You're the BU. ASA JO fastpitch. Very common situation.

Pitcher sets up with her pivot foot on the front of the plate (say, arch or even the heel at the front edge) so the front of her foot is off the plate. Legal so far.

As she steps forward, she picks up the heel of her pivot foot to push off, but because of the placement of her foot, her actual push off is 3-4 inches in front of the plate in the dirt. No leap, no hop, no skip, just a push off a few inches in front of the plate.

Do you call that?

As I see, the foot doesnt leave the ground, I don't call it.

I will make it known to her coach and her about the infraction, and if she continues to pitch this way will call an illegal pitch on her everytime afterwards. Dave

I concur with Dave!

Are you gonna call it when there is a big divot in front of the rubber? 98% of ball fields are like that. So what do you do then?

By rule, the hole only comes into play for the drag of the pivot foot away from the plate, not for the push off.

I want JEL to ump my games. 3 or 4 inches? Please! 12 to 24 inches? Yes call it. What advantage is gained with 3 to 4 inches?

I was looking for some honest dialog (true confessions?) from umpires on whether they call this technical violation. I have never called it, even though I see it fairly often.

However, since you brought up the "no advantage" rubric, I have to ask this... If there is no advantage gained by placing the foot at the very front edge of the plate so that the push off is in front of the plate on the dirt, then there is no disadvantage to moving the foot back on the plate at the start so the push off is from the front edge of the plate, right? Therefore, move it back.

I think I'll go with Dave's suggestion in the future. Warn the first time. Call it thereafter.

I'm still interested in what other umpires actually do with this situation. Call it? Warn & call it? Ignore it?

Then you risk the pitcher getting hurt because of the canyon in front of the rubber. Most girls push off in front of the hole to avoid an injury. The only time I have ever seen what you are talking about called is in LL or a very inexperienced umpire who thinks the rule book is to be adhered to strickly. Those guys have 3 and 4 hour 7 inning games and for the life of them cannot figure out why it takes so long.

A rule is a rule,, this is where we here "home town ump"
or he must have something else to do.

I have seen the technique described on a good number (more than a few, but less than several) of pitchers in my area.

I concur with JEL, I'm not calling it or warning the pitcher. Both feet start on the pitcher's plate and the pivot foot does not leave the ground.

Another reason that I won't call this is because nobody ever complains about it. And no, I don't base my calls on what the coaches and fans are complaining about.

For the issue described, I feel that it would be over-officious to make that call.

If I am conviced that the pitcher is pushing off from other than the plate, I will call it because it is illegal.
If the foot does not move forward from its original position, then it would not seem to be illegal and most likely could not be detected.

18-year softball ump here. Never got the memo saying that the rulebook did not have to be adhered to strictly. So, archer, which parts of the rulebook are we now allowed to let slide?

Sarcasm aside --- if the field permits it, call it by the book. Like it was said, if you ever let something go because "they gain no advantage from it", then there's no disadvantage in sticking by the rule.

On the other hand, where the field is in need of some help, I'm not going to cause the girls to twist ankles in order to stay on that rubber. However, in a case like this - it's our job to inspect the field beforehand. If the mound has a canyon (and we've all seen 'em), we should let BOTH coaches know - before we see their pitchers at all - that a little leeway will be given regarding their pitchers feet remaining on the rubber.

Safety first. If it's safe to call it by the book, then call it by the book.

Being an ump Gmoore. You should know that 99% of the people who yell at you from the stands never played a sport and more than likely played in the band. Ill even bet they have some "one time at band camp" stories to tell.

I guess mb, Im from the school advantage disadvantage. In my years of officiating I have found that if it doesnt affect the play and it is not an obious violation. Dont call it. Ex. In football, R1 is holding away from the ball. He is in no way a part of the play and never will be a part of the play. Do you call it? I dont and all the veteran officals I have worked with in the past wouldnt either. Why disrupt the flow of the game because the rule book said holding is a penalty?
No sarcasm taken or intended.

