Fielder's balk?

[drumsub]

I have no idea how far back I'm going for the MLB rule, I just know our rule book derived from NFHS (word for word in many sections), which derived from MLB, and it simply states "The catcher shall position himself directly back of the plate. He may leave his position at any time to catch a pitch or make a play". No reference to the intentional walk. So the penalty was not limited to an intentional walk, and it would be hard to argue that in our league games to this day. Additionally, the penalty statement is not indented with subsection A so the argument can be made that it applies to everything above it and not just subsection A.

I think the biggest reason this is still misunderstood by many is because youth leagues that have their own rule books don't keep up with the yearly changes in MLB/NFHS/etc. I have a laundry list of differences we either haven't kept up with, or haven't adopted for one reason or another, that lead to confusion with coaches, players, and umps participating in multiple leagues.

All that aside, I still think it could easily be put to rest with a simple comment in that section as is done in so many other places in the rules. Look at the lengthy comment for 5.03 regarding base coaches. MLB felt that one needed an explanation, yet this commonly misapplied and much debated rule doesn't get the same treatment. Obviously it isn't debated or misapplied at that level so it doesn't get any attention.

[drumsub]

JJ, what difference does 1 or 2 feet in foul have? Are you saying you'd make a call if the 1st baseman had both feet in foul while holding the runner on? Or would you stick with the "don't do that" response/warning?

Like any rule book for any sport, if it warrants mentioning it warrants a consequence. If it doesn't then should anyone really care, and should it be mentioned at all?

[Rich Ives]

Originally Posted by drumsub

JJ, what difference does 1 or 2 feet in foul have? Are you saying you'd make a call if the 1st baseman had both feet in foul while holding the runner on? Or would you stick with the "don't do that" response/warning?

Like any rule book for any sport, if it warrants mentioning it warrants a consequence. If it doesn't then should anyone really care, and should it be mentioned at all?

What you do is not put the ball in play until the fielder complies.

Smart move in FED.

MLBUM procedure for OBR.

Don't cause a problem - head it off.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by drumsub

JJ, what difference does 1 or 2 feet in foul have? Are you saying you'd make a call if the 1st baseman had both feet in foul while holding the runner on? Or would you stick with the "don't do that" response/warning?

FED specifically says "one foot in fair is okay." So, in FED, if you see F3 with both feet in foul, stop play, and make him put one in fair. If you don't see F3 with both feet in foul then you can't enforce any penalty.

In OBR /interps, it says, "don't worry until one coach complains, then enforce for both" In OBR, both feet must be in fair territory.

[drumsub]

@umpjim, all baseball rulebooks derived from MLB. They've undergone changes since the first writing, and of course there are differences, but you can still see parts that are the same wording, or organized the same way. Maybe there's a league out there other than MLB that sat down and wrote a rule book from scratch, but I've seen no evidence of that.

And I'm saying it's debated and misapplied in youth leagues all over the US. That's obvious from the existence of threads like this one.

My point is that due to all the derivative rule books out there you've got various iterations of the rule with different wording, indentations, etc. It doesn't matter what X's interpretation guide says to someone in Y league, and the existence of that interp guide probably isn't known to that person. My point is that the confusion could have been put to rest by MLB addressing it as they do so many other rules via a short note in the rule book way back when.

I remember this thing sparked in the 80's because Keith Hernandez had it called on him and then every ump in my area was calling it because they saw it in an MLB game (or so the rumor went, I didn't actually see it myself, but as a young umpire I believed what the older guys taught). So there has obviously been confusion over the years.

[Rich Ives]

Originally Posted by drumsub

@umpjim, all baseball rulebooks derived from MLB. They've undergone changes since the first writing, and of course there are differences, but you can still see parts that are the same wording, or organized the same way. Maybe there's a league out there other than MLB that sat down and wrote a rule book from scratch, but I've seen no evidence of that.

And I'm saying it's debated and misapplied in youth leagues all over the US. That's obvious from the existence of threads like this one.

My point is that due to all the derivative rule books out there you've got various iterations of the rule with different wording, indentations, etc. It doesn't matter what X's interpretation guide says to someone in Y league, and the existence of that interp guide probably isn't known to that person. My point is that the confusion could have been put to rest by MLB addressing it as they do so many other rules via a short note in the rule book way back when.

I remember this thing sparked in the 80's because Keith Hernandez had it called on him and then every ump in my area was calling it because they saw it in an MLB game (or so the rumor went, I didn't actually see it myself, but as a young umpire I believed what the older guys taught). So there has obviously been confusion over the years.

No OBR rule version/derivative I have ever seen has a penalty listed for not being fair - therefore it isn't a balk.

No OBR rule version/derivative I have ever seen has it listed in 8.05 as a balk, therefore it isn't one.

