Balk?

[umpjim]

Originally Posted by DG

The Evans Balk Video demonstrates a case where F1 throws to F3 off the bag in attempt to make a play. The video shows F3 about 12 feet from the bag, he makes a move toward 1b and recieves the ball about 6' from the bag and makes the tag. It kind of looks like a QB leading a receiver who catches the ball in stride. The obvious difference between this illustration and the on here is that it was obvious that F3 was moving to the bag to receive a throw and make a play. Not so in this example, F3 was flatfooted and likely a bit surprised by the throw and made the best of it.

Might have been a very good deke.

[umpjim]

Originally Posted by jicecone

"From the MLBUM: "The pitcher shall be charged with a balk if, while in contact with the rubber, he throws to the first baseman who is either in front of or behind first base and obviously not making an attempt at retiring the runner at first base. However, there is no violation if the pitcher throws the ball directly to first base in this situation."

What part of this statement is not clear here.

Did he throw to the bag? NO

Was F3 obiviously trying to trying to retire the runner prior to receiving the ball? No

Text book call of rule interpretation. F3's location relative to the runner and the fact that he tagged him has no bearing on the determination of whether it was a balk or not.

It would have been a balk in NFHS and NCAA ball also.

NCAA A.R. -9.3.c.1 If the pitcher throws to the first baseman who is playing off the base, a balk shall not be called if the fielder moves toward first base in an attempt to retire the runner.

FED give little guidance but you are wrong about NCAA.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by umpjim

NCAA A.R. -9.3.c.1 If the pitcher throws to the first baseman who is playing off the base, a balk shall not be called if the fielder moves toward first base in an attempt to retire the runner.

FED give little guidance but you are wrong about NCAA.

FEd says "close enough to make a play", and it's umpire judgement.

Assuming we are all correct that the balk had to do with the throw and/or F3's position, I would not have had a balk in FED, based on the video I've seen.

[JJ]

How about NCAA, Bob? Balk or no balk?

JJ

[jicecone]

Originally Posted by umpjim

NCAA A.R. -9.3.c.1 If the pitcher throws to the first baseman who is playing off the base, a balk shall not be called if the fielder moves toward first base in an attempt to retire the runner.

FED give little guidance but you are wrong about NCAA.

I agree.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by JJ

How about NCAA, Bob? Balk or no balk?

JJ

Not for that reason. Maybe for opening up to home before throwing to first.

I'd like to ask the umpire (or MLB): Why (for what reason) did you call the balk? Is that what was discussed with Ventura? Now that you've seen the replay, do you want the call back?

[maven]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Not for that reason. Maybe for opening up to home before throwing to first.

I'd like to ask the umpire (or MLB): Why (for what reason) did you call the balk? Is that what was discussed with Ventura? Now that you've seen the replay, do you want the call back?

When I first saw the video, I thought it was borderline in a couple ways: maybe a move to home, maybe a borderline step balk, maybe throwing to F3 away from the base.

When I saw the discussion with Ventura, the discussion seemed to concern how close F3 had to be to the base to make a play.

It looks as if the Sox set up that play to take advantage of the wording of the MLBUM: F3 is neither "in front of" nor "behind the base," since he's playing off the base but even with it. So it would seem that this provision of MLBUM would not apply, and the play should be legal.

But if that's what's going on, I think it mistakes the UM comment for the rule. 8.05(c) requires that the pitcher step toward a base "before throwing to that base," and for 1B this provision is interpreted quite strictly as requiring throwing to the base.

The concept of "for the purpose of a play" is part of 8.05(d), not 8.05(c), and is not relevant to this call. F1 threw it to F3 away from the base, so it's a balk.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by JJ

Not a very good call UNLESS he balked the step. Heck, if he was balking the throw to the first baseman being off the bag it was downright lousy call in light of the fact that the video replay would seem to indicate the first baseman in fact tagged the runner out..

JJ

Freeze Frame at 1:52 - runner is OUT.

[Manny A]

If you watch the video again, you'll see at roughly the 42-second mark that F1 starts to make his move to first while F3 is completely flat-footed. In fact, it appeared at the 1:55 mark that F3 was starting to get down into his fielding crouch before realizing what F1 wanted to do, and then adjusted to make the catch and start the chase of R1.

