The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Baseball

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #46 (permalink)  
Old Wed May 01, 2013, 09:25pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 2,716
Quote:
Originally Posted by bob jenkins View Post
And that's also why other codes have (or HAD in OBR) the 3-1 (or 2-1) move a balk if contact isn't broken.

I was just givng the FED interp. Don't like it? Write them with a suggested rule change. (not meant directly to jicecone)
I fully agree with you Bob. When I first started officiating, I was told many times that if it looks weird, it's probably a balk. These scenarios are weird looking whether it is a RHP or LHP, and for certain, one partner is going to be calling, "Balk".
Reply With Quote
  #47 (permalink)  
Old Wed May 01, 2013, 10:57pm
In Time Out
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,263
Quote:
Originally Posted by jicecone View Post
I fully agree with you Bob. When I first started officiating, I was told many times that if it looks weird, it's probably a balk. These scenarios are weird looking whether it is a RHP or LHP, and for certain, one partner is going to be calling, "Balk".
I don't understand why disengaging the rubber on the moves isn't a rule across the board in all rule sets. Pitcher still has to disengage, and re-toe the rubber anyway.......hopefully, bluehair can talk me through it.
__________________
I have nipples, Greg. Can you milk me?
Reply With Quote
  #48 (permalink)  
Old Thu May 02, 2013, 06:06am
CT1 CT1 is offline
Official & ***** Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 1,049
Quote:
Originally Posted by MD Longhorn View Post
Yes, it commits him to 2nd ... but you are not required to throw when you go to 2nd. The play David's talking about would be a full fake to 2nd, without throwing, and then turning 90 degrees and throwing to first, all while keeping the pivot foot on the rubber.
Then that would be a balk, although any R1 who gets picked on that move probably deserves what he gets.
Reply With Quote
  #49 (permalink)  
Old Thu May 02, 2013, 07:47am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 2,716
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steven Tyler View Post
I don't understand why disengaging the rubber on the moves isn't a rule across the board in all rule sets.
If your going to come on here and start talking logical, I will immediately recommend your removable.
Reply With Quote
  #50 (permalink)  
Old Thu May 02, 2013, 08:04am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 18,016
Quote:
Originally Posted by jicecone View Post
I was told many times that if it looks weird, it's probably a balk.
I would disagree with that statement, and that training.
Reply With Quote
  #51 (permalink)  
Old Thu May 02, 2013, 08:11am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: North, TX
Posts: 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by jicecone View Post
If your going to come on here and start talking logical, I will immediately recommend your removable.
Funny. I recently added ST to my ignore list (actually he's the only one in there). I doubt he can sustain any kind of "talking logical" pattern...but I'll never know.
Reply With Quote
  #52 (permalink)  
Old Thu May 02, 2013, 08:18am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Katy, Texas
Posts: 8,033
Quote:
Originally Posted by jicecone View Post
I was told many times that if it looks weird, it's probably a balk.
Worst advice ever. I'm sure you've discarded that since then.
__________________
I was thinking of the immortal words of Socrates, who said, 'I drank what?'”

West Houston Mike
Reply With Quote
  #53 (permalink)  
Old Thu May 02, 2013, 09:41am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 2,716
Quote:
Originally Posted by MD Longhorn View Post
Worst advice ever. I'm sure you've discarded that since then.
Sorry guys I should have cleared that up. I never accepted it to begin with.

I subscribe to the school of, if you can't explain why you just called a Balk, then it is obvious that you don't know enough about the subject to be calling a Balk.
Reply With Quote
  #54 (permalink)  
Old Thu May 02, 2013, 10:03am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Katy, Texas
Posts: 8,033
Quote:
Originally Posted by jicecone View Post
I subscribe to the school of, if you can't explain why you just called a Balk, then it is obvious that you don't know enough about the subject to be calling a Balk.
Absotively.
__________________
I was thinking of the immortal words of Socrates, who said, 'I drank what?'”

West Houston Mike
Reply With Quote
  #55 (permalink)  
Old Thu May 02, 2013, 10:18am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Germantown, TN (east of Memphis)
Posts: 783
Quote:
Originally Posted by MD Longhorn View Post
Worst advice ever. I'm sure you've discarded that since then.
You're taking it too literally.

With every pitch, do you tell yourself, "That was not a balk"?

No! You don't. And that's because nothing looks unusual about it.

It doesn't even occur to you to call a balk.

But, when something looks odd, even if at the very instant it occurs you could not immediately say WHY it's a balk - your mind is racing to determine why, indeed, it is a balk. What sets our brain in motion is precisely because "it looks wrong".

The key is that you have to be able to intelligently and properly articulate why it was a balk once you call it.

