balk vs illegal pitch [FED]
 

We just had the mandatory state meeting the other night. The big wig who usually makes the presentation, at one point, gave an example of a pitcher stumbling while making his delivery (with no runners on base) and not delivering the ball. He said, "That's nothin'!"

Most agreed and nodded. In fact, I've seen that many times and I have never made any call. Nobody ever complains.

But then a discussion arose that, in FED (unlike OBR), any pitching infraction that would have normally been ruled a balk had there been runners on base, should be penalized as a "ball".

For instance, let's say that the pitcher elects to pitch from the set position at all times. Should we require him to come to a discernible stop even when there are no runners on base? If so, what if he doesn't? Should we call a "ball" each time he fails to come to a discernible stop?

PLAY: Nobody on base. Game tied. Last inning. No outs. Full count on the batter. As the pitcher begins his wind-up he catches his spikes on the rubber, stumbles, and aborts his delivery. The coach from the team at-bat wants the umpire to call that "pitch" a ball. Obviously, it would be nice to get the lead-off man on base in such a close game. He insists that this is a rule issue and has nothing to do with judgment.

Just looking for opinions. Thanks!

This one is explicitly covered under the rules. 6-1-3 covers the set position and says what the penalty is with and without runners. Yea, by rule it's an illegal pitch and should get called a ball. Reality? I wouldn't call it without at least sending out the catcher to tell him to stop or otherwise warning him. Maybe nothing if it's close or it's lower level ball where someone just doesn't know what they're doing.

And 6-1-4 covers the aborted delivery situation. If you judge it as a dropped ball, then with no runners it's a nothing if it doesn't cross the foul lines.

I'm talking about an aborted delivery where the pitcher never releases the ball at all - a fairly common occurrence. I see it at least a few times each season.

OC has put PU between a rock and a hard spot. The question becomes, do you want to risk having a rule violation protest uphold on your resume or make an OOO (by the book) call. Neither is desirable but you have to choose one.

I would risk of a rule protest uphold. I think it would be easier to explain than making the OOO call, it is righteous (IMO), and I don’t ever want to hear anyone tell the story about the time I called a ball in this situation. I want to hear the story about the time when I refused to be hood-winked into making an OOO call.

No runners? No delivery? Nuttin', honey.

I'm happy to risk a protest. My state does not allow them. :)

The penalty for rule 6, articles 1, 2, and 3 states:

"The ball is dead immediately when an illegal pitch
occurs. If there is no runner, a ball is awarded the batter. If there is a runner,
such illegal act is a balk. In both situations, the umpire signals dead ball."

If F1 fails to release the ball, I'd rule no pitch: thus it cannot be an illegal pitch. If he does release the ball, 6-1-4 applies (ball if it crosses the foul line, otherwise no pitch).

Interesting...so are you are saying that "it's nothing" IS a judgement call, not a rule violation ?

That might work on a coach, but I can't buy it. 6.1.2 ...With his feet in the wind-up position, the pitcher may only deliver a pitch or step back... And the penalty for violating 6.1.x has been stated.

I am going with "its nothing" also. But I'm doing so knowing that it's outside of the rules.

Yup.

Hmmm,
 

In NFHS rules the "start/stop" movement is not allowed.

When Rumble first referred to the play fe "called it" a balk . . . since that time it has been consider, with no runners on, a violation and should be called.

By reading the OP is "appears" this activity as described by Mr. Emerling falls into at least a start/stop violation.

T

This is one I'll happily ignore, too.

It gets called here. :shrug:

Many of Mr. Rumble's "curious" interps have either been reinterpreted, or simply ignored.

As Tim C pointed out, the OP is start & stop. It is a violation of pitching rules and is a ball with no runners on, a balk with runners. Yes, it's nice to say that you will ignore this, or call no pitch but then..... what other rules are you choosing not to enforce?

Not that canard again. We *all* choose to not enforce everything according to the letter of the law.

Try not to be a total dolt, Rich. You know perfectly well what I am saying.

I know I am jumping into this debate kind of late, but I would like to relay a play that MTD, Jr., had last May. The game was the freshmen championship game of the league that consists of most of the largest high schools in NW Ohio.

Junior was on the bases. Bottom of the seventh inning, one out, runner on third base, and the scored tied. Junior was in the C position. The Pitcher assumed the Windup Position. As the Pitcher started his pitching motion his coach yelled for him to stop and pitch from the Set Position. The Pitcher stopped his motion for a full second and Mark balked in the winning run. Why? The Pitcher committed an illegal act, i.e., an illegal pitch, which is a balk when runners are on base. If the Pitcher had done the same thing with no one on base, it would still be an illegal pitch, for which the penalty is a ball awarded to the batter.

MTD. Sr.

It's a worn out phrase, Ozzy. Local practice dictates crap like this -- I'm not going to be the only umpire in the area to call this when all the rest call it "no pitch."

It's a good thing you train umpires. We can use the laughs from time to time.

The 17" KZ, the rectangular prism KZ, F1 needs to take his signs from the rubber, uniform anomolies, and any other rule that requires suspension because rooster crowing threatens, baseball etiquette dictates, or ugliness demands.

I always thought that including the no-pitch as an illegal pitch was an unintended over-sight because I've never seen it called and had been told to leave it alone. Re-calculating.

Not germane to this infraction but similar. The F1 foot position in the WU and set is now a POE. Because it was ignored in many locations due to rule ignorance or local practice (because nobody was confused) it now should be strictly enforced. The "start and stop" (used to describe this OP infraction but also another infraction in the set which is not penalized in OBR but in practice is) is in the same category but has not been a focus yet for FED. Maybe it should be a POE next year. It's not a big deal whether you ball it or nothing it (with no runners) as long as everybody knows the code.

Don't forget retouching after a foul ball.

Ditto around here. I know no one who has called a ball, and no coaches who have complained.

Yep from me. I haven't seen this called in one of my games of many years - haven't seen it called in any games that i've watched.

Never heard a coach ask for a call on this type of play... so we just play on.

Might be different in other areas of country.

Thanks
David

there's no call to make.

[QUOTE]IMO, the "key ingeredient" in rules such as the one you mention lies within the association you belong to. In other words if the "big wig" says "that's nothin" then "it's nothin".

You want to be conistent with these types of rules. You do not want one crew calling it a balk and another crew says "it's nothin"

This is similar to the no shoulder turn (check a runner) that at one time was a balk in FED. In some associations this was ignored completely meaning they went with the OBR interp.

I believe SC still uses the old appeal rule meaning there is not any appeal the umpires call the infraction.

In summary, if your association says "it's nothin" then call it that way.

Pete Booth

[QUOTE=PeteBooth;874380]Yup...despite all of the lobbying I (and other umpires) have done with the SC High School League.