Pitcher balk ?- throw to 1st
 

My understanding is while on the rubber a pitcher must step to 1st when throwing on a pick-off. If the pitcher just lifts his pivot foot and throws without a step to first.. or even just jumps up and throws while airborn- is he no longer considered on the mound ?. I am not sure if the rule calls for him to replant the pivot foot on the ground in order for him to be considered OFF the rubber.

Are you meaning, 'off the rubber'?

After coming set, F1 may legally do just 3 things:

1. Pitch to the batter
2. Legally disengage
3. Step and throw to a base (or feint if allowed)

To disengage legally (step off), his first move must involve the pivot foot. It must move directly backward and behind the rubber. The pivot foot must plant before the hands separate, though if the move is clearly a step off many umpires will allow the hands to separate as the foot is coming down.

Once disengaged, the pitcher is an infielder and may throw or feint to any base as he wishes.

He just lifts the pivot foot and throws? I've not seen that one, but it would be a balk.

The jump step is considered a move from the rubber, but the pitcher must land (so your example where he throws while airborne is a balk) and the non-pivot foot must gain distance and direction to first before the throw.

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: http://forum.officiating.com/basebal...ase-award.html

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.

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?

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.

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.

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 :-)

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.


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.

Back Edge makes a BIG difference. thanks

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".

Mea Culpa!
 

Thanks, Jice. Lol!

Muddy water?
 

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.

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.

Challenge taken... http://forum.officiating.com/basebal...tml#post860610

Red Robin or Red Herring?
 

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.

Don't look at me.
 

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

I'm Back!
 

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

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.

Election Day Coverage
 

[QUOTE=Lapopez;861063]All right, I'll help you SA...
Also, in the fake to third base, the pitcher must break contact with the rubber before throwing to first base.
-------
In the earlier thread, the jab step was used to break contact with the rubber, though it was not considered a jab step after the legal feint to third base. The pitcher who is standing over the rubber from 3rd to 1st base is considered a fielder.

I would like to see the NCAA and Fed adopt the 2013 MLB ruling asap.
------
In the later thread, the jump turn was used to break contact with the rubber and it was still considered a jump turn even though it was made behind the rubber. The pitcher who is standing over the rubber from 3rd to 1st base is NOT considered a fielder.

I would like the pitcher to return to the classic jump turn, and penalize him two bases for trying to step off at the same time he is trying to pick off a runner on 1st base.

Presumption of Innocence
 

...and the pitcher who stepped behind the rubber IS considered an infielder.

You may correctly enforce two bases if he stepped back.