Some have tried to interpret a fielder not being in the field of play at the time of pitch, as being one.:confused:

No, it isn't. It's when F1 is charged with a balk even though he hasn't committed one.

The term is misunderstood because so many people continually present it as having to do with F2 being outside the catcher's box, resulting in F1 committing a balk.

8.05(l) does not describe the catcher's balk; 7.07 does.

If people would comprehend that it's limited to F1 being charged with a balk due to F2's CI when R3 is advancing to the plate, when F1 has not, in fact, committed a balk, the term would not be so widely misrepresented.

dash_riprock understands.

Exactly. There's no such thing as a "catcher's balk."


It's not an "illegal act" if the pitcher pitches before all fielders are in their prescribed locations; and what, exactly, are their "prescribed locations," other than the catcher having his own--a catcher's box? ;)

I've experienced that--years ago when I had a partner who was so balk happy that I think that's how he conceived his 3 kids--he yelled "Balk!" in bed and...well...the rest was history.

He used to call a balk everytime the first baseman had a foot in foul territory when the pitcher pitched, except that it wasn't a balk; it was just "nothing," literally. The pitcher's not supposed to pitch unless, with the exception of the catcher, all fielders are in fair territory. If he does, nothing happens.

PLAY (NCAA & OBR): We begin the top of the 4th inning when the visiting team's batter comes to the plate. Pitcher throws the first pitch for a strike. Suddenly, a player from the home team runs out to right field. It is then that everyone realizes the right fielder hadn't been out there. RULING: Nullify the pitch and begin again. Because the home team did not have their required number of players on the field to comprise a legally constituted team (9 players in NCAA & OBR), no action could legally take place.

Of course it's an illegal act: it's a BALK, 2.00, "an illegal act by the pitcher with a runner or runners on base..."

According to 4.03 all fielders other than F2 must be in fair territory before the ball is made live, but the only penalty is stated in 4.03(a) when the pitcher pitches with F2 out of position. The penalty for the pitcher's act is a balk.

Reread my statement. It is NOT an "illegal act" if the pitcher pitches when a fielder other than the catcher is not in fair territory. You're thinking of a balk; I'm not referring to that.

I'm not sure what you mean by "not an 'illegal act'", but in NCAA, the penalty for pitching with any fielder outside fair territory is to nullify the play if it benefited the defense. 5-4c Penalty. So I'd say it is an illegal act.

Which is what my aforementioned play/ruling discussed. It's essentially a "nothing counts" situation.

I think some folks look at the pitcher committing an "illegal act" to mean that he directly and unilaterally and intentionally does something not legal. I was referring to "illegal act" meaning something more direct, akin to defacing the ball, faking to first from the rubber, etc.

Have you ever enforced this?

MrUmpire,
I've never seen it in game.

UMP25,
It is not a "nothing counts" situation. If the outcome of the play is favorable to the offense, they get to keep the result.

You're misreading the rule. According to someone whom I asked in the NCAA, I was told that "because the legally required number of players were not on the field at the time the pitcher pitched, no action can take place. Therefore, nullify anything that did occur and replay the pitch." He referenced the Penalty under Rule 4c, which states the umpire should not put the ball back into play unless all fielders other than the catcher are in fair territory. If he does, there is no penalty per se because he wasn't supposed to have put the ball into play. Consequently, what did happen is nullified.

This is the ruling in OBR, BTW.

At the risk of stating the obvious and belaboring the issue, no, I didn't misread the rule which says in part, "The play, if it benefits the defense, shall be nullified."

If somebody at the NCAA would like it called differently than written, it isn't the first (or last) time that the written rules don't correspond to the way the game should actually be called.

I read the penalty as referring to something else and not the situation where one of the required 7 other fielders (catcher not included here) was not in fair territory. Regardless, it's probably not very clear, which isn't uncommon.

On fair ground

I've got to stop posting on here. No one seems to know what facetiousness or sarcasm is.