Balk or not
 

NFHS rules. Runner on 2nd, pitcher pitching from the stretch. After going to the set position, the pitcher pivots on the rubber, steps toward 2nd base and fakes a throw to 2nd. The runner takes off to 3rd not realizing the pitcher was faking a pick off move to 2nd. The pitcher, no longer in contact with the rubber throws the ball to 3rd and the runner is tagged out. Is this a balk or a legal play?

My opinion:
NFHS Rule 6.2.4.b says it is a balk if there is a runner on and the pitcher throws or feints to an unoccupied base when it is not an attempt to put out or drive back a runner. So, in my opinion it is a balk because he stepped toward 2nd, then threw to 3rd. Had he stepped to 3rd and thrown to 3rd, he would not be a balk because he was making an attempt to put out a runner.

I have heard 2 arguments from other umpires on this.
Argument 1: it is a balk because the pitcher must step behind the rubber before he can throw to an unoccupied base.
Argument 2: it is not a balk because the pitcher while faking a throw to first, stepped toward second and after his pivot foot left the rubber during the step toward 2nd, he is now a fielder and can throw wherever he wants to.

Thoughts?

2nd base is the occupied base.

3rd base is the unoccupied base with a runner advancing toward it.

Now think it through again.

Not sure what you mean Rich. I agree 3rd base is not occupied. My feeling is the pitcher must step towards the base he is throwing to regardless if it is occupied or not. I think the pitcher cannot step toward 2nd, then throw to 3rd.

He stepped toward second and faked a pick-off to second. Legal

He threw to 3B while disengaged from the rubber. Legal

Nothing illegal about his move. He faked to an occupied base (legal) and then threw to a base in an attempt to retire a runner attempting to advance (legal). In fact, once the disengagement from the rubber was made on the fake pick-off, anything after that is legal anyway (even a fake throw to an unoccupied base) because he's an infielder the moment he disengages.

I agree with Yawetag, this is not a Balk. The pitcher can step toward second base and does not need to throw. Once he comes off the rubber, there are no restrictions and he can throw to third to retire the advancing runner.

Iitbtsb

You are correct about this principle, but it doesn't apply to your case. The key is to understand when he ceases to be a pitcher: the pitcher stepped toward 2B and feinted there, which is legal.

Once disengaged, he is no longer a pitcher, and the restrictions on pitchers no longer apply. He is technically an infielder and may do whatever (otherwise legal action) he wishes.

If he steps toward second and throws across his body to third all in one motion (just like a "normal" throw to third except the foot is to second -- or like you're faking out the dog when having him chase the ball in the backyard), then it's a balk.

But, that's not what he did in the OP. He faked to second and THEN threw to third. The tiem between the fake and the throw can be >veryshort<

I agree completely with the advice given by everyone.

What did argument 2 mean though? You never mentioned first until now. If he feint to first whle stepping to second, well that is the same as Bob has talked. abt. balk.

Let's start with the basics.

• The only base that F1 cannot fake a throw to when in contact with the rubber is 1st base.
• F1 may turn from the set position and either throw or fake to 2nd base.
• Pitching restrictions (all rule sets) only apply when F1 is in contact with the rubber. Once F1 disengages the rubber, he is an infielder and can throw anywhere.
• Even if he were in contact with the rubber, he is making a play on the runner heading for 3rd base so it is a legal move.

Quoting rules is good but you need to understand the rule first.

I believe clevbrown's fundamental misunderstanding is that he does not understand that, in this play, 2B is considered an "occupied base" because that was the base R2 was entitled to when F1 engaged the rubber.

Even though R2 had "taken off" to 3B at the time of F1's feint to 2B, for purposes of the rule, 2B is still considered an "occupied base".

JM

Sorry, I messed up when I posted "argument 2". it should have read ...

Argument 2: it is not a balk because the pitcher while faking a throw to 2nd stepped toward second and after his pivot foot left the rubber during the step toward 2nd, he is now a fielder and can throw wherever he wants to.

I did not mean to state "while faking a throw to first". My mistake.

Actually, I understand which base is occupied. My problem is I did not understand that a pitcher can step toward a base with his non pivot foot and still be considered stepping off the rubber. I thought the pitcher had to disengage from the rubber with his pivot foot and step behind the rubber.