Bottom line: Judgment call all the way. And U1 judged that there was a violation of the MLBUM guidance. I agree.

[umpjim]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

FEd says "close enough to make a play", and it's umpire judgement.

Assuming we are all correct that the balk had to do with the throw and/or F3's position, I would not have had a balk in FED, based on the video I've seen.

I was going to ask Bob for a cite but I did my own legwork and don't know why I had not seen this before:

6.2.4 SITUATION J

With R1 on first base and two outs, F1 attempts to pick off R1. As F1 pivots to throw, he realizes that F3 is not on the base, but is in his normal defensive position. F1 completes the throw without interruption. The coach of the defensive team wants a balk called on F1.

RULING: As long as F3 is in the proximity of the base, F1 would not be guilty of a balk. Proximity is umpire judgment and is based on whether the fielder is close enough to the base to legitimately make a play on the runner.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by umpjim

I was going to ask Bob for a cite but I did my own legwork and don't know why I had not seen this before:

6.2.4 SITUATION J

With R1 on first base and two outs, F1 attempts to pick off R1. As F1 pivots to throw, he realizes that F3 is not on the base, but is in his normal defensive position. F1 completes the throw without interruption. The coach of the defensive team wants a balk called on F1.

RULING: As long as F3 is in the proximity of the base, F1 would not be guilty of a balk. Proximity is umpire judgment and is based on whether the fielder is close enough to the base to legitimately make a play on the runner.

Agreed ... and I believe that we have to assume that the fact that he DID make a legitimate play on the runner (in time for the out, no less), he was in fact "close enough" to make such a play.

I don't like this call.

[jicecone]

Originally Posted by umpjim

I was going to ask Bob for a cite but I did my own legwork and don't know why I had not seen this before:

6.2.4 SITUATION J

With R1 on first base and two outs, F1 attempts to pick off R1. As F1 pivots to throw, he realizes that F3 is not on the base, but is in his normal defensive position. F1 completes the throw without interruption. The coach of the defensive team wants a balk called on F1.

RULING: As long as F3 is in the proximity of the base, F1 would not be guilty of a balk. Proximity is umpire judgment and is based on whether the fielder is close enough to the base to legitimately make a play on the runner.

Words such as "close enough to make a play","obviously", "proximity" = umpire judgement = someonelse's opinion=argument=ejection=forum discussion.

[RadioBlue]

Originally Posted by Rich Ives

Nobody cares in MLB

I'm not in MLB, obviously. But I DO care. The lax enforcement is gonna cause us problems in NF ball.

[Manny A]

Originally Posted by RadioBlue

I'm not in MLB, obviously. But I DO care. The lax enforcement is gonna cause us problems in NF ball.

"NF ball"? What is "NF ball"?

MLB pitchers get away with technical violations of the balk rule if it is part of their routine move before getting set. I've seen pitchers lean forward and take a step toward home with their free foot when going from the stretch to the set (Musina), tap the ball repeatedly in and out of the glove (Rocker), and do all sorts of other minor fluctuations that really fools nobody.

It's really no different than the free-foot step that pitchers take to the side or even to the front of the rubber as they windup. 8.01 allows only a backward step with that foot. It's also no different than the hesitation some Asian pitchers take during their windup. They make these moves all the time, and if they did them with base runners, they would never get balked for them.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by Manny A

"NF ball"? What is "NF ball"?

MLB pitchers get away with technical violations of the balk rule if it is part of their routine move before getting set. I've seen pitchers lean forward and take a step toward home with their free foot when going from the stretch to the set (Musina), tap the ball repeatedly in and out of the glove (Rocker), and do all sorts of other minor fluctuations that really fools nobody.

It's really no different than the free-foot step that pitchers take to the side or even to the front of the rubber as they windup. 8.01 allows only a backward step with that foot. It's also no different than the hesitation some Asian pitchers take during their windup. They make these moves all the time, and if they did them with base runners, they would never get balked for them.

NF = National Federation (as in ... "of High Schools") You've been here a while - very surprised you haven't seen that abbreviation.