Mixing the Set and Windup Positions

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

Based on just that, I have nothing. What rule (in the windup section) do you think he broke? "Free" can include where it sounds like his foot was.

Mike, I'm reading this F1 as starting in the set, not the windup. That would make more sense with a runner on.

I could be wrong: F1 cannot both be "perpendicular to the batter" (sounds like he's facing the batter in the windup) and have "his back to the runner at 1B" (sounds like he's facing 3B in the set).

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by mbyron

Mike, I'm reading this F1 as starting in the set, not the windup. That would make more sense with a runner on.

I could be wrong: F1 cannot both be "perpendicular to the batter" (sounds like he's facing the batter in the windup) and have "his back to the runner at 1B" (sounds like he's facing 3B in the set).

With the pitcher stepping back, this HAS to be a windup... so compare his actions to that rule to determine if he broke one.

Imagine pitcher with feet appearing to face 3rd, but the body facing home... could that not be "facing the batter"?

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

With the pitcher stepping back, this HAS to be a windup... so compare his actions to that rule to determine if he broke one.

Imagine pitcher with feet appearing to face 3rd, but the body facing home... could that not be "facing the batter"?

As you know, what he does during the pitching motion does not determine whether he's in the windup or the set. It's strictly the position of his feet when he takes the rubber.

[Coach Dykhoff]

The two parts of the rules that I feel make this a balk are:

1) When he steps back while in the set position it is toward first base which makes this a balk.

2) When he steps back while in the set position he is bringing his free foot off the ground to step back (Not going to the plate but doing a windup) which makes this a balk.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by Coach Dykhoff

The two parts of the rules that I feel make this a balk are:

1) When he steps back while in the set position it is toward first base which makes this a balk.

2) When he steps back while in the set position he is bringing his free foot off the ground to step back (Not going to the plate but doing a windup) which makes this a balk.

Both of these say, "While in the set position".

What part of the "Windup position" rule has he broken? MByron is envisioning the initial foot setup as the problem. In my head, I'm not - but I might not be envisioning exactly what this kid did. It's very HTBT.

[Coach Dykhoff]

The rule that he has broken is he is setup in the set position. Is he not?

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by Coach Dykhoff

The rule that he has broken is he is setup in the set position. Is he not?

I don't know... I'm not there.

[jdmara]

Originally Posted by Coach Dykhoff

The rule that he has broken is he is setup in the set position. Is he not?

If his non-pivot foot is not (or nearly) in contact with the pitcher's plate, he is in the set position. He has balked by not throwing to first IMO.

-Josh

[Coach Dykhoff]

Originally Posted by mbyron

Mike, I'm reading this F1 as starting in the set, not the windup. That would make more sense with a runner on.

I could be wrong: F1 cannot both be "perpendicular to the batter" (sounds like he's facing the batter in the windup) and have "his back to the runner at 1B" (sounds like he's facing 3B in the set).

We will say parallel then.