What I have learned from everyone on this page is once a pitcher steps towards an occupied base and removes his pivot foot from the rubber, he is now a fielder and can throw anywhere he wants. Thanks to everyone for helping me understand this.

One follow up question...
Runner on 2nd, pitcher in the stretch, runner breaks for 3rd, can the pitcher step toward 3rd and throw to third since he is "attempting to put out a runner"? Per the rules, it appears the answer is yes he can. However, I hear a lot of people say he cannot.

clev,

Yes, he can.

JM

Yes he can, and your reasoning is correct. In my experience, the balk rules are the weakest area of rules knowledge for many "veteran" umpires. You'll be better off doing what you're doing: study the rules for yourself, and then you can help out some of your "more experienced" partners.

Never seen a balk on a pick off at second nor have I heard of one called. It might be possible but I can't think of how it would be committed.

gordon,

Heck, D-backs F1 Brad Ziegler did it just a couple of weeks ago in the playoff against the Brewers.

Baseball Video Highlights & Clips | ARI@MIL Gm 2: Brewers score five runs in the sixth - Video | MLB.com: Multimedia

(Around the 20-second mark.)

Of course, the IITBTSB dogmatists will come up with some specious semantic argument that the balk was for "...failure to deliver a pitch without interruption after having made a move which committed him..." or some such nonsense.

But, in the real world, it's "a balk to second base".

It's not impossible, it's just really hard.

JM

Yeah you can drop the ball or commit to the plate and it is indeed a balk. Give me a way to commit a balk other than above.

JM, I'm curious why you regard this argument as either specious or semantic.

But in any case, disputes about IITBTSB are moot and miss the point of the "dogma."

Michael,

The only explanation I've ever come across that describes the "point of the dogma" is that it somehow facilitates the learning of the balk rules.

That never made sense to me.

Perhaps there's another "point" of which I am unaware?

JM

ô!ô
 

JM:

I am not at all a "dogmatist" . . . what I am is someone that can look at a situation and make common sense.

The balk in the video was for failing to complete the pitch as it has nothing to do with balking "to" second base.

Remember (and I know you "get it") while it is impossible to balk top an occupied second base there can be balk while second base is occupied.

I will remind everyone: if you accept IIITBTSB and teach it you will eliminate phantom balks that are called by some of the people that post here.

T

It must be nonsense because you say it is . . . I expect better from you.

Tee gave it: eliminate phantom balks.

Now perhaps you'd answer my question? :cool:

Tim and Michael,

I characterized the "philosophy" as "dogmatist", and the argument "specious and semantic" because:

1. The pitcher in the video clearly and unequivocally balked while attempting to make a pick-off move on the R2. (I say it this way because I expect that neither of you would disagree with this way of characterizing it.)

2. The pitcher's initial movement did NOT commit him exclusively to delivering a pitch. It committed him to either delivering a pitch OR making a pick-off move to 2B. Had there been an R3 - or had the R2 been advancing - he would have also had the legal option of making a move to 3B.

3. And, to be honest about it, I was intentionally being "provocative". :o Hey, sometimes I just can't help it.

In my experience (which I stipulate is significantly less than either of yours), I have never seen a "phantom balk" called on a pitcher making a move towards 2B - though, to be fair, I have seen a number of coaches who wanted such a call, typically because the move was "awkward".

Balks are the hardest calls for newer umpires to make. I can't help wondering if the practical effect of teaching the IITBTSB philosophy is that it makes umpires hesitant to call balks that ARE committed rather than reducing phantom calls.

JM

ô!ô
 

JM,

Unlike you I have personally seen a BU call a balk for F1 tossing to F6 not near the base.

I have seen a BU call a balk on F1 who turned to throw to second base but the runner had already headed to third . . . yep, a balk for throwing to an unoccupied base.

We also SEVERAL times over the past ten years enough questions have been brought to umpire websites where there are questions about "balks to second" that are not that.

I stand by what we teach.

