Balk or not

clevbrown

NFHS rules. Runner on 2nd, pitcher pitching from the stretch. After going to the set position, the pitcher pivots on the rubber, steps toward 2nd base and fakes a throw to 2nd. The runner takes off to 3rd not realizing the pitcher was faking a pick off move to 2nd. The pitcher, no longer in contact with the rubber throws the ball to 3rd and the runner is tagged out. Is this a balk or a legal play?

My opinion:
NFHS Rule 6.2.4.b says it is a balk if there is a runner on and the pitcher throws or feints to an unoccupied base when it is not an attempt to put out or drive back a runner. So, in my opinion it is a balk because he stepped toward 2nd, then threw to 3rd. Had he stepped to 3rd and thrown to 3rd, he would not be a balk because he was making an attempt to put out a runner.

I have heard 2 arguments from other umpires on this.
Argument 1: it is a balk because the pitcher must step behind the rubber before he can throw to an unoccupied base.
Argument 2: it is not a balk because the pitcher while faking a throw to first, stepped toward second and after his pivot foot left the rubber during the step toward 2nd, he is now a fielder and can throw wherever he wants to.

Thoughts?

Rich Ives

2nd base is the occupied base.

3rd base is the unoccupied base with a runner advancing toward it.

Now think it through again.

clevbrown

Rich Ives wrote
2nd base is the occupied base.

3rd base is the unoccupied base with a runner advancing toward it.

Now think it through again.

Not sure what you mean Rich. I agree 3rd base is not occupied. My feeling is the pitcher must step towards the base he is throwing to regardless if it is occupied or not. I think the pitcher cannot step toward 2nd, then throw to 3rd.

yawetag

clevbrown wrote
Not sure what you mean Rich. I agree 3rd base is not occupied. My feeling is the pitcher must step towards the base he is throwing to regardless if it is occupied or not. I think the pitcher cannot step toward 2nd, then throw to 3rd.

He stepped toward second and faked a pick-off to second. Legal

He threw to 3B while disengaged from the rubber. Legal

Nothing illegal about his move. He faked to an occupied base (legal) and then threw to a base in an attempt to retire a runner attempting to advance (legal). In fact, once the disengagement from the rubber was made on the fake pick-off, anything after that is legal anyway (even a fake throw to an unoccupied base) because he's an infielder the moment he disengages.

Mrumpiresir

I agree with Yawetag, this is not a Balk. The pitcher can step toward second base and does not need to throw. Once he comes off the rubber, there are no restrictions and he can throw to third to retire the advancing runner.

BSUmp16

Iitbtsb

mbyron

clevbrown wrote
I think the pitcher cannot step toward 2nd, then throw to 3rd.

You are correct about this principle, but it doesn't apply to your case. The key is to understand when he ceases to be a pitcher: the pitcher stepped toward 2B and feinted there, which is legal.

Once disengaged, he is no longer a pitcher, and the restrictions on pitchers no longer apply. He is technically an infielder and may do whatever (otherwise legal action) he wishes.

bob jenkins

clevbrown wrote
I think the pitcher cannot step toward 2nd, then throw to 3rd.

If he steps toward second and throws across his body to third all in one motion (just like a "normal" throw to third except the foot is to second -- or like you're faking out the dog when having him chase the ball in the backyard), then it's a balk.

But, that's not what he did in the OP. He faked to second and THEN threw to third. The tiem between the fake and the throw can be >veryshort<

jicecone

clevbrown wrote
NFHS rules.

I have heard 2 arguments from other umpires on this.

Argument 2: it is not a balk because the pitcher while faking a throw to first, stepped toward second and after his pivot foot left the rubber during the step toward 2nd, he is now a fielder and can throw wherever he wants to.

Thoughts?

I agree completely with the advice given by everyone.

What did argument 2 mean though? You never mentioned first until now. If he feint to first whle stepping to second, well that is the same as Bob has talked. abt. balk.

ozzy6900

clevbrown wrote
NFHS rules. Runner on 2nd, pitcher pitching from the stretch. After going to the set position, the pitcher pivots on the rubber, steps toward 2nd base and fakes a throw to 2nd. The runner takes off to 3rd not realizing the pitcher was faking a pick off move to 2nd. The pitcher, no longer in contact with the rubber throws the ball to 3rd and the runner is tagged out. Is this a balk or a legal play?

Let's start with the basics.

The only base that F1 cannot fake a throw to when in contact with the rubber is 1st base.
F1 may turn from the set position and either throw or fake to 2nd base.
Pitching restrictions (all rule sets) only apply when F1 is in contact with the rubber. Once F1 disengages the rubber, he is an infielder and can throw anywhere.
Even if he were in contact with the rubber, he is making a play on the runner heading for 3rd base so it is a legal move.

