BlueJays-Sox (BalK)

[Jay R]

In the Blue Jays - White Sox game tonight, Toronto pitcher A. Lopez threw to first base but the 1B was not holding the runner on. The umpire called a balk. Is this because he did not throw directly to first base? I can't remember seeing that play before.

[Jim Porter]

You are correct. The pitcher is required to throw to first base - not to the first baseman, but to the base. It is the only base with that requirement.

[brian43]

i have always read that the first baseman has to be within range to make a play on the runner retreating to the base the ball was thrown to. i didnt see this play so i am guessing the F3 was playing behind the runner as if there was no one on, but then again i dont know so here goes.

many of you know that Mo Vaughn never actually "holds" a runner on but does make plays on runners going back into 1st base. he is usually 2-3 feet in front of the bag but they dont call it a balk because he is close enough to swipe the runner. if the pitcher were to throw to a base with no runner there, except to make a play, it would then be a balk by OBR rule 8.05(d). when that rule says "throws to an unoccupied base," what does that mean as far as the fielder? is my way of thinking that if hes close enough(ie. Mo Vaughn) its occupied correct?

i'll have to look on espn and see if i can catch that play.

[Jim Porter]

The rule requiring the pitcher to throw to an occupied base has nothing to do with the fielder. It's only about runners. With a runner on first only, a pick-off attempt to third would be a balk because no runner holds legal title to third. Third would be unoccupied, so the pick-off attempt would be to an unoccupied base, and therefore a balk. There isn't any more mystery involved than that.

Once again, a pitcher is required to throw to first base. It is the only base he is required to throw to. He can fake to other occupied bases, or he can throw to a fielder stationed away from second or third, as long as second or third is occupied.

Any first baseman must be in the vicinity of the base in a position to make a play in order to avoid a balk call on this rule. It isn't necessary that the first baseman be right at the base. The only thing that matters is that the throw is to the base. We can use the first baseman's position to decide whether or not the throw is to the base.

[Jay R]

Thanks guys. In this situation, the 1B was so far behind the runner that no play could be made on the runner. The pither probably assumed R1 was being held. When he turned to throw, he seemed to hesitate before throwing and then he threw to the 1B behind the bag.

[PatF]

A noticeable hesitation followed by a throw, even if F3 was at the bag, should also be called as a balk.

[brian43]

Originally posted by Jim Porter
The rule requiring the pitcher to throw to an occupied base has nothing to do with the fielder. It's only about runners.

not according to MLB umpire Ed Montague.


http://www.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/mlb/of...montagueqa.jsp

read the 7th question down, Montague says the fielder must be able to make a tag or its a balk...as i originally said.

[CDcoach]

Brian if u read the rest of his post I think you'd find he is saying the exact same thing......

[brian43]

ok i read it all the way through know, stupid me. i just saw that sentence and figured that was it.

why did Jim say the rule has nothing to do with the fielders positioning in the beginning of his post, but later on in the same post he said what i originally said about fielders needing to be in range to avoid the balk being called when throwing to an occupied base?

[Jim Porter]

Originally posted by brian43
why did Jim say the rule has nothing to do with the fielders positioning in the beginning of his post, but later on in the same post he said what i originally said about fielders needing to be in range to avoid the balk being called when throwing to an occupied base?

Because the rule itself has nothing to do with the position of the fielder. The rule merely requires the pitcher to throw to first base.

However, we use the position of the fielder as a guide to determine if the throw was, in fact, to the base. That's based on interpretation.

It is semantics, but important semantics in my opinion, especially for amateur umpires. A skipper isn't interested in hearing about interpretations. He wants to know the rule. The rule says the pitcher is required to throw to first base. That's the rule.

The position of the first baseman is our homework. The requirement to throw to first is the rule.

[brian43]

ok i got it now Jim. i was getting confused for a second but now i completely understand why its called that way. thanks for the help.

[Jim Porter]

Of course, it's probably important to point out exactly what rule we're talking about. That way, I haven't confused anyone or been misunderstood.

8.05(b) The pitcher, while touching his plate, feints a throw to first base and fails to complete the throw.

He's not allowed to feint a throw to first. The word, "feint," is carefully chosen in the rule. It basically means, "a mock attack."

While all of that is interesting for us, it just boils down to, "Skip, he's got to throw to the base at first."

[oreillywv]

Originally posted by Jim Porter
Of course, it's probably important to point out exactly what rule we're talking about. That way, I haven't confused anyone or been misunderstood.

8.05(b) The pitcher, while touching his plate, feints a throw to first base and fails to complete the throw.

He's not allowed to feint a throw to first. The word, "feint," is carefully chosen in the rule. It basically means, "a mock attack."

While all of that is interesting for us, it just boils down to, "Skip, he's got to throw to the base at first."

Pat O'Reilly response.
Thanks for all of the above. Very Informative. Isn't baseball fascinating? All the variations of a play. Here's one. Sixteen-year old all stars. Many great skills exhibited in this game. No wonder that at 67 I still love to officiate. With man on first, pitcher had made three pick-off attempts. Now the 1B is playing normal (deep), R1 has a good lead-off, and I back up a few steps from my normal tight coverage (3-man)crew. Pitcher whirls and throws to first. At about 3 feet off the bag, a glove + ball + helmeted head all meet up. Ball gets dropped. Safe. Is this a balk or a brilliant play? I asked the 1B, was he throwing to you or to the base? He was throwing to the base and just missed. Now for the great question; whisper to me how did you and the pitcher communicate on that play, was it through the catcher? No. The signal is: if I see the pitcher look back at 2B, the play is ON. Reaction please? Should a balk have been called?

[bob jenkins]

Originally posted by oreillywv
With man on first, pitcher had made three pick-off attempts. Now the 1B is playing normal (deep), R1 has a good lead-off, and I back up a few steps from my normal tight coverage (3-man)crew. Pitcher whirls and throws to first. At about 3 feet off the bag, a glove + ball + helmeted head all meet up. Ball gets dropped. Safe. Is this a balk or a brilliant play? I asked the 1B, was he throwing to you or to the base? He was throwing to the base and just missed. Now for the great question; whisper to me how did you and the pitcher communicate on that play, was it through the catcher? No. The signal is: if I see the pitcher look back at 2B, the play is ON. Reaction please? Should a balk have been called?

Not a balk. 3' from the bag is "at the bag" by my definition. And, since F3 had a play it wouldn't matter.

[Jim Porter]

I tend to agree with my fine colleague Mr. Jenkins. Three feet is about the length of a reach, so it's more than possible for the first baseman to catch a throw that's intended to be a genuine attack on R1 from that range.