Balk Called by Coach....
 

Would like to see how others would respond to the following situation:

3rd base coach yells out "He balked" believing that F1 balked which in turn caused F1 to balk....

3-3-1o states penalty for "use of any command or commit any act for the purpose of causing a balk" EJECTION.

My question is the phrase "purpose of causing balk" and wold be interested in others action to the above situation.

Time, no balk, warn the coach, dump if repeated.

agree with dash. Basically the offense can't make the pitcher balk.

I had a disagreement with one of my partners last year, he was at 3B, I at 1B in 4 umpire game. R3 fakes toward home as 3B coach is hollering GOGOGO. Pitcher stopped his motion after TOP. My partner said no balk, and warned the coach.

I had one last season where the batter verbally asked for time as the pitcher was starting his delivery. The pitcher stopped his delivery. I did call the balk in that situation and I feel that I made the right call under the circumstances. There is an element of judgement in these cases right? Other than the super-obvious ones I suppose.

Old school thoughts
 

Doesn't 3-3 apply to batter, as well as base coach.

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.

[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.

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.

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?

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.

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....

Indeed. I would agree.

There's a specific rule in OBR (and, I think FED) where this is a "restart from scratch."

A similar discussion just took place on the NFHS forum. You can check it out for a few different viewpoints:

NFHS Forum: coach's conduct

Johnnyg08: Bob's right. There's a specific rule in place. No balk. And yes, this rule exists in FED.

If the pitcher pitches, we can play on? Do we have to judge if the comment made by the player or coach was intended to get the pitcher to balk...or just a coincidence?

His comment wasn't intended to make the pitcher balk, it just worked out that way. He was yelling at you (or your partner). He was pointing out an infraction that he thought he saw. He wasn't yelling "balk" to make the pitcher balk.

I've got nothing, and warn the coach. Repeat offense by anyone on his team is an ejection.

johnny,

To me, it sounds like you kicked this one. Just because nobody complains, it doesn't mean you got it right.

Would the pitcher have balked if the batter hadn't asked for Time?

JM

+1

Seems to be exactly the situation covered by 6-2-4 (d1):
"If the pitcher, with a runner on base, stops or hesitates in his delivery
because the batter steps out of the box (a) with one foot or (b) with
both feet or (c) holds up his hand to request “Time,” it shall not be a
balk. In (a) and (c), there is no penalty on either the batter or the pitcher
The umpire shall call “Time” and begin play anew."

I agree with the just because nobody came out piece. I wasn't necessarily using that as my measuring stick. I guess I'm having a hard time deciding what is coincidence and what is causing the pitcher to balk.

To answer your question JM...If the batter didn't say anything...then I would say that "no, the pitcher probably wouldn't have balked"

I guess I understand giving "time" when F1 is freezing the hitter, and I understand the pieces where offense will try to throw of F1's rhythm by asking for time during their AB's...but how do we judge when to not give "time." By not giving the batter "time" when the pitcher is set and ready to pitch, we seem to be protecting the pitcher, but then as soon as he balks, then we bail out F1.

Obviously, I'm going to try to defend my call, but I can see the other side too...I could've simply called time, with the proverbial "do over" but all the other what if's pop into my mind.

Any pointers out there for how to develop good judgement around these types of plays would be great.

Trust me, I have a few "do-overs" on this type of play every year...this was one of the only ones where I called a balk.

Except he didn't hold up his hand. Batter did not move from his normal hitting stance. We can't add words to the rules right? In my sitch...the batter did none of what is listed there. So I guess my question is, when a batter does none of the above in terms of what's written in the rule...why do we bail the pitcher out. Thank you for your feedback guys.

Good judgment comes from experience. Experience comes from poor judgment.

(And, as an aside, judicious use of the quote feature would make your posts easier to follow).

Give the benefit of the doubt to F1. I'm in the camp that says to nullify the balk if the coach says "GO GO GO!" Aside from baserunners running bases, if the offense causes the balk, nullify it.

Close enough for government work. If you believe the rule requires intent, then I have intent. No balk.

As Bob has already stated,"Good judgment comes from experience. Experience comes from poor judgment."

Two past incidents that stand out in my mind. Amateur Ball. R3 taking a lead and yelling at the pitcher during his wind up. Obvious, yes. Did we eject, no. Could we have, yes. Instead it was a quick "Time, with a warning.

Batter in box. R3, tied score, bott of 7th. Legion ball. Batter steps to front of box, turns a 360 and gets set again. Pitcher balks. I call time and "Do over." Was the batter attempting to bring the winning run home? I thought so but, I choose to handle it differntly. HC argues that there is no such thing as a do-over and I explain that my other alternative is to eject the batter.

I realize this may have been handled differently by others here including myself at higher levels of ball but, I just wanted to point out two situations I have seen.

Not so much.

There are legal actions by the offense aside from running that may induce a balk. There are illegal actions which may do so, as well.

Only nullify the balk on the illegal ones.

R3 taking a lead and yelling at the pitcher during his wind up.

That was routine when I played, but runners knew they couldn't yell "balk" or "time" or something else an umpire might say. But I remember well when it seemed that during most of a ball game, everyone was yelling something at somebody.

NCAA has the same rule as well.. I had this happen in a College game last year...LOL

Dash had it right to start with. If either coach or batter (but especially the coach) does something that you recognize as precipitating the balk, intentional or not, first call "TIME." You have about a half second to replay the situation in your mind. If the coach intentionally did it, the ejection is easy, but you could warn as well depending on the severity. The coach crossed the line and is at the mercy of your ruling. With the player, having asked for time, he has bailed the pitcher out himself. I don't like pitchers, but once the batter requests "time," the pitcher has the advantage.

FED rules don't prescribe "a warning" for this infraction. The penalty is to "eject"- period.

That's why it's important to be as close to 100% sure as you can that it was intentional, purposely designed to cause the balk. If you're not sure it was intentional, then the rule wasn't violated. You could then issue a warning- consider it preventive umpiring- and let the coach know the consequences if it happens again and you do consider it intentional.

And if it does happen again, it's going to take a lot less to convince me that it is intentional!

Heck of a thing for an umpire to admit. At least you can be consistently sorry for both sides.