Quoting rules is good but you need to understand the rule first.

UmpJM

I believe clevbrown's fundamental misunderstanding is that he does not understand that, in this play, 2B is considered an "occupied base" because that was the base R2 was entitled to when F1 engaged the rubber.

Even though R2 had "taken off" to 3B at the time of F1's feint to 2B, for purposes of the rule, 2B is still considered an "occupied base".

clevbrown

jicecone wrote
I agree completely with the advice given by everyone.

What did argument 2 mean though? You never mentioned first until now. If he feint to first whle stepping to second, well that is the same as Bob has talked. abt. balk.

Sorry, I messed up when I posted "argument 2". it should have read ...

Argument 2: it is not a balk because the pitcher while faking a throw to 2nd stepped toward second and after his pivot foot left the rubber during the step toward 2nd, he is now a fielder and can throw wherever he wants to.

I did not mean to state "while faking a throw to first". My mistake.

clevbrown

UmpJM (nee CoachJM) wrote
I believe clevbrown's fundamental misunderstanding is that he does not understand that, in this play, 2B is considered an "occupied base" because that was the base R2 was entitled to when F1 engaged the rubber.

Even though R2 had "taken off" to 3B at the time of F1's feint to 2B, for purposes of the rule, 2B is still considered an "occupied base".

JM

Actually, I understand which base is occupied. My problem is I did not understand that a pitcher can step toward a base with his non pivot foot and still be considered stepping off the rubber. I thought the pitcher had to disengage from the rubber with his pivot foot and step behind the rubber.

What I have learned from everyone on this page is once a pitcher steps towards an occupied base and removes his pivot foot from the rubber, he is now a fielder and can throw anywhere he wants. Thanks to everyone for helping me understand this.

One follow up question...
Runner on 2nd, pitcher in the stretch, runner breaks for 3rd, can the pitcher step toward 3rd and throw to third since he is "attempting to put out a runner"? Per the rules, it appears the answer is yes he can. However, I hear a lot of people say he cannot.

UmpJM

clev,

Yes, he can.

mbyron

clevbrown wrote
One follow up question...
Runner on 2nd, pitcher in the stretch, runner breaks for 3rd, can the pitcher step toward 3rd and throw to third since he is "attempting to put out a runner"? Per the rules, it appears the answer is yes he can. However, I hear a lot of people say he cannot.

Yes he can, and your reasoning is correct. In my experience, the balk rules are the weakest area of rules knowledge for many "veteran" umpires. You'll be better off doing what you're doing: study the rules for yourself, and then you can help out some of your "more experienced" partners.

gordon30307

Never seen a balk on a pick off at second nor have I heard of one called. It might be possible but I can't think of how it would be committed.

UmpJM

gordon,

Heck, D-backs F1 Brad Ziegler did it just a couple of weeks ago in the playoff against the Brewers.

Baseball Video Highlights & Clips | ARI@MIL Gm 2: Brewers score five runs in the sixth - Video | MLB.com: Multimedia

(Around the 20-second mark.)

Of course, the IITBTSB dogmatists will come up with some specious semantic argument that the balk was for "...failure to deliver a pitch without interruption after having made a move which committed him..." or some such nonsense.

But, in the real world, it's "a balk to second base".

It's not impossible, it's just really hard.

gordon30307

UmpJM (nee CoachJM) wrote
gordon,

Heck, D-backs F1 Brad Ziegler did it just a couple of weeks ago in the playoff against the Brewers.

Baseball Video Highlights & Clips | ARI@MIL Gm 2: Brewers score five runs in the sixth - Video | MLB.com: Multimedia

(Around the 20-second mark.)

Of course, the IITBTSB dogmatists will come up with some specious semantic argument that the balk was for "...failure to deliver a pitch without interruption after having made a move which committed him..." or some such nonsense.

But, in the real world, it's "a balk to second base".

It's not impossible, it's just really hard.

JM

Yeah you can drop the ball or commit to the plate and it is indeed a balk. Give me a way to commit a balk other than above.

mbyron

UmpJM (nee CoachJM) wrote
Of course, the IITBTSB dogmatists will come up with some specious semantic argument that the balk was for "...failure to deliver a pitch without interruption after having made a move which committed him..." or some such nonsense.

JM

JM, I'm curious why you regard this argument as either specious or semantic.

But in any case, disputes about IITBTSB are moot and miss the point of the "dogma."

UmpJM

Michael,

The only explanation I've ever come across that describes the "point of the dogma" is that it somehow facilitates the learning of the balk rules.

That never made sense to me.

Perhaps there's another "point" of which I am unaware?