SIDENOTE: Whenever I'm a BU, with a runner on 1st, I have to confess that I do, specifically, tell myself "That was not a balk" - especially if the pitcher has already demonstrated that he is on the edge legality.
Reply With Quote
  #56 (permalink)  
Old Thu May 02, 2013, 11:23am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 18,016
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Emerling View Post
But, when something looks odd, even if at the very instant it occurs you could not immediately say WHY it's a balk - your mind is racing to determine why, indeed, it is a balk. What sets our brain in motion is precisely because "it looks wrong".

The key is that you have to be able to intelligently and properly articulate why it was a balk once you call it.
Nope and nope.

If it's "odd" I do ask, "Was that legal or not?" but that's not the same as trying to determine "why, indeed, it is a balk."

And, I know how to articulate it BEFORE I call it.
Reply With Quote
  #57 (permalink)  
Old Thu May 02, 2013, 03:40pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Germantown, TN (east of Memphis)
Posts: 783
Quote:
Originally Posted by bob jenkins View Post
If it's "odd" I do ask, "Was that legal or not?"...
Isn't that exactly what I just said? You don't ask yourself, "Was that legal or not?" if it doesn't look odd - do you?

That's my point! Our experience tells us - "That's not right." In the next instant, we quickly figure out why it's not right.

Quote:
but that's not the same as trying to determine "why, indeed, it is a balk."
Whether you realize it or not - there are many balks when there is a period of time (maybe 1-sec, maybe 3-secs) between you noticing that "it didn't look right" and when you can say exactly why it's a balk.

Obviously, there are some balks that simply call themselves - the more common ones - like failure to pause in the set position - not completing a throw to 1st without disengaging - dropping the ball while engaged with the rubber - starting to deliver and then stopping. But there is a host of less common balks (call them unusual or unexpected balks) that can occur and, when you see them, the reason doesn't immediately occur to you, but the fact that it "looked wrong" does immediately occur to you. Your mind races - you realize why it was wrong - and you call "Balk!" It all starts because "it looked wrong".

I'm not saying that if "it looks wrong" it's a balk. I'm saying that if "it looks wrong" that's when your brain starts considering that it might be a balk.

I've seen a pitcher do something odd - I can't see why it was illegal. I call nothing. My partner and I look at one another as if to see, "That was weird" - yet neither of us called a balk because, as we replay what the pitcher did in our head, we can't see what he did wrong.

There is a pitcher around here who, on occasion, does not go through his normal wind-up routine. He just gets the signal and throws it. He may even do this with a runner on base. The runner sees the pitcher on the rubber as if he is going to pitch from the wind-up. The runner thinks the pitcher forgot that there is a runner on base. The runner decides to take advantage of the situation and breaks on the delivery. But there's no wind-up. The pitcher delivers the ball almost as quickly from this position as he does from the set position. It looks very odd. It looks wrong. But it's completely legal.
Reply With Quote
  #58 (permalink)  
Old Thu May 02, 2013, 07:04pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 2,716
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Emerling View Post
There is a pitcher around here who, on occasion, does not go through his normal wind-up routine. He just gets the signal and throws it. He may even do this with a runner on base. The runner sees the pitcher on the rubber as if he is going to pitch from the wind-up. The runner thinks the pitcher forgot that there is a runner on base. The runner decides to take advantage of the situation and breaks on the delivery. But there's no wind-up. The pitcher delivers the ball almost as quickly from this position as he does from the set position. It looks very odd. It looks wrong. But it's completely legal.
This isn't the hybrid position that was discused in the POE this year was it?
Reply With Quote
  #59 (permalink)  
Old Thu May 02, 2013, 08:37pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Germantown, TN (east of Memphis)
Posts: 783
Quote:
Originally Posted by jicecone View Post
This isn't the hybrid position that was discused in the POE this year was it?
No, he positions his feet legally.

If I recall, the POE illegal position was to toe the rubber with your pivot foot as if you were going to pitcher from the wind-up position, but the free foot is in front of the rubber, as if to pitcher from the set position.

His free foot is behind the rubber. Totally legal. He just doesn't do any wind-up. No rocker step. Nothing. He just steps and throws.

There's no rule that says you have to use the same pitching motion each time. You don't have to have a wind-up. Usually, he throws a pitch out so the catcher can throw the runner out stealing.
Reply With Quote
  #60 (permalink)  
Old Sat May 04, 2013, 03:18pm
In Time Out
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,263
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluehair View Post
Funny. I recently added ST to my ignore list (actually he's the only one in there). I doubt he can sustain any kind of "talking logical" pattern...but I'll never know.
Yeah, but he had to send me a private message so I could walk him through the process.
__________________
I have nipples, Greg. Can you milk me?
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
ASA & High School Zepp Softball 10 Fri Dec 17, 2010 09:46am
ASA/High school Chess Ref Softball 2 Thu Jan 20, 2005 11:12am
Interesting high school play SC Ump Softball 18 Fri May 16, 2003 06:42am
High School Ump Robert G Baseball 3 Thu Jun 21, 2001 04:50pm
over time play in high school football left-field Football 4 Wed Sep 06, 2000 11:18pm


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:15am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1