Licked Fingers & Others...

[BlueDevilRef]

In #1, yes, it is delayed bc the offense can always hit an illegal pitch.

#2-I don't know of a rule that would allow for ejection in this case. I'd get direction on it from assignor and probably let that guy die on that hill alone. That is pretty far fetched
#3-I would just talk to player and coach about it. Simple fix is for her to step on rubber and take the sign.

[Andy]

BlueDevil covered 1 and 2. I need a bit more information in order to address 3.

Is the pitcher stepping onto the pitchers plate and immediately going into her pitching motion? If so, then this is illegal and needs to be called.

Even if she already has her "signal" or knows what she is going to throw, she must step onto the PP, Pause with her hands separated, and look at the catcher.

The purpose of this piece of the pitching rule has nothing to do with where she actually gets her signal from, it is for the batter to know that she is getting into position to pitch.

[AtlUmpSteve]

Originally Posted by Andy

BlueDevil covered 1 and 2. I need a bit more information in order to address 3.

Is the pitcher stepping onto the pitchers plate and immediately going into her pitching motion? If so, then this is illegal and needs to be called.

Even if she already has her "signal" or knows what she is going to throw, she must step onto the PP, Pause with her hands separated, and look at the catcher.

The purpose of this piece of the pitching rule has nothing to do with where she actually gets her signal from, it is for the batter to know that she is getting into position to pitch.

Why do we add "look at the catcher"? The rule requires a pause for batter's to know timing, we acknowledge she can get the signal from anywhere (even multiple signals from multiple places to lessen "stealing" the signal), and even that the signal can be verbal. With all the being the case, how do we equate "take or simulate taking" to require looking at the catcher?

[Crabby_Bob]

Originally Posted by AtlUmpSteve

Why do we add "look at the catcher"? The rule requires a pause for batter's to know timing, we acknowledge she can get the signal from anywhere (even multiple signals from multiple places to lessen "stealing" the signal), and even that the signal can be verbal. With all the being the case, how do we equate "take or simulate taking" to require looking at the catcher?

Fed requires taking or simulating taking the sign from the catcher. 6-1-1b.
ASA only requires taking or simulating taking a sign, but doesn't specify from where.

[AtlUmpSteve]

Originally Posted by Crabby_Bob

Fed requires taking or simulating taking the sign from the catcher. 6-1-1b.
ASA only requires taking or simulating taking a sign, but doesn't specify from where.

OK; again, what says she has to look at the catcher to simulate to take a signal? Can the catcher verbalize a signal? Not saying she has to, but if she COULD, then looking at the catcher, whether you see, hear, or she uses telemetry, is NOT a rule requirement.

The PAUSE after stepping on and engaging the pitcher's plate, and before bringing the hands together is the only absolute rule requirement I see in NFHS, ASA, and most clearly in NCAA. And the only part that makes sense to me.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by AtlUmpSteve

OK; again, what says she has to look at the catcher to simulate to take a signal? Can the catcher verbalize a signal? Not saying she has to, but if she COULD, then looking at the catcher, whether you see, hear, or she uses telemetry, is NOT a rule requirement.

The PAUSE after stepping on and engaging the pitcher's plate, and before bringing the hands together is the only absolute rule requirement I see in NFHS, ASA, and most clearly in NCAA. And the only part that makes sense to me.

If they would just say that AND enforce it.

[CecilOne]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

If they would just say that AND enforce it.

What, change a rule be make more sense?????

[CecilOne]

Pitchers do NOT have to actually take the sign on the pitching plate, just simulate doing it. Any PAUSE on the plate with hands separated is interpreted and accepted as SIMULATING. It's just about not deceiving the batter with a quick pitch, stepping on and pitching all at once.

[blueump]

Originally Posted by BlueDevilRef

In #1, yes, it is delayed bc the offense can always hit an illegal pitch.

But according to the case book the umpire is to "declare the ball dead immediately" - the word immediately doesn't seem to allow time for the pitcher to then go through all the steps and release the pitch.

So, if she licks her fingers and begins the process of pitching, do I kill it or let her throw it?

[CecilOne]

Originally Posted by blueump

But according to the case book the umpire is to "declare the ball dead immediately" - the word immediately doesn't seem to allow time for the pitcher to then go through all the steps and release the pitch.

So, if she licks her fingers and begins the process of pitching, do I kill it or let her throw it?

CALLING an illegal pitch immediately (or declaring) is not the same as immediate dead ball. See 6.1.1 penalty, NFHS.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by CecilOne

CALLING an illegal pitch immediately (or declaring) is not the same as immediate dead ball. See 6.1.1 penalty, NFHS.

He was quoting the casebook play, not the rule. Casebook says dead ball immediately

[Crabby_Bob]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

He was quoting the casebook play, not the rule. Casebook says dead ball immediately

Rule book supercedes the casebook, no?

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by Crabby_Bob

Rule book supercedes the casebook, no?

Unless it is giving interpretation/direction of how to apply the rule.

Personally, I believe this to be a completely useless rule left over from 20th century baseball. Licking one's fingers and touching the ball has zero effect to the ball or pitch.

[chapmaja]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

He was quoting the casebook play, not the rule. Casebook says dead ball immediately

I am not crazy for thinking the rulebook and casebook differ on this. I actually had this call last night, and I called it dead immediately because that was the interpretation in the casebook.

I would say use the casebook because they are the interpretations of the rules from the ruling body. (Which is different than a source like a magazine, which is not by the ruling body).

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by chapmaja

I am not crazy for thinking the rulebook and casebook differ on this. I actually had this call last night, and I called it dead immediately because that was the interpretation in the casebook.

I would say use the casebook because they are the interpretations of the rules from the ruling body. (Which is different than a source like a magazine, which is not by the ruling body).

where is the disagreement?