T

Ask yourself ... if he hadn't thrown to third, would you have a balk for the feint toward 2nd? (I'm hoping your answer is no.)
Now ask yourself - are there any restrictions regarding throwing the ball once the pitcher has legally disengaged? (Again, hoping the answer is no)

So now what do you have?

I've seen it more than once when I played adult ball. Those guys don't usually know their elbow from a hole in the ground.

J.M.

I respectively disagree, he most clearly commited himself to the pitch. He did not step directly toward second base. This balk is/was taught at at the college level. It's an effective balk move that a pitcher can get away with and often do. Just as the jump turn is more times than not a balk, that rarely gets called. This picher clearly brings his leg up then half to three quarters down before he changes direction toward 2B. Absouletly a balk. I was one of those that would argue you could balk to 2B. In reality you can't. I agree with the others, the balk had nothing to do with 2B.

Jouquin Benoit did a jump turn in the playoffs against the Rangers and it wasn't called.

Bring on the Cardinals anyway.

OTOH-Get rid of that stupid rule about home team advantage in the World Series. As hard as they try, the All-Star game sucks for the most part. Getting less entertaining than the Pro Bowl that not many players want to play in.

Thanks guys for the feedback. I am learning a lot about balks this season and I appreciate your help.

An observation regarding the video, the announcer kept saying the balk was called because of the hesitation. I really thought the balk should have been because he did not step toward 2nd or home. Instead he stepped with his left foot about 6 inches from the rubber toward the 3rd base side. At that point he had not disengaged from the rubber with his pivot foot. So, I would call balk for not stepping toward ho e or 2nd. Would that make sense?

It wasn't a balk.

How do you figure?

Yes. What is illegal about a jump turn as long as it gains ground toward the base?:confused:

It is considered a move from the rubber.

Which is legal, as long as there is ground gained toward the base to which the pitcher is feinting or throwing. Where else would the jump turn or jab step (both legal) originate, the moon?

Coach JM (correctly) says "The INITIAL move does not commit him to pitch." By "initial move" he means the leg raise. You are now talking about lowering the leg. Since that lowering is not toward second, I agree that this prohibits him from throwing (or feinting) to second.

He balked multiple times. Award the runner home. ;)

Matt, as Steve said here, as long as he gains distance toward first, it's legal. Obviously, with a jump turn, F1 has the directional part of the rule covered. What you will see is the non-pivot foot often lands behind the pivot foot, away from the base, hence, not gaining distance nor direction, therefore a balk.


I agree Bob, it's not the raising of the leg, it's his downward motion that commits him to the pitch, again, it wasn't a direct step toward 2B. Sorry, J.M., if I mis-understood your post, I agree, it's not the initial movement.

I'm having trouble understanding your worry. The free foot has to gain distance and direction toward 1B relative to where it was when F1 came set. I don't think you can do a jump turn toward 1B and fail to accomplish this.

The most common balk during a jump turn might be failing to throw to 1B.

+1
I'm having trouble seeing how one might balk on this move short of simply falling over and tripping. You'd have to balk on purpose, almost.

1. I don't think you even know what a jump turn is.

2. Who mentioned a jab step being the same as a jump turn.

Finally, someone who gets it.................:rolleyes:

1. I'm quite certain Steve (and you) know what a jump turn is.

2. The jab step and the jump turn are similar in that neither is mentioned in the (OBR) rules book, but both are legal by interpretation, and subjest to the same rules.

3. If you point is that F1 must throw the ball, that has nothing to do with the jump turn itself being legal (or not, depending on how it's performed)

4. Both of you need to stop the sniping at each other. It would be best, imo, if you just ignored each other.

Actually you might see one of three ways on a jump turn that the pitcher balks. As mentioned, he doesn't throw, he throws while still in the air, or as I mentioned, he fails to gain ground. It's not uncommon during a jump turn that the free foot will rotate around and land behind where the pivot foot was during his initial set. Hence, not gaining distance toward 1B and a balk. It's not one I generally look for however if a pitcher is using a jump turn exclusively, I tend to pay more attention to his feet position. I'll bet a dollar to a doughnut you'll see it this coming season.

1. I've never seen that balk. F1 would have to be jumping backwards, away from 1B. Makes no sense.

2. I won't ever see it. (8.05 COMMENT)