Overturned Balk

[Forest Ump]

I don't think I have ever seen a balk overturned but here it is.

Baseball Video Highlights & Clips | TB@CWS: Run comes off board after umps reverse call - Video | MLB.com: Multimedia

[Manny A]

Ooooh, I think the balk call was justified.

On the fake-to-third/fake-to-first move, the pitcher should disengage the rubber while he makes the initial step to third base so that, as the announcer said, he "just becomes another fielder" when he fakes to first. But this F1 never really disengaged. In fact, it looked to me like he executed a jab-step move to first after the fake to third, and a jab-step is considered a move from the rubber.

I don't know what the rest of the crew told U1 to convince him the call should be reversed. IMO, he made the right call.

[rbmartin]

As luck would have it, I just watched the Jim Evans balk video last night.
I don't think it was a balk.

[Manny A]

Originally Posted by rbmartin

As luck would have it, I just watched the Jim Evans balk video last night.
I don't think it was a balk.

Elaborate, please.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by Manny A

Elaborate, please.

What rule, specifically, was broken? I see no balk here either.

The closest thing to a balk might be that he didn't gain (enough?) ground toward third on the first move. However, I don't think that is what U1 called, given the timing of the call. Looks like he's balking the move to first - and at the point of the move to 1st, the pivot foot has already come off.

PS - can't be a jabstep ... he's already an infielder after not throwing to third.

[Rich Ives]

Once completing the fake to 3B he completed the requirement to step off, throw(fake) or pitch. The "pitch" sequence is over.

This is why MLB is discussing a change in the rule.

[Manny A]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

PS - can't be a jabstep ... he's already an infielder after not throwing to third.

But when he made his fake to third, he never disengaged his pivot foot from the rubber. His subsequent move to first looked just like a jab-step, because the pivot foot disengaged simultaneously as he was making the move to first. At least that's how it looked to me.

From 8.05(c): "However, if, with runners on first and third, the pitcher, while in contact with the rubber, steps toward third and then immediately and in practically the same motion “wheels” and throws to first base, it is obviously an attempt to deceive the runner at first base, and in such a move it is practically impossible to step directly toward first base before the throw to first base, and such a move shall be called a balk. Of course, if the pitcher steps off the rubber and then makes such a move, it is not a balk.

This pither, IMO, did not step off the rubber before making the move to first. He started his move to first with a jab-step, which comes simultaneously with the move.

[rbmartin]

The back foot clearly disengages the rubber before the feint to 1st. I think what makes the play look odd to some people is that during the feint to 3rd, there is no accompanting arm action. According to Jim Evans, this is not a requirement. An odd-looking play from the mound does not always equal a balk.

Next year this will be a balk in MLB if I read correctly. So use it while you can.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by Manny A

But when he made his fake to third, he never disengaged his pivot foot from the rubber.

I honestly have no idea what you're looking at. Look at where his foot is at 1:04 and 1:05 of the video. Pretty standard disengagement there.

[SAump]

Originally Posted by Manny A

But when he made his fake to third, he never disengaged his pivot foot from the rubber. His subsequent move to first looked just like a jab-step, because the pivot foot disengaged simultaneously as he was making the move to first. At least that's how it looked to me.

From 8.05(c): "However, if, with runners on first and third, the pitcher, while in contact with the rubber, steps toward third and then immediately and in practically the same motion “wheels” and throws to first base, it is obviously an attempt to deceive the runner at first base, and in such a move it is practically impossible to step directly toward first base before the throw to first base, and such a move shall be called a balk. Of course, if the pitcher steps off the rubber and then makes such a move, it is not a balk.

This pither, IMO, did not step off the rubber before making the move to first. He started his move to first with a jab-step, which comes simultaneously with the move.

I think you nailed him simulating a pickoff to third, but the other folks here seem to think he legally disengaged from the rubber. They claim Jim Evans says it legal, so it's legal, right?

[Chris_Hickman]

I think Chad thought he fainted a throw to first and did not see the pitcher faint to 3rd prior to.....

[Chris_Hickman]

I thing saumps is saying is that a pitcher cannot, from the set, straddle the rubber, put his hands together, then engage the rubber, then separate his hands.