Illegal Pitch
 

USSSA 16U.

I am PU. After receiving the ball from the catcher, the pitcher bends down and picks up a bit of the chalk from around the circle. She wipes the chalk off on the side of her shorts and prepares to pitch. I think, no problem, she's wiped off the chalk.

Next pitch, same routine but the pitcher now works the chalk between her fingers and the excess falls to the ground. Now I'm thinking, she's pushing it. I don't give the illegal pitch signal until after the pitch. While tracking the ball I see a white blur on the ball (she threw inside, so it was easy to track). I call "illegal pitch" and warn the coach that his pitcher cannot apply a foreign substance to the ball. He didn't argue, just told the pitcher to "wipe it off next time."

Two questions. First, should I have called IP on the first pitch?

Second, do you think chalk is a foreign substance? I can see both sides of the answer. Yes, it is a foreign substance because it is brought to the field to establish the lines of the field, which I agree with. But I may also be swayed, after further thought, that chalk is close to a resin bag and should not be a foreign substance, since a resin bag is legal (Rule 7, Sec. 1. H.). :confused:

Feedback, please.

Scott,
The first one, I agree, that is not an IP.
I do not agree with you on the 2nd pitch, that was an IP, immediately. It was illegal because F1 did not wipe her pitching hand before touching the ball. That's applying a foreign object. I know you called IP, but that was much later. I'm calling IP as soon as the unwiped pitching hand touches the ball - the actual, physical pitch is not going to happen.
Now, what is a foreign substance - if it was not on the ball when it came out of the box, that's a foreign substance. And RESIN, applied directly to the ball - as opposed to being applied to the hand & then wiped - is also applying a foreign subsance.
And, when wiping, I am not looking at the hand to make sure F1 got every bit of the chalk/resin/whatever off of the hand. The fact is, the stuff went onto the hand and the hand was then wiped. That's good enough for me to believe that the book requirements have been met.

I disagree with you on this one Steve. We actually have this arguement in our local board all the time. If you call the IP as soon as the hand touches the ball - she can simply step off the back of the pitcher's plate and you have nothing. By definition, the pitch begins when the hands are separated after they have been brought together (or something like that - don't have my book with me). IMO, when she takes the hands apart - that's when the IP is to be called. It became illegal when the hand touched the ball - it became a pitch when the hands separated.

I should add that I'm looking at this from fed rules . . . not sure if ASA treats it differently.

Larry, :D
We'd be on opposite sides guy. The IP is the penalty - in both Fed and ASA - for going directly to the ball after applying the foreign substance. I don't need the actual pitch to occur.
For Fed, check Rule 6, Penalty for Article 2&3 - it sez immediate
For ASA, I'm going to trust memory and say it's Rule 6, Section 5.

You are correct - we are on opposite sides. Until the hands are taken apart, 6.1.f says that the pitcher can remove herself from the pitching position. If you call an IP before it's a pitch - i.e. when the ball touches the hand, she steps back off the plate and you look foolish. My hope is that once she starts her windup or removes one hand that I call the IP and it causes her not to finish the pitch. At any rate, I still don't see how you can call an IP before you have a pitch.

I did check the reference you stated (albeit a 2005 book) and it doesn't have the word immediate. I agree that an IP is the penalty for applying an illegal substance to the ball - but till she commits to the pitch you have nothing.

BTW, if I were your partner, I'd back you to the coach and disagree with you privately. If I were the coach, you might have to dump me - especially if that call cost me something.

Larry, then you are dumped. It is an illegal pitch for any player to apply a foreign substance, even if the ball is never pitched.

Picture this. Foul ball to third baseman; he fields it, and applies stickum to the ball before returning the ball to the pitcher. What is your call?

My call is illegal pitch; now. The ball is thrown out of play, and the third baseman is warned that repeating that act will result in an ejection.

Play 2; same, but third baseman rubs the ball in the dirt to "rough it up". My call, same result.

