Yet another balk question

[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.

[tankmjg24]

Sorry for the numbering guys. I choose the firing squad over being stoned please

In regards to my partners explanation on how he called the balk, he stated that he looked at where the foot landed and that in his judgement it landed behind the rubber. Now I had a similar play that I posted on here that involved a right handed pitcher going to third, however his free foot in my judgement crossed behind the rubber before picking to 3rd. In the most recent case where my partner called the balk, he said that his foot did not cross behind before the pick off, but in his judgement that it landed behind the rubber after the pickoff.

Hope all that makes since.

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by tankmjg24

Sorry for the numbering guys. I choose the firing squad over being stoned please

Sure you weren't already stoned when you wrote it?

[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?