Balk?

[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

[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.

[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.

[Matt]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

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.

Uh, no. Did you see how far he had to move to make the play?

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by Matt

Uh, no. Did you see how far he had to move to make the play?

Yes I did. Quite a ways... but how could one say that he was too far away to make a legitimate play when he did, in fact, make and ACTUAL play?

[Manny A]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

Yes I did. Quite a ways... but how could one say that he was too far away to make a legitimate play when he did, in fact, make and ACTUAL play?

I think that's Matt's point. F3 couldn't make a play initially, which I believe is the thought behind the MLB guidance on balking this scenario. The moment F3 caught the ball, he still had to take two or three steps before he was close enough to make that actual play.

I mentioned an extreme example earlier, where F3 is playing way in for the bunt. If F1 throws to him, and then F3 has to run a significant distance to make the tag on R1, that would be a clear case where F3 wasn't initially positioned to make a play on R1.

On the play in question, F3 was much closer to R1 than in my example. But he still had to move an appreciable distance to make the tag attempt (which, if memory serves, is required to be considered a "play"). That's enough to judge that F3 wasn't in position to make a play when he received the ball.

[SAump]

Sheesh, those umpires erred. That was not a balk. Both are BAD calls and embarrassing to the profession.

Of course, I didn't hear the word protest come UP, so I guess I can't lean on the umpires too hard.

Here's a balk: http://mlb.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_id=3287297

[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.