Now , play 3, pitcher applies dirt/resin/chalk, whatever. Illegal pitch; now. No pitch is required for that ruling. If the ball is defaced, it is unsafe to be used. Allowing or requirig it to be used isn't prudent or appropriate.

Looking from FED rules, it is 6-2-2 and the penalty states "An illegal pitch shall be called immediately"

In reading the EXCEPTION we are told that if the pitch is completed the coach (may) have the option, and signal with the left arm and so on. Then the NOTE: again states to call it when it becomes illegal.

If we say that "she can simply step off the back of the pitcher's plate and you have nothing" then what is to stop the F5 from applying vaseline (an illegal act per rule 6-2-2) then returning the ball to the pitcher? Or are you arguing that she may step off, remove the foriegn substance (be it vaseline or chalk, or spit) and then throw with still no penalty? These rules are listed under the title "INFRACTIONS BY PITCHER". If there is an infraction, how can there be no penalty?

Mountaineer I really think you need to re-consider somewhat.

Larry...

Don't want to beat up on you, but the Steves are correct. For this type of infraction, the IP needs to be called when it occurs. This is according to ASA, NFHS, and the OP's USSSA. Stepping back and abandoning the pitch does not nullify the infraction.

Larry,
I appreciate this - and would do the same.
And I think we'd have a ball on the field and then after.

Just got off the phone with a member of the NFHS rules committee and he agrees with me. If you call an IP before you have a pitch (by rule) and she steps off - you have nothing. If a girl toes the rubber with her hands together, do you call that immediately too? While I can certainly see the validity of calling it the minute her hands come together, I also see more confrontation. Once the hands separate, she's committed to the pitch and there's nothing to argue about. My contact also agrees that if I call an IP when her hands come together and she steps back off the rubber - I have nothing and the IP is nullified.

Here's my question though - when you do this, are coming out and killing the play? "Dead ball, I have an IP for applying foreign substance!" That's the only way I could see that working.

NFHS Case BookBecause this case play has the pitcher begin the delivery it does not completely resolve the discussion, but I think the statement of the ruling is pretty clear - dead ball immediately upon committing the infraction (touching the ball without wiping).

Larry,

Is the rule for applying a foreign substance to the ball or pitching a ball to which a player applied a foreign substance?

If the former (as the ASA rule reads), then there is no pitch required as the violation is the application of the foreign substance, not the pitching of the ball.

And that makes sense to me . . . for some stupid reason, I kept seeing a DDB on the IP and that's where I said it wouldn't work. Immediate DB does now make sense to me. I just had this picture in my mind that I couldn't get out - no matter what anyone said.

I guess I personally don't feel that chalk or dirt is a foreign substance. As soon as a ball touches the ground whether by pitch or hit, it's going to have dirt and/or chalk on it. Are you changing to a new ball after every pitch? Most players will have dirt/chalk in their gloves by just using them and that's going to get on the ball as well. If a pitcher puts some dirt/chalk on his/her hand, I'm not too concerned about it. Heck, I've had pitchers almost bury the ball in dirt before they pitched it. Playing in wet conditions, the ball gets wet, the pitcher dries it off with some infield dirt, I'm not saying anything. It's not giving them any advantage that I can see.

If F1 toes the pitchers plate with her hands together, she can step off and correct herself. When she applies a foreign substance to the ball, that act alone is what is illegal.

The ball can come in contact with dirt/chalk through normal play. INTENTIONALLY contacting the ball with dirt/chalk/moisture/or any substance that is foreign to the ball is what is illegal.

So, slapping the ball towards the ground is illegal? Isn't that INTENTIONALLY contacting the ball with dirt/chalk? IMO, anything that is part of the field is fair play and I'm not the only one that thinks this. Chalk is part of the field as is the dirt. A resin bag is not. Now, if a player walks over to where the guy is chalking the field and grabs a handfull of chalk out of his chalker, that is crossing the line.

