Balk?
 

R3 on third. Pitcher is in a full wind of position. R3 begins his steal towards home. F1 seeing this and without starting his preliminary motions, throws towards home without stepping off.

Was this a legal pitch or a balk? I think it was a balk but could you give me an explanation why?

Thanks,

Greg

Hmm.. lte's see -- the pitcher on the rubber and complies with all requirements of 8.01 or 6-1 (depending on the cose)?

No, I can't give you an explanation of why you thought this was a balk.

You said it. it was a quick pitch. so a balk

I'm not disagreeing, but I wonder how you got that from the original description -- I see nothing in there that this was made with the obvious intent to catch the batter off balance.

It is not a quick pitch.

The pitcher is not required to "wind up." Jim Kaat stepped and threw for years without winding up.

The pitcher is not required to pitch the same way each time. He can wind on one pitch and not wind on another.

The quick pitch is also known as the quick return pitch, designed to sneak a pitch by a batter. It can happen as a ball is thrown back to the pitcher from another fielder and can also happen if a pitcher steps off the rubber and then steps back on a pitches before the batter is prepared (or without separating his hands).

What was originally described is not a balk as long as the pitcher stepped with his free foot and did not violate any provisions of 8.01 or 8.05.

Rich

Bob, he said "without preliminary motions"so i got from that description the pitcher didnt pause at all, neither disengaged, just went . Just my oppinion

I'm wondering why the title of this thread is "obstruction"....and I'm still not convinced it was a balk either.

And, what "preliminary motions", or "pause" are required when pitching from the wind-up?

yeah, where does obstruction fit into this thred?
if the pitcher came set, it is not a balk.

I would have to see it myself.. Sounds like it is a balk if he just went without a proper set (quick pitch) but if he was standing on the rubber in a set position then legal.

The original post says, "Pitcher is in a full wind of position."

I assume that's just a typo -- and the poster meant "wind up" position.

Rich, you said: The pitcher is not required to pitch the same way each time. He can wind on one pitch and not wind on another. Did you mean he can pitch from the wind up or stretch position? Cause I would disagree if you would let a pitcher, who has been winding up previously by stepping backwards during his windup, to all of a sudden with a runner stealing home go directly to home without stepping back! IMO, that is a quick pitch. BALK!

there is nothing in the rule book that states " if the pitcher has been stepping back from the wind up position the entire game, then he must continue to do so."

simply put, if he comes set "a complete and discernible stop", and steps towards home plate while delivering the pitch, it is NOT a balk, nor is it a "quick pitch"

tucktheump,

Where do you get: if he comes set "a complete and discernible stop"? If you read the thread, he is pitching from the windup, NOT the stretch.

Two TOTALLY different situations! This was the thread.

R3 on third. Pitcher is in a full wind of position. R3 begins his steal towards home. F1 seeing this and without starting his preliminary motions, throws towards home without stepping off.

I know what the rule states, 6.1.Art 2

IMO, if the pitcher has been taking one step backward and one step forward previously, then all of a sudden just lifts his leg forward and delivers the pitch, it deceives the batter! BALK!

The "balk" rules are designed for actions that (illegally) decieve the runner -- deceiving the batter is not a balk.

He can join his hands one time and not join them the next.

He can pump once, pump twice, not pump at all.

He can throw sidearm, overhand, underhand, three-quarters.

The pitcher can step back once and not step back the next. "During delivery, he MAY lift his non-pivot foot in a step forward, OR in a step backward and a step forward ..."

Then somebody better get the word out to the 200 some odd umpires that I know! lol

Those umpires make it difficult for those of us that know the rules and know what their intent is.

Just because something looks "different" or "weird" does not make it a balk.

He delivered legally, as defined in 8.01 (windup position).

Rich

You wouldn't want to bet me...would you? lol

All I'm saying, is I have been to several clinics where the instructor/clinician has described this play, and it has been a BALK!

I'm not saying they are right, because obviously by rule, they have not been.

I would just like to mention, I have known 20 yr. officials that know every rule and interpretation of the rule, but on the court and on the field, you would think it was their 1st game.

Rich said:

Those umpires make it difficult for those of us that know the rules and know what their intent is.

OK, Lord of the Umps!

I'd guess that they (or at least some of them) described a *slightly* different play that made it a balk -- F1 didn't step before throwing to the plate, or F1 stepped toward third and threw to home, or F1 was in the set position and didn't pause before throwing home, or F1 "double clutched" before throwing home, or ...

Nope, Bob, same situation.

I did it standing in my living room and started laughing! If that's not a Quick Pitch, what is?

I doubt if you can get your money back from these clinicians, but I'd suggest switching clinics in the future. Delivery motions from the same stance can vary throughout the game provided they do not violate other pitching rules.

A quick pitch is one delivered when the batter is not yet reasonably set in the batter's box. There was nothing provided stating the batter was not set in the box. If set in the box, the mere act of delivering in a new, faster motion that takes less time or less motion is not a quick pitch. It's merely a different delivery motion.


Freix

<b>"If set in the box, the mere act of delivering in a new, faster motion that takes less time or less motion is not a quick pitch. It's merely a different delivery motion.
</b>

...and a LEGAL deceptive move as opposed to an ILLEGAL deceptive move.

Pitchers are allowed to attempt to deceive, if done legally. Altering the rhythm and tempo are among the most common.

No amount of stories about clinics, 200 umpires or endless LOL's at the end of posts will change the facts.

It wasn't that long ago
 

All this talk about 20 year umps and stuff makes me feel old.

We should all remember the Tommy Johns and Jim Kaats of the world. They were able to extend their career several years with the one step delivery.

Undoubtably it was much better on the arm because they did it for several years at the end of their careers.

I'm sure there were others but they are two that come to mind who were quite noteworthy.

To the umpires that called the balks, please show me the rule that says this is contrary. I don't see it in FED, OBR, or NAPBL etc, they all say the same things as stated above.

Thanks
David

Had a coach come popping off about a kid that didn't "stretch" before pitching outa the set. Kid engaged rubber with hands feet clearly stopped, then pitched. Told him to look up "may" in the webster, then read the pitching positions. Boy, this thread has been beaten!!

I'm not sure what you are saying, Chris.
If in set stance he must have hands split to take signs.
Then he must bring hands together in front of his body and come to a complete stop. He cannot legally step and pitch from the hands separated position. He can avoid the "stretch" by merely bringing his hands together without "stretching" upward above his setting point and then lowering into the set.


Freix