3rd to 1st Move Becomes a Balk

[bluehair]

Originally Posted by egj13

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.

I have never seen F1 fein to 3B when he didn't come off the rubber on this move, which made it legal (previously) for the now infielder to throw to 1B. If F1 didn't come off the rubber, I can't image an umpire not recognizing it and balking it for no other reason than the ugliness it would take to perform.

Can you describe a sitch where you actually witnessed this "inconsistency"?

[egj13]

Originally Posted by bluehair

I have never seen F1 fein to 3B when he didn't come off the rubber on this move, which made it legal (previously) for the now infielder to throw to 1B. If F1 didn't come off the rubber, I can't image an umpire not recognizing it and balking it for no other reason than the ugliness it would take to perform.

Can you describe a sitch where you actually witnessed this "inconsistency"?

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

The pitcher would only have become an infileder if he stepped backward off the rubber prior to feining to third base. In a 3rd to 1st scenario the pitcher rarely, if ever steps off first. 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. 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.

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

[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.

[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...

[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.

[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.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

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

Right. It's the move you make when you want to fake out your dog when you're throwing the tennis ball, or when you're having fun with your 7 year olds in the back yard.

[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.