Hogwash. The pitcher actually risks greater injury by pushing off from the bottom of the hole instead of just staying on the plate to push off.

Most fields have a small divot in front of the plate, not a deep hole, and I see this positioning of the foot on all kinds of fields. It is obviously a coached and practiced foot positioning, so somebody somewhere thinks this is a better way to handle the foot mechanics (i.e. gain an advantage).

As I said above, I've never called a pitcher on it, but it is clearly illegal.

It is a little ironic, but I agree with you on football. I've been doing football for 2 years - so I'm much less experienced there, but you are right as far as your opinions of how veterans call the game. There is, for some reason, a lot more leniency on the football field regarding calling penalties that don't affect the play. Perhaps it is because football is a constant motion sport, and if one were to call it by the book, on every play at every point on the field, there would likely be a penalty on every single play.

However, to the point that we should let things go in baseball or softball, I tend to disagree. I'll have to think a lot more about WHY I disagree, but initial thoughts are thus:

The rules in baseball are nearly all there for specific reasons. The "no harm, no foul" principle doesn't apply because nearly every "foul" in baseball is actually part of the play. If there is truly no advantage in pitching from 3 inches in front of the rubber, then you have to ask yourself why she does it. If there is some disadvantage to her to do it correctly, then obviously there IS an advantage to her doing it wrong. If there's no disadvantage, then there is simply no reason not to do it right.

Think about the lookback rule. A girl is strolling 1 step off the bag, and a pitcher gets the ball in the circle. The BR takes another slow step off the bag, stops, and then returns to 1st. No harm, right. But sorry folks - she's out. So the no harm-no foul principle clearly doesn't hold water there - so why be lax elsewhere.

The only instance where I can see leniency on a rule is when safety is involved (like the canyons in front of the rubber mentioned above).

I agree dakota. Pushing of from the bottom of the hole will get a kid hurt. That is why they land on the other side of the divot.

I wonder if maybe we are miscommunicating here. I'm not talking about the drag above a hole & landing on the other side.

Visualize no hole at all. When you push off with the ball of your foot, your heel naturally lifts. If you start with the heel only on the front of the plate, the push off with the ball of the foot will be the lenght of the foot in front of the plate & in the dirt. The point of impetus, therefore, will not be in contact with the plate, but will be several inches in front of the plate in the dirt.

That is what I was asking about. Not the drag in air above a hole.

Well, I'm gonna give you my opinion.

The action originally described is not a violation IMO.

The rule does not require the whole foot to be on the pitcher's plate at the start of the pitch. If F1 wishes to only have her heel on top of the plate at the start of the pitch, then any natural motion on the pitch will cause her to lose contact with the plate as she takes the required step. Matter of fact the diagrams illustrating legal pitching positions in the Fed book spicifically show this.

Just use a little common sense and consider the whole rule, not fragments. This is not pushing off from some other place than the pitching plate.

Roger Greene

It's interesting that this topic came up. I was doing a game on Sunday where this exact thing happened. Pitcher sets up with pivot heel on top of the front part of the plate. Her forward motion always rocked her foot into the hole 3-4 inches in front of the rubber. She actually pushed from the hole.
I didn't call it because I honestly was confused. But after reading Roger Greenes' post I have to agree with him. Fed book shows an example of a legal pitch doing the same thing. I'm assuming they don't expect the girl to push off with her heal only.

Roger Green is correct. This is a legal delivery. To call it illegal would be nit-picking at best.
May I suggest that a warning should never be given if a pitcher is illigal. Make the illigal pitch call and that is warning enough. A warning is not fair to the other team to basically ignore the infraction. If it is illigal, call it and if not, ignore it

Voices of reasoning..

Tom,

A lot of lurkers appeared on this one. I stayed out of this one because I thought it got off track and wasn't sure which way it was going to go, especially when I started reading about football and baseball on this board.

I think you are referring to the same thing which happens in SP when the pitcher raises the heel during the delivery, yet the remainder of the foot never moves off the set position.