So what? The rule is that the player may not "use" a foreign substance on the ball or on the contact points of the hand, and may not "apply" a foreign substance to the ball (ref: NFHS 6-2-2). It says nothing about keeping the ball from contact with the playing surface during normal play. I don't know why you cannot see the distinction.All of those violate the rule. I'll grant you that most of the time in girls fastpitch, when a foreign substance is applied to the ball it is not to affect the flight of the ball in the classic spit-ball sense, but rather to improve the pitcher's grip. Nonetheless, if done improperly, it is a violation.

I'm arguing what a "foreign substance" is. Is there dirt on the field of play? Is there chalk on the field of play? How are these "foreign" substances? They're part of the field and not foreign. Is there a definition of what a foreign substance is according to the ASA book? Tell me where to look as I can't find it, I have the 2006 and 2007 books right here. Rule 6, section 6.A talks about resin and saliva, says nothing about dirt/chalk.

I don't see how dirt can help a pitchers grip. I can see the opposite.

Upon what assumption do you base your interpretation that the rule refers to substances foreign to the playing field and grounds rather than substances foreign to the ball?

Because dirt and chalk get on the ball and on the players hands/gloves/uniforms/hair/etc. during normal play. What difference does it make if he/she puts a little more on his/her hand before touching the already dirty ball? What advantage does the pitcher have by doing this? I see none so why make a big deal out of it. These substances are not foreign to the playing field or players. I'm also not assuming anything. What makes my interpretation wrong? Show me in the rule book that dirt and chalk are considered foreign substances. You can't because it's not in there. I'm not going to make up a rule. Also, even before the first pitch is thrown, there's going to be dirt and chalk on the ball.

...

Try case play 6.6-4.

Between the time a ball is manufactured, shipped, purchased and subsequently opened from its bag or box, is dirt and chalk part of its intristic composition?

No, therefore those substances are foreign to the ball.

Do balls get dirt or chalk on them propior to the game and during the course of normal playing action?

Of course they do, but that is not what the rule is addressing at all. The rule addresses only the actions of a player who intentionally places these substances on the ball.

Don't have a case book and don't plan on buying one for this situation either. Until someone can show me in the rule book that dirt and chalk are foreign substances, I'll keep umpiring the way I umpire. For all you others that disagree with me, better start bringing more balls to the games because to be true to your interpretations of the rules, you'll need to change balls after every pitch.

Uh...with that attitude you won't be umpiring very long. Pardon my sarcasm but here goes...Are you going to call balls that are hit and fielded on the foul line foul because it is called a foul line? I mean it is a foul line not a fair line!

And this is one of the most asinine comments I've ever quoted. What are you trying to say? What the hell does this have to do with the topic at hand?

One of the most asinine ever? Perhaps.

Coming in a close second:

"For all you others that disagree with me, better start bringing more balls to the games because to be true to your interpretations of the rules, you'll need to change balls after every pitch."

Why? Even if we disagree on what constitutes a foreign object on the ball, nowhere has anyone implied a problem with dirt or chalk on the ball as the result of normal game play.

If I were to be "true to my interpretations of the rule" I would have no problem with the ball until that dirt or chalk was deliberately placed there by a defensive player.

What's the difference? Convince me there'e a difference between what gets on the ball during normal play and what a defensive player puts there on purpose.

Perhaps it was an asinine statement (remember I did admit it was sarcasm)...as was yours.

My point is that there are probably a few rules and interpretations that we, as umpires, may not agree with. However, all umpires should strive to enforce the rules and interpretations the same. This is clearly an illegal pitch and as far as I can tell you are probably the only umpire that thinks it isn't.

For you to stand up and say "For all you others that disagree with me, better start bringing more balls to the games because to be true to your interpretations of the rules, you'll need to change balls after every pitch" is very unprofessional and a disservice for all of us who uphold the rules.

That's all I have to say about that, except perhaps I was wrong to word my previous post the