of which involved delivering the pitch while the pitcher's back was to the batter in an attempt to keep the batter off balance and disguise when they actually released the ball.

The rulesmakers decided they wanted to eliminate the freak deliveries, hence the rule.

With the pitcher constrained to contact with the rubber and delivering from either the set or windup position, it is virtually impossible to violate 8.05(f) while pitching from windup or set while in contact with the rubber - though I suppose someone could come up with a way if they really tried.

One thing that is fairly common is to see the F1 do a "look back" during his delivery at 2B when there is an R2 in an attempt to hold the runner. That is perfectly legal and NOT a violation of 8.05(f).

JM

[johnnyg08]

oh, the pick off from the wind-up is a good one. nice add.

[Lapopez]

In my list of balks, the following two are consecutive:

a) Pitches from the windup position without maintaining contact with the rubber.
b) Pitches from the set position with his pivot foot outside the end of the rubber.

5a. Was it deliberate that these were presented consecutively? What I mean is, was the author purposely distinguishing the windup and set? This bothers me because (a) should apply to both the windup and the set.

5b. Regarding (b), is it practical to be very strict on this, especially in light of the way Evans presents this in his video where he said it is acceptable for the pitcher to at least have half of his foot adjacent to the rubber?