3rd to 1st Move Becomes a Balk

[egj13]

Originally Posted by maven

As others have already pointed out, this account of the motivation for the change is incorrect. MLB doesn't care how you call your games or how anyone else might use their rules.

My account for the motivation of the rule change came thusly...sitting at a dinner with the father of a MLB umpire last summer he brought up to me that MLB umpires had been informed that this rule would be eliminated because...wait for it...inconsistency in application.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by egj13

I am either dreaming or we have some bad umpires in here.

It could be both. But if the pitcher steps toward third (or second) and in the process removes the pivot foot from the rubber (this happens 99.9% of the time), he has become an infielder, just as if he stepped backwards off the rubber.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by egj13

My account for the motivation of the rule change came thusly...sitting at a dinner with the father of a MLB umpire last summer he brought up to me that MLB umpires had been informed that this rule would be eliminated because...wait for it...inconsistency in application.

to the extent that's true, I think the inconsistency is in not calling a balk when the pitcher didn't step toward third (either stepped more toward home, or didn't mov ethe free foot enough toward third -- left it in "the same footprint")

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by egj13

Even in the current rule (before any change) it was a balk if you faked towards 3rd and then wheeled to throw to first without stepping towards first. Umpires at ALL levels were not enforcing the step towards first and thus not calling the rule as it was intended to be called.

So basically we as umpires weren't calling it consistently so baseball simply made it illegal at all times to take it out of our hands.

Ah. Well, at least we now understand your comment that it was not being called correctly. It's because you don't understand the rule in the first place. Glad that's cleared up.

[egj13]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

Ah. Well, at least we now understand your comment that it was not being called correctly. It's because you don't understand the rule in the first place. Glad that's cleared up.

MD...how the hell can you not read the comment from the MLB rule book and see that I am the only one on this board that DOES know what the rule says?

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by egj13

I am either dreaming or we have some bad umpires in here.

You are correct... but the bad umpires are the opposite group from what you're assuming.

The pitcher would only have become an infileder if he stepped backward off the rubber prior to feining to third base.

Why would you think this. More importantly, what rule states this? This is just flat untrue. Feinting a throw (FEINTING, people, not FEINING) to third (or 2nd) is a legal disengagement from the rubber. You don't have to disengage first to feint a throw to 2nd or 3rd.

[QUOTE]So since he stepped directly towards 3rd..without stepping off...and then wheeled to throw to first without stepping towards first ahead of the throw he now balked.[/quote}This is only true if he manages all of this without removing his foot from the rubber at all. A) That's DAMN hard to do, and B) the reason you've never seen it is because it's a balk.

The fact that he lost contact with the rubber when he feinted to third does not releas him from the requirement to STEP towards first before he throws there. Pull up some video...I bet you will be able to see that after feining to thrid, he then turned to throw to first WIHOUT STEPPING AHEAD of the throw...which is a balk.

Herein lies the complete misunderstanding of this rule you seem to be having.

Clearly no one on this board was calling it a balk hence the reason to need to change the rule

It was not being called a balk because it's not a balk... that said - you're literally insane if you think MLB would change a rule because the members of officiating.com were calling something incorrectly.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by egj13

MD...how the hell can you not read the comment from the MLB rule book and see that I am the only one on this board that DOES know what the rule says?

In my experience, if 99% of the people are saying one thing, and one person is saying something different, it's the one that's wrong 99% of the time. If you find yourself thinking you're the only one on this board that knows something, I guarantee you that you're wrong.

I read the comment from the MLB rule book. It does not refer to what you seem to think it does. It refers to a move that I believe I can safely assume NONE of us has ever seen anyone try.

[egj13]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

It could be both. But if the pitcher steps toward third (or second) and in the process removes the pivot foot from the rubber (this happens 99.9% of the time), he has become an infielder, just as if he stepped backwards off the rubber.

Bob I don't know you but I have respect for you from following on the boards...but according to the MLB rule book you are incorrect.

