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

[Rita C]

Originally Posted by SAump

Sheesh, those umpires erred. That was not a balk.

No wonder, they made up for it when Peavy balks during a first to third move in another thread.

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.

Just to get my point across, would you balk the center fielder if he ran into second base in an attempt to pick off the only runner from second base and the pitcher threw him the ball before he stepped into the infield and he tagged the runner out?

Nope. I only balk pitchers.

Rita

[Rich]

Originally Posted by SAump

Sheesh, those umpires erred. That was not a balk.

No wonder, they made up for it when Peavy balks during a first to third move in another thread.

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.

Just to get my point across, would you balk the center fielder if he ran into second base in an attempt to pick off the only runner from second base and the pitcher threw him the ball before he stepped into the infield and he tagged the runner out?

It's amazing how much this post comes across as completely clueless. There is quite a difference between throwing to first and throwing to any other base.

[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.