Pitcher balk ?- throw to 1st

[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.

[Lapopez]

Originally Posted by SAump

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

JohnnyG has my torch and all I have is a ten-foot pole.

[Lapopez]

All right, I'll help you SA...

Originally Posted by SAump

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.

The following quote from MLBUM should help you. Please keep in mind that the MLBUM is a supplement to OBR. That is, it does NOT contradict or supersede it.

MLBUM 7.5(h): A pitcher must step directly toward a base before throwing or feinting to that base, but he is not required to throw (except to first base only) because he steps. It is possible, with runners on first and third, for the pitcher to step toward third and not throw, merely to bluff the runner back to third; then seeing the runner on first start for second, turn and step toward and throw to first base. This is legal. 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 ruled a balk. Of course, if the pitcher steps off the rubber and then makes such a move, it is not a balk.

NOTE: With runners on first and third, if a pitcher fakes a throw to third base and then throws the ball to first base, arm motion is not required in the fake to third, although a legal step is required. Also, in the fake to third base, the pitcher must break contact with the rubber before throwing to first base. If the ball is thrown out of play in the throw to first, the pitcher would be considered an infielder for the purpose of the award.

Originally Posted by SAump

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

Well, that would be one point of view. Given that many here needed a slow motion replay to ascertain that Cain stepped back, it would be presumptuous to conclude how the umpires considered Cain's move.

[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".