Why is the ruling on this move being changed?

[tcarilli]

Originally Posted by BigUmp56

I had a balk on the play as well. Possibly for two reasons.

One - Looked like the free foot crossed the back plane of the rubber. (maybe)

Two - Also looked like he may have started to rotate toward home rather than step directly toward third. (or more to home than third).

Tim.

No way on either.

1. whole foot has to cross whole rubber, not even close. (see below and thanks to mbyron for updating me on this one). I still don't see him breaking the back edge here.

2. everything went towards third.

No way this is a balk.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by tcarilli

1. whole foot has to cross whole rubber, not even close.

Tony, that's the FED rule (6-2-4f).

OBR 8.05a COMMENT is usually interpreted as any part of the foot.

[tcarilli]

Originally Posted by mbyron

Tony, that's the FED rule (6-2-4f).

OBR 8.05a COMMENT is usually interpreted as any part of the foot.

I don't think that is what 8.05a says. Maybe I'm getting old and fuzzy headed but I remember as a cadet at the Academy being told that it was the whole foot past the whole rubber.

I stand corrected I just found MLBUM 7.5(c).

NCAA is explicit about it in 9-1-b (3)

When the pitcher starts the delivery from the set position and the entire free foot or any part of the stride leg breaks the plane of theback edge of the pitcher’s rubber, the pitcher is committed to throwor feint a motion toward second base or pitch to home plate.

Thanks for making me look it up, I appreciate it really. Any day I can learn something is a good day!

And I really got to update my PBUC manual. The one I have says in 6.4 (b)

...when he swings his entire foot completely behind the back edge of the rubber.

[CT1]

Bad example in the OP. Beltran was going on first movement -- he didn't take a big secondary & get "deceived".

[john5396]

So, assuming that MLB wants to make this old standby move illegal, how would they change the rule.

I assume they would make it illegal to feint to any base, not just first, so the pitcher would have to throw on any move to a base. Seems like this would cause much more problems, not asllowing a fent to second to drive back a runner without F4/F6 being at the base to receive the throw. Seems to me the medicine will be worse than the illness...

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by john5396

So, assuming that MLB wants to make this old standby move illegal, how would they change the rule.

I assume they would make it illegal to feint to any base, not just first, so the pitcher would have to throw on any move to a base. Seems like this would cause much more problems, not asllowing a fent to second to drive back a runner without F4/F6 being at the base to receive the throw. Seems to me the medicine will be worse than the illness...

No, feints to 2B and 3B will still be legal. See 8.05c COMMENT: where it says "This is legal," insert "not." Problem solved.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by mbyron

No, feints to 2B and 3B will still be legal. See 8.05c COMMENT: where it says "This is legal," insert "not." Problem solved.

Not what I read... where I first saw this stated that they would make feints to any base illegal.

Then again ... why are feints to 2nd and 3rd ok, but not to first. Other than tradition, it seems an odd exception.