Legal pitch?
 

Fed rule set. Pitcher places her pivot foot heel on the plate, non-pivot foot toes on the plate. As she starts forward, she moves to the ball of her pivot foot to push off, but the ball of her foot is 3-4 inches in front of the plate due to how she intially placed her feet. That is the position of her feet at the time of release. Even though her intial foot placement is legal, I feel the pitch is illegal since she is pushing off from in front of the plate.

Legal or illegal?

Technically, illegal. In practice, allowed. I can't cite you anything on the latter, however. I'm interested to read other's views on this.

Isn't the position of the feet at the time of the release considerably nearer to home plate than that? She's pushing forward and not releasing the pitch until near the end of her forward movement if she's a normal pitcher. I'm not sure I'd even go so far as to say this is technically illegal but I'd love to hear more thoughts on it too. (If you start calling this you'll be groundbreaking in a bad way)

3-4 inches? Sounds like a replant to me and illegal.

As was already stated technically illegal. (6-1-2c) "Pushing off with the pivot foot from a place other than the pitcher's plate is illegal."

Is she moving her pivot foot further forward as she starts her motion? Or is she simply breaking contact with the pitching plate with her heel as she pushes off?

She does not pick up her entire for nor slide it forward, she simply lifts her heel and starts her push off the "plate" from that point. As I said, once she lifts her heel, the ball of her foot is a few inches in front of the plate.

Then it is a completely legal pitch. If her feet are in a legal position to start she is in fact pushing off from the pitching plate even though her heel lifts off.

This exact scenario is discussed in great detail below in Similar Threads (started by yours truly), complete with Visual Aids...

This^^^

For all those in the "must be in contact" when releasing the ball corner, I doubt that 95% of the pitches thrown meet such a demand.

Sure, but if (for example) you had in your association an umpire who was also a lawyer, he would point out that the pitch is illegal by the letter of the rule.

That argument does work, doesn't it? :eek::rolleyes:

And then you point out the very next rule says the pivot foot must remain in contact with the ground and drag away from the pitching plate. How can the foot remain in contact with the pitching plate at the time the ball is released if it is dragging away from the pitching plate?

I had this argument from a coach one time who was mad I was calling his pitcher illegal for leaping. He came out with a rule book and by this point it was almost comical so I let him do it. He pointed to the rule about the foot being in contact with the pitching plate. At that time the rest of the rule was on the next page. I said yep, now turn the page and I pointed to the next rule and told him to get back in the dugout.

I wasn't making a serious argument... I was poking at a similar argument made in another thread. :D

But wouldn't a lawyer be the best one to determine a legal pitch?:):cool:

Or maybe this is a paralegal pitch.

Does the legality of this pitch involve tort?

Now I make a motion to exclude.

But you honor, citing the published interpretation and direction concerning this point, RS#40.F clearly notes, "Dragging OR pushing off with the pivot foot from the pitcher's plate is required". :)