Balk Called by Coach....

[greymule]

DG: I think I'd call the balk in your situation. Saying, "Go, go, go!" is different from calling, "Time!"

johnnyg08: If the pitcher reflexively reacted to something the batter did, like hold up his hand or turn his head toward you, I'd give the pitcher the benefit of the doubt and not call the balk.

I remember an incident in a game I was listening to on the radio in the early 1960s. Hal Woodeshick relieved for Houston against Pittsburgh in the bottom of the ninth inning of a tie game with the bases loaded and none out. Woodeshick struck out the first two batters, got 2 quick strikes on Roberto Clemente, and was about to deliver his next pitch when Clemente held up his hand and asked for time. The ump didn't grant time, but Woodeshick stopped in his motion. He was called for a balk, and the winning run scored. Needless to say, a "discussion" ensued. I think that this play resulted in MLB's "enticed balk" policy.

[DG]

[QUOTE=greymule;659130]DG: I think I'd call the balk in your situation. Saying, "Go, go, go!" is different from calling, "Time!" [QUOTE]Thus the disagreement. If we give all benefit of doubt to the pitcher, then coach can't say anything. I would have called balk also.

When play happened PU and U3 had conversation and warned 3b coach. After the game we had post game and he was adamant that he learned this at pro school. I told him that I'm sure pro school also told him that penalty for this offense is ejection.

[johnnyg08]

Originally Posted by greymule

johnnyg08: If the pitcher reflexively reacted to something the batter did, like hold up his hand or turn his head toward you, I'd give the pitcher the benefit of the doubt and not call the balk.

You make a good point and I can appreciate that comment especially without having seen the play. The batter was still in his regular hitting stance and simply said the word time in a normal speaking voice that really only the catcher and I could hear. After watching the video of that game, I also noticed that the catcher seemed to assume that I'd give the batter time and he relaxed his action. After watching the play on video it appeared that the pitcher balked more because of the fact that his catcher relaxed as he was starting his motion. While I often give the benefit of the doubt to the pitcher in these instances, this was one that I feel I got right based on all of the circumstances around how the play developed. Nobody came out to talk to me about the play...and honestly, I think the call could've gone either way and nobody would've argued either way. I guess that's the judgement piece of umpiring.

[pastordoug]

Sorry I didn't clarify this is FED rules.... And the rule is clear that calling "time" or "using any command or commit any act for the purpose of causing a balk" means EJECTION... I understand it is one thing to know the rules and another thing to apply them so....

Let's add this situation:

Runners on 2nd and 3rd, coach and R3 yell "thats a balk" pither stops or makes some movement which is a balk..... What are you calling now?

[johnnyg08]

Correct...but "for the purposes of causing the pitcher to balk" and the pitcher balking are two different things aren't they?

To your post. "Time." "That's nothing." Will have a conversation with the coach about inciting a balk. On the other hand, maybe the coach was right...so maybe we have a balk...at that point, I'd probably be in the process of calling the balk an in FED, nothing can occur after a balk so we'd enforce the balk.

[pastordoug]

I agree that causing a pitcher to balk and the pitcher balking could be tow different situations.... Thats why I suggested knowing the rules and how to enforce them comes with experiance, IMO..

However, if that "balk" was the winning run in bottom of 7th you might have some visitors with a possible "good" rule discusion....

[johnnyg08]

Indeed. I would agree.