[DG]

Interestingly enough, the FED rule book says you can start the game when infielders, pitcher and catcher are in position. I missed this question once, obviously a trick and clearly conflicts with rule about starting with 9 players unless one assumes that 3 of them are on the bench.

I expect the FED rule book evolved from the OBR rule book since I expect they were playing pro ball before high schools took up the sport or before high schools were considered high schools. But there are many differences in the rule sets just like there are differences in language and dialects.

Suffice it to finalize by saying I have never been looking at F9 when I am set for a pitch behind the plate, or when I am BU so this is surely a third world play situation. I think I sense an OOO who would even entertain a balk in this situation.

[drumsub]

Rich - and yet here this discussion is because someone read it that way at some point and it has proliferated for decades. I'm surprised this one didn't make the top 40 myths list.

[umpjim]

Originally Posted by drumsub

@umpjim, all baseball rulebooks derived from MLB. They've undergone changes since the first writing, and of course there are differences, but you can still see parts that are the same wording, or organized the same way. Maybe there's a league out there other than MLB that sat down and wrote a rule book from scratch, but I've seen no evidence of that.

And I'm saying it's debated and misapplied in youth leagues all over the US. That's obvious from the existence of threads like this one.

My point is that due to all the derivative rule books out there you've got various iterations of the rule with different wording, indentations, etc. It doesn't matter what X's interpretation guide says to someone in Y league, and the existence of that interp guide probably isn't known to that person. My point is that the confusion could have been put to rest by MLB addressing it as they do so many other rules via a short note in the rule book way back when.

I remember this thing sparked in the 80's because Keith Hernandez had it called on him and then every ump in my area was calling it because they saw it in an MLB game (or so the rumor went, I didn't actually see it myself, but as a young umpire I believed what the older guys taught). So there has obviously been confusion over the years.

A google search shows Keith Hernandez caused Dwight Gooden to be balked for a start and stop when Hernandez yelled "step off" too late. Maybe Hernandez was outside fair, no one complaining and not called, but maybe your old timers did not have sound on their TVs or the announcers were as clueless as some of today's.

[umpjim]

Originally Posted by drumsub

@umpjim, all baseball rulebooks derived from MLB. They've undergone changes since the first writing, and of course there are differences, but you can still see parts that are the same wording, or organized the same way. Maybe there's a league out there other than MLB that sat down and wrote a rule book from scratch, but I've seen no evidence of that.

And I'm saying it's debated and misapplied in youth leagues all over the US. That's obvious from the existence of threads like this one.

My point is that due to all the derivative rule books out there you've got various iterations of the rule with different wording, indentations, etc. It doesn't matter what X's interpretation guide says to someone in Y league, and the existence of that interp guide probably isn't known to that person. My point is that the confusion could have been put to rest by MLB addressing it as they do so many other rules via a short note in the rule book way back when.

I remember this thing sparked in the 80's because Keith Hernandez had it called on him and then every ump in my area was calling it because they saw it in an MLB game (or so the rumor went, I didn't actually see it myself, but as a young umpire I believed what the older guys taught). So there has obviously been confusion over the years.

Believing what the older guys taught was how it worked back then. Not many paid for a rulebook and it was word of mouth perpetration of the myths.

[umpjim]

Originally Posted by drumsub

I have no idea how far back I'm going for the MLB rule, I just know our rule book derived from NFHS (word for word in many sections), which derived from MLB, and it simply states "The catcher shall position himself directly back of the plate. He may leave his position at any time to catch a pitch or make a play". No reference to the intentional walk. So the penalty was not limited to an intentional walk, and it would be hard to argue that in our league games to this day. Additionally, the penalty statement is not indented with subsection A so the argument can be made that it applies to everything above it and not just subsection A.

I think the biggest reason this is still misunderstood by many is because youth leagues that have their own rule books don't keep up with the yearly changes in MLB/NFHS/etc. I have a laundry list of differences we either haven't kept up with, or haven't adopted for one reason or another, that lead to confusion with coaches, players, and umps participating in multiple leagues.

All that aside, I still think it could easily be put to rest with a simple comment in that section as is done in so many other places in the rules. Look at the lengthy comment for 5.03 regarding base coaches. MLB felt that one needed an explanation, yet this commonly misapplied and much debated rule doesn't get the same treatment. Obviously it isn't debated or misapplied at that level so it doesn't get any attention.

If your rulebook is derived from NFHS it is not derived from MLB/OBR. Their are many many differences.
NFHS actually does not differentiate when the catcher can leave his box but an umpire who would be focused on this particular infraction would be an untrained, but perhaps a well read, umpire. If the umpire has no access to on field practical umpire training then the next thing he should read is "Baseball Rules Differences" by Carl Childress.
Are you saying the rule is commonly miss applied or debated in the USA or in a foreign country?