Balk Call
 

So here is the situation. OBR Rules but I do not think it matters. Two man crew and I am the field umpire in C position with R2 and R3. RHP has a high leg kick and he picks off R3. From my angle he clearly crossed the plane of the rubber. I could see his foot go back and where it landed was well behind the extended line of the rubber.

Coach comes out to question balk. I explain that he crossed the plane of the rubber which commits him to pitch. His first argument is that this is not a balk and a legal move. I explain nicely to check his rules as it is illegal and reference the rule below.

Rule 8.05(a) Comment: If a lefthanded or righthanded pitcher swings his free foot past the back edge of the pitcher’s rubber, he is required to pitch to the batter except to throw to second base on a
pick-off play.

He then complains that there is no way I can see this from my angle.
I saw the conversation going nowhere so I replied that the call was a balk and not going to change and the conversation was over and the coach returned to the dugout.

Now here is where my true question comes into play. The coach complained to the head umpire of the association over the call. I have no clue how the conversation went. My boss in talking with me said that he was not going to get into discussing my judgement and that I was correct in the rule however he would have to agree with the coach in that this cannot be seen in a two man crew. According to him the only way you can see this is if you have a three man crew and U3 is in D position.

So what are everyone's opinions on this? To me this was an easy call due to the fact that I could see his foot go beyond his hip and then where it landed. Thoughts?

Where it landed doesn't help you (it HAS to land more toward 3rd than home - having it land slightly beyond 3rd doesn't make it illegal or give you a hint that it might have been illegal) - you can't draw any information from that.

Your assignor is partially right - it's VERY hard to see from C as opposed to D. However, that's actually a point in your favor. For you to see it from C, it would have to be blatant... the fact that you DID see the foot back too far tells me this was an elephant balk.

Said another way, the borderline balk to 3rd is almost impossible to see from C - the only balk (on this play) that you CAN see from C is a very blatant very obvious balk, which it sounds like this one must have been.

You can see this, but it's relatively rare. You quoted the rule: F1's entire foot must go behind the back edge of the rubber for him to be committed to pitch to the batter. That's a lot of foot going a long way back.

The way I was trained to see this balk: look for the sole of his shoe. If you can see the entire sole, the foot likely went behind the rubber (try it for yourself). Otherwise, legal for a pickoff.

That is why I come to this forum!
 

+1

Great advice!

Michael,

In FED (and NCAA) it's the "entire foot" (or "any part of the stride leg" in NCAA). OBR, it's "any part" of the free foot.

The rest I concur with.

Hadn't heard the "sole of the foot" guideline before. I'll definitely give it a try.

JM

I think your mistake is a rule which governs how much leeway F1 has to swing his leg during delivery to where the free foot is landing. The only requirement for the landing of the free foot is distance and direction (to the base F1 is throwing to). The breaking of the back plane occurs when F1 raises the leg (free foot). If in doing this the entire foot breaks the back plane of the rubber, that would be a balk. The coach was right in arguing with you - hope you learned from this.

good question
 

I think the coach is right, you really can't tell that from your position. Even if its pretty blatant as far as the step.

Its much easier to argue with the offensive coach and say, "I can't really see that from my position," etc.,

As has been said, "don't go pickin boogers".

But, for him to call the head of the association is very poor - tells me a lot about the coach.:rolleyes:

Thanks
David

I do not know how to quote so I will just paste the portion I am looking at.

Ozzie wrote: The breaking of the back plane occurs when F1 raises the leg (free foot). If in doing this the entire foot breaks the back plane of the rubber, that would be a balk.

Maybe I was not too clear in my early post but from my vantage point this is exactly what he did. He picked his foot up, went back, then went to third.

I have not heard the sole of the foot one explanation (which is a good one that indicates a for sure balk I think), but I used the fact that I saw his foot clear his hip and then land behind the rubber.

I know that the foot can land behind the rubber as long as it does not initially pass it, however in my judgement it did.

Maybe I was right and maybe I was wrong. My main question is should this balk be called with a two man crew when the field umpire is in the B or C position?

Sole of the shoe will be an easier guideline. ;)

Taught to me at an endangered institution of higher umpiring. :(

So it doesn't matter where his free foot lands, just as long as the entire free foot doesn't come behind the rubber when he "raises" his leg? So the pitcher can step toward 2B (behind the rubber) and throw to third is essentially what you are saying, correct? Sounds like a failure to throw home to me.

Wouldn't the pitcher's leg have to be raised to step?

Amazing how often I finally decide to unignore someone only to have them last about 3 posts before my senses return... Love it when people put words in someone's mouth and then ridicule them for the things they didn't even say. Classic.

Try living in Ohio, where the coaches in all team sports rule the roost when it comes to choosing officials and umpires.

MTD, Sr.

Eh, the soccer coaches in NW Ohio can't have that much pull or there are a few teams I'd never see.

The only answer this post deserves is to go back on the ignore list.

See that big "QUOTE" button at the bottom-right of the post? Click it.