Yet another balk question

[Rich]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

Doesn't sound like a balk to me...

(PS - you are U1 ... why is someone at B?)

Idiotic FED notation for the PU, I'm guessing. Next thing we'll see him post R1 at third base or something equally idiotic.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by GROUPthink

Idiotic FED notation for the PU, I'm guessing. Next thing we'll see him post R1 at third base or something equally idiotic.

Of course R1 is at third base because NFHS Rules specifically state that B1 is the first batter and if he gets on base he becomes R1, and and downe the lineup we go for each inning. I work only games using NFHS Rules so when I post questions I am going to use NFHS nomenclature. I know that many here look down upon NFHS Rules, but some of us here only work NFHS Rules, and logically it makes sense: R1 on 3B, next two batters make outs, R4 on 1B, and B5 is the Batter.

I will admit that labeling the Umpires U1 for the P and U2, etc. for the Bases is stupid.

MTD, Sr.

[Welpe]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

Of course R1 is at third base because NFHS Rules specifically state that B1 is the first batter and if he gets on base he becomes R1, and and downe the lineup we go for each inning.

That doesn't mean it isn't stupid.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

Of course R1 is at third base because NFHS Rules specifically state that B1 is the first batter and if he gets on base he becomes R1, and and downe the lineup we go for each inning. I work only games using NFHS Rules so when I post questions I am going to use NFHS nomenclature. I know that many here look down upon NFHS Rules, but some of us here only work NFHS Rules, and logically it makes sense: R1 on 3B, next two batters make outs, R4 on 1B, and B5 is the Batter.

I will admit that labeling the Umpires U1 for the P and U2, etc. for the Bases is stupid.

MTD, Sr.

That's not the nomenclature, though. There would never be an R4. If your scenario happened, it would be R1 on third base, R2 on first base. I've never seen an R4 referenced in a case play.

(How would this ever be easier than saying: "R1, R3, 2 outs"? I get the softball-only umpires not liking the much better baseball nomenclature because they hate everything to do with baseball, but why would anyone use the FED way over the much easier "normal" way?)

[ozzy6900]

This is the 2nd balk question where one of our brothers called a balk for a free foot landing "behind the rubber". Did someone "change " the rules?

Also, I was admonished in the last post because I stated that ..."it doesn't matter where the free foot lands as long as there is distance and direction...". Seems that this is exactly what everyone here is saying for this post.

Interesting.......

[TwoBits]

Wording of FED rule 6-2-4f regarding infractions that result in a balk:

"...failing to pitch to the batter when the entire non-pivot foot passes behind the perpendicular plane of the back edge of the pitcher's plate, except when feinting or throwing to second base in attempt to put out a runner."

If the pitcher's foot landed "on the backside of the rubber" as described in the OP, then it did pass behind the "perpendicular plane of the back edge of the pitcher's plate". Remember your geometry: planes extend indefinitely, and the "perpendicular plane of the back edge of the pitcher's plate" would not be limited to just the 24" width of the pitcher's plate.

Having said all that, I doubt I would have been able to see enough to call a balk from either behind the plate or from the B position.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by TwoBits

Wording of FED rule 6-2-4f regarding infractions that result in a balk:

"...failing to pitch to the batter when the entire non-pivot foot passes behind the perpendicular plane of the back edge of the pitcher's plate, except when feinting or throwing to second base in attempt to put out a runner."

If the pitcher's foot landed "on the backside of the rubber" as described in the OP, then it did pass behind the "perpendicular plane of the back edge of the pitcher's plate". Remember your geometry: planes extend indefinitely, and the "perpendicular plane of the back edge of the pitcher's plate" would not be limited to just the 24" width of the pitcher's plate.

Having said all that, I doubt I would have been able to see enough to call a balk from either behind the plate or from the B position.

It would be pretty hard for that entire foot to come behind the rubber on the step to first base. Couldn't imagine I'd even be looking to pick that nit.

[TwoBits]

Originally Posted by GROUPthink

Couldn't imagine I'd even be looking to pick that nit.

Agreed.

[Steven Tyler]

Originally Posted by GROUPthink

It would be pretty hard for that entire foot to come behind the rubber on the step to first base. Couldn't imagine I'd even be looking to pick that nit.

Impractical, but not impossible.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by TwoBits

Wording of FED rule 6-2-4f regarding infractions that result in a balk:

"...failing to pitch to the batter when the entire non-pivot foot passes behind the perpendicular plane of the back edge of the pitcher's plate, except when feinting or throwing to second base in attempt to put out a runner."

If the pitcher's foot landed "on the backside of the rubber" as described in the OP, then it did pass behind the "perpendicular plane of the back edge of the pitcher's plate". Remember your geometry: planes extend indefinitely, and the "perpendicular plane of the back edge of the pitcher's plate" would not be limited to just the 24" width of the pitcher's plate.

Having said all that, I doubt I would have been able to see enough to call a balk from either behind the plate or from the B position.

See bolded, italized and underline portions... they contradict.

[Welpe]

That is not the intent of the rule either.

[David B]

next time someone is in 3-man mechanics, watch the pitcher and see exactly how hard it is for him to have his foot go completely past the back side of the rubber. That is really back there.

Might help someone making a judgement about the foot in regards to this rule etc.,

On the OP, no way the BU can see this from B or C.

If a coach complains, tell him to hire 3-men.

Thanks

David

[Steven Tyler]

Originally Posted by ozzy6900

This is the 2nd balk question where one of our brothers called a balk for a free foot landing "behind the rubber". Did someone "change " the rules?

Also, I was admonished in the last post because I stated that ..."it doesn't matter where the free foot lands as long as there is distance and direction...". Seems that this is exactly what everyone here is saying for this post.

Interesting.......

Even more interesting. Define direction. When does it become a step to 1B or 2B. Using your logic, a RH pitcher could whirl to second, and throw to 1B. If a lefty brings his foot up even with the rubber, and then proceeds to step entirely behind the rubber on a throw to 1B, what do you call then?

[cbfoulds]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

Of course R1 is at third base because NFHS Rules specifically state that B1 is the first batter and if he gets on base he becomes R1, and and downe the lineup we go for each inning. I work only games using NFHS Rules so when I post questions I am going to use NFHS nomenclature. I know that many here look down upon NFHS Rules, but some of us here only work NFHS Rules, and logically it makes sense: R1 on 3B, next two batters make outs, R4 on 1B, and B5 is the Batter.

I will admit that labeling the Umpires U1 for the P and U2, etc. for the Bases is stupid.

MTD, Sr.

Crap, Mark, you know better.
If posting on the NFHS site [does anyone, anymore?], OK, follow their idiotic nomeclature: but everyone else on the planet reads "R1" as "the Runner on 1st"; and except for BOO issues, couldn't [and need not] care less who is "B1" ... "B5".

[yawetag]

Originally Posted by cbfoulds

Crap, Mark, you know better.
If posting on the NFHS site [does anyone, anymore?]

They switched to having the forum on Arbiter. I haven't been back since.