Pitcher balk ?- throw to 1st

[maven]

Originally Posted by Lapopez

You see Dundal, it all depends on how fast the pitcher steps back. That threshold, when once exceeded and the pitcher is doing a “move from the rubber” and not actually disengaging legally, is your judgment. But not to worry, it’s very clear, in fact, it’s “textbook." See this for example: NLCS blown base award

It does not depend on how fast the move is. That is utterly incorrect and potentially misleading for a poster who seems to be asking a sincere question.

If a move is not clearly legal disengagement, then the move must comply with the "step and throw" provisions or risk being called a balk.

This principle explains why all umpires in the play referenced ruled the move a throw "from the rubber" — a jump step — and thus a 1-base award when the ball went out of play. If you are eager to debate that ruling further, I would encourage you to post it in the other thread.

[Lapopez]

Originally Posted by maven

If a move is not clearly legal disengagement, then the move must comply with the "step and throw" provisions or risk being called a balk.

That's twice now that you've mentioned "clearly/not clearly," yet you have put forth nothing to help Dundal judge whether stepping BACK (!) is a move "from the rubber." If speed isn't your criteria, what is?

[rbmartin]

Originally Posted by Lapopez

If speed isn't your criteria, what is?

The speed of the event does not change the rule. It may make it more difficult for an umpire to discern what happened (ie make it more likely to get away with an infraction), but the rule is consistant regardless of the speed at which it happens.

[Lapopez]

Originally Posted by rbmartin

The speed of the event does not change the rule. It may make it more difficult for an umpire to discern what happened (ie make it more likely to get away with an infraction), but the rule is consistant regardless of the speed at which it happens.

To be "clear," I know it doesn't. What matters is where the pivot foot lands.

[SAump]

From earlier this year,

Baseball Video Highlights & Clips | TB@DET: Verlander is called for a balk in the fifth - Video | MLB.com: Multimedia

Verlander had a rule book balk called on him for spinning off of his non pivot foot, but that video was not found.

[johnnyg08]

Originally Posted by SAump

From earlier this year,

Baseball Video Highlights & Clips | TB@DET: Verlander is called for a balk in the fifth - Video | MLB.com: Multimedia

Verlander had a rule book balk called on him for spinning off of his non pivot foot, but that video was not found.

I might have it. I will have to check.

[jicecone]

Now that is closer to a jump turn then what I have seen in other places. Of course he just didn't complete the step.

[SAump]

Someone please check on the legallity of disengaging from the front of the pitcher's plate.

In a previous CWS balk video and earlier thread, a pitcher steps toward third with his non-pivot foot and then immediately executes a jab step in front of the rubber with the pivot foot to disengage and turn towards first base. The ruling is not a balk.

In the latest NLCS thread, stepping backwards off the rubber is considered a move from the rubber by a group of MLB umpires.

I can't find one written example, a video explanation or case play to validate these two "paranormal" calls.

[maven]

Originally Posted by Lapopez

That's twice now that you've mentioned "clearly/not clearly," yet you have put forth nothing to help Dundal judge whether stepping BACK (!) is a move "from the rubber." If speed isn't your criteria, what is?

I provided criteria of legal disengagement. The remark you were quoting concerns umpire judgment and how strictly we enforce the restriction on separating the hands.

There are no independent criteria of "clarity." The term refers to umpire judgment, not the move.

[Lapopez]

Originally Posted by maven

I provided criteria of legal disengagement. The remark you were quoting concerns umpire judgment and how strictly we enforce the restriction on separating the hands.

There are no independent criteria of "clarity." The term refers to umpire judgment, not the move.

There you have it Dundal, I hope it's clear for you. If not, try Bob P.'s quote in the other thread. Maven doesn't disagree with that one.

[DUNDALKCHOPPER]

Thanks everyone.. Saw Verlander twice yesterday throw to 1st while simply spinning on the non-pivot foot while simply lifting the pivot foot.
.
My other Balk beef is when a pitcher brings the non-pivot foot over top of the rubber then throws to 1st. I was also under the impression that once that happens the pitcher must pitch or spin around to make a play at 2nd.- I know its another topic :-)

[Lapopez]

I'm actually feeling bad with respect to you, Dundal. I did "muddy" up your thread. The things Maven posted prior to my involvement are good info. We just disagree on one thing. No one has posted the rule itself. This is the applicable rule with regards to our disagreement. To me, it's clear: No mention of dropping one's hands here.

OBR 8.01(e)
If the pitcher removes his pivot foot from contact with the pitcher’s plate by stepping backward with that foot, he thereby becomes an infielder and if he makes a wild throw from that position, it shall be considered the same as a wild throw by any other infielder.

Originally Posted by DUNDALKCHOPPER

My other Balk beef is when a pitcher brings the non-pivot foot over top of the rubber then throws to 1st. I was also under the impression that once that happens the pitcher must pitch or spin around to make a play at 2nd.- I know its another topic :-)

The answer to your question here is in the comment to 8.05(a):

Rule 8.05(a) Comment: If a lefthanded or righthanded pitcher swings his free foot past the back edge [my emphasis added] of the pitcher’s rubber, he is required to pitch to the batter except to throw to second base on a pick-off play.

If you saw the free foot pass behind the back edge and the pitcher threw to first, you're right, it's a balk.

[DUNDALKCHOPPER]

Back Edge makes a BIG difference. thanks

[jicecone]

Originally Posted by Lapopez

I'm actually feeling bad with respect to you, Dundal. I did "muddy" up your thread. The things Maven posted prior to my involvement are good info. We just disagree on one thing. No one has posted the rule itself. This is the applicable rule with regards to our disagreement. To me, it's clear: No mention of dropping one's hands here.

OBR 8.01(e)
If the pitcher removes his pivot foot from contact with the pitcher’s plate by stepping backward with that foot, he thereby becomes an infielder and if he makes a wild throw from that position, it shall be considered the same as a wild throw by any other infielder.

You didn't print the part of the rule that doesn't say, "unless MLB umpires deem it to be defined as they feel that day or within the confines of what they deem to be or not to be a jump step or turn etc., and award one base instead of two".

[Lapopez]

Originally Posted by maven

If you are eager to debate that ruling further, I would encourage you to post it in the other thread.

Challenge taken... NLCS blown base award