Why would MLB put a comment with a particular rule interpretation and give an example of the play if it wasn't a common mistake made? I don't see what you guys are missing in the MLB comment.

When a pitcher steps towards third and then wheels on that front foot and throws to first without stepping towards first AHEAD OF THE THROW it is a balk even though his back foot broke with the rubber...

[egj13]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

In my experience, if 99% of the people are saying one thing, and one person is saying something different, it's the one that's wrong 99% of the time. If you find yourself thinking you're the only one on this board that knows something, I guarantee you that you're wrong.

I read the comment from the MLB rule book. It does not refer to what you seem to think it does. It refers to a move that I believe I can safely assume NONE of us has ever seen anyone try.

I am sorry that you don't understand...I do find it hard to believe that you would believe that MLB would put an example in the rule book that is impossible to do...why would they put that in there?

[zm1283]

Originally Posted by egj13

MD...how the hell can you not read the comment from the MLB rule book and see that I am the only one on this board that DOES know what the rule says?

Originally Posted by egj13

I am sorry that you don't understand...I do find it hard to believe that you would believe that MLB would put an example in the rule book that is impossible to do...why would they put that in there?

Add me into the camp that says you're wrong. The balk in the 3rd to 1st move is if the pitcher doesn't disengage his pivot foot from the rubber before throwing to first. (Or if he doesn't gain distance and direction to third on the feint) If he steps to 3rd and then disengages, he can throw or feint wherever he wants at that point.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by egj13

Why would MLB put a comment with a particular rule interpretation and give an example of the play if it wasn't a common mistake made? I don't see what you guys are missing in the MLB comment.

Obviously.

When a pitcher steps towards third and then wheels on that front foot and throws to first without stepping towards first AHEAD OF THE THROW it is a balk even though his back foot broke with the rubber...

No. If he wheels on the BACK foot and doesn't remove it from the rubber during the throw to third, then you have a balk.

You need to slowly read the part of the rule you are harping on. Here it is again so no one has to page back.

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."

Note where it says "SUCH A MOVE". It says that in the move it's describing, it is nearly impossible to step directly toward first base, and in that move, you have a balk. THE VERY NEXT SENTENCE says "of course" --- if the pitcher steps off (not disengages; not steps BACK; steps OFF) the rubber and then makes "such a move" - i.e. wheeling and throwing to first --- it's NOT a balk.

I see where your assumption has gone wrong. I ask you to take your assumption of what they are talking about and try very hard to fit the final sentence into your assumption ... it doesn't fit.

[zm1283]

Originally Posted by egj13

Even in the current rule (before any change) it was a balk if you faked towards 3rd and then wheeled to throw to first without stepping towards first. Umpires at ALL levels were not enforcing the step towards first and thus not calling the rule as it was intended to be called.

Here is the excerpt stright from the MLB rule book:

"Rule 8.05(c) Comment: Requires the pitcher, while touching his plate, to step directly
toward a base before throwing to that base. If a pitcher turns or spins off of his free foot without
actually stepping or if he turns his body and throws before stepping, it is a balk.
Apitcher is to step directly toward a base before throwing to that base but does not require him
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 called a balk. Of
course, if the pitcher steps off the rubber and then makes such a move, it is not a balk."

So basically we as umpires weren't calling it consistently so baseball simply made it illegal at all times to take it out of our hands.

It means if the pitcher doesn't disengage with his pivot foot before "wheeling" to throw to first. If he disengages, he's fine.

[Mrumpiresir]

egj13, you are flat wrong. Listen to the veterans on the board who have tried to gently let you know you are wrong. Get some experience and read the rulebook before posting your incorrect "knowledge".

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by egj13

When a pitcher steps towards third and then wheels on that front foot and throws to first without stepping towards first AHEAD OF THE THROW it is a balk even though his back foot broke with the rubber...

I never see that move (at least as I use the word "wheels").

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

I never see that move (at least as I use the word "wheels").

I just broke my ankle merely thinking about trying to wheel on my front foot and throw the other direction.