It seems to me that if this can be absolutely determined to be prior to the delivery, it is illegal. If it is a motion that occurs so quickly that you just aren't sure which came first, you have a legal pitch.

And I mean the umpire must SEE this, not just assume it happened, to make this call.

Oh no! Mike has demoted me to a "lurker"!

Roger Greene

I agree with this philosophically - like an out - only call it if you see it. The IP call can have a significant penalty with runner on base, and especially with a runner on third, so the umpire should never guess at an IP call.

I also agree with the "don't warn - just call it" in Championship play, at least. However, in lower level play with younger kids, I will almost always inform the coach of technical violations between innings so the pitcher can work on them. (Actual, intentional violations are another matter, and while not perfect at reading intent, I can tell the difference in many cases.) I never "warn" about an IP (even though I threatened to earlier). I either inform the coach so he can work on it, or I call it.

However, I firmly disagree with Roger and those who agree with his view that this is a legal pitch. A drawing of legal foot positioning at the start of the pitch in the NFHS book does not supercede the clear ASA Rule 6, bolstered by the definition of a crow hop in Rule 1, that the point of impetus and push off must be the pitching plate and nowhere else. Positioning of the foot can be legal or illegal; legal foot positioning does not mean everything after that is by definition legal.

OTOH, I am back to the significant penalty that the IP call can result in and the relatively minor violation this is.

OTOH, it is clearly coached in most cases, and therefore could just as easily be coached to be legal. Move your foot back a bit, pitcher, and then you'll push off from the plate. Or, slide your foot sideways to push off instead of rock forward. Whatever... just push off from the plate.

It bugs me every time I've seen it, and it bugs me more that I don't call it, since I have this nagging feeling that I should call it but don't just because I don't want the hassle.

There. True confessions.

It bugs me enough I was just wondering what others did.

But now when you start calling it you are going to get "But you have never called it before so why start now?" and have to put up with that headache. I'm not disagreeing that it shouldn't be called as I feel it should but you know you will be hearing that statement when you start.

Yeppers (2¢ to Joel), right you are.

In answer to the question in the first post, as long as the pivot foot is legal on the start of the pitch where is there anything to call? I do not call a lift of the heel providing the foot does not slide forward or it is a turn only to clear cleats and the heel is not turned off the rubber. I do however call everytime when the first motion of the pitch is with the pivot foot and it is slid forward 3 or 4 inches before the stride foot is moved.

IMO, to not call something because no perceived advantage is gained is a slippery slope, except maybe for safety when both teams are given the same tolerance.

A few years ago a girl that is now playing D-1 would start with her heel in contact, her fist motion was to slide her pivot foot forward several inches, I would call her, she would smile and not move it the rest of the game. IMO she knew exactly what she was doing and mayby wasn't called all the time. But because the ball of her foot was already forward, I wanted here in contact as required by the rules when the pitch started. (ASA says in contact with and Federation says on top of.)

If you can show me where it says in the rule book to only call a pitching violation if the pitcher is gaining an advantage, then I will be glad to call it your way. However, until such wording is added, I must call it the way the rule book states, which in the case provided is a violation.

Ummm...I am a very experienced umpire, though not as much so as many on this board, and I will tell you that the rule book should be strictly adhered to. That is what we, as umpires, are taking your money for. To enforce the rules as they are written, not just the ones that you or I feel should be enforced. One cannot pick and choose which rules to enforce, and having coached FP for 10 years myself, I wouldn't have wanted an umpire who did enforce the rules on a selective basis. It surprises me that you would want to shortchange your girls that way.

Inflammatory comments such as this serve no purpose, other than to give a glimpse into the nature of your character. For the record, I was in band in both middle school and high school, but I also played baseball, basketball, and tennis. I am 6'2", 225 lbs and in peak health. Want to listen to my "band camp" stories???? ;)

The bottom line is, ask yourself this one question. When you pay your fees and sign up for a tournament, do you want to know that your money has gone to hire officials who will ajudicate your games according to the book, or would you prefer officials who will only apply some of the rules some of the time?! Remember, they may pick and choose the ones that you don't want enforced. That is the risk you run when you "desire" substandard officials.



[Edited by Skahtboi on Sep 18th, 2003 at 10:49 AM]

Scott,
If you are as stiffed necked as your post makes you out to be. You have no business being around kids. Your remarks I find not only offensive, but also funny. As an official of other sports. I chuckle at watching you guys get bent out of shape when someone disagrees with you. It seems 2 of you are former band memebers in high school. I guess you didnt laugh at the American Pie movie. Guys lighten up. Judging from the comments here I can just about bet that when a coach disagrees with you you take it personal and probably the first words out of your mouth are " Your outta here!" Oh, and if you think intimidation is a way to change a persons opinion,then it must have been an issue for you when you were a kid.

Ah! a nerve has been struck. To close for comfort for the weekend warriors. Yes, that is what I have gathered so far. The ones of you who think that this issue of 3 inches should be called are the guys who havent the ability to move up to at least high school ball. Should have known when I first posed a question. Your stiff necked replies was amusing at best. Some of you guys are a real joke. I would hate to be involved in a game that you officiated. Im just glad that there are some on this board who have common sense. It at least balances out the ignorance you idiots spew when you talk about the rules. No wonder youth league sports are in the shape they are. It because of idiots like you who grew up being picked on and was never good enough to play anything above youth league ball. So you became involved in the game as a ump because you didnt have the athletic talent to play. Just as I mentioned before. Those holler monkeys in the stands who yell the loudest never played the game. Just like some of you idiots! As for the band comment.... Go hum your school fight song at the youth league complex. You wont and never will be good enough to make the big show. More than likely because you are over weight from stuffing your face with cheetos while watching a game on TV and telling your other fat buddy about how bad the umps are, and how good you are.

Roger, Roger, Roger. I certainly hope that isn't how you handle things on the bench. :)

I doubt, with 401 posts, anyone including myself considers you a lurker.

Wow, it looks like we have an escapee from McGriffs in our midst.

Simply amazing! Scoffs, and is offended I might add, at others' posts, yet doesn't hesitate to make blind and ignorant judgments of others.

Maybe this is the type of folk for which Mick may be searching.

Tom:

There was a wise saying that went around on McGriff's board. Simply put, "please don't feed the trolls!"

Yeah, thanks for reminding me. He just got me going with his silly comments.

Talk about living in the past. Im surprised you didnt give me your batting average. Yep, I did escape from something. Its called the wanna be officials. I moved on from youth league. To bad none of you have the ambition to move up.

As a courtesy to the board, I've deleted all my off-topic posts. Doesn't change my opinion of a certain member's posts, just trying to recover a bit of civility and follow my own advice I used to post on McGriffs (as I was recently reminded). ;)

archer...the board for you
 

Archer - check this out:

http://www.gmcgriff.com/refonline/ww.../baseball.html

If you hurry, you can get right in the middle of a flame war over something somebody wrote a few years ago!

I wasnt looking to get into a flame war. But it seems some people look for things that they say they find offensive. My intentions was never to get into a pissing contest, but it seems and I should have known better to try and discuss rules with youth league oficials. They are there for a reason. My mistake.....

http://instagiber.net/smiliesdotcom/...tor/indian.gif

What? $24?!?! Sure, I'll buy that!

Mike, I was trying to make a lighthearted comment. Wrong thread, I guess.

Just for the record, I may disagree with Tom on this one, but I'd call a game with him anytime if the opportunity presented itself.

I'd say, from my internet relationships with the"old time" regulars, none of them seem so insecure that that our disagreement over an interpertation of the rule of a GAME would be bigger than our electronic friendships and respect for each other.

Roger Greene

I'll second that, Roger - and I'm sure that the rest of the gang will too.

Did you get hammered with the weather, Roger? It looks like most of it will miss me here in north central Pa.

Steve M

Roger,

Didn't you see my smilie face? :) I understood and heartily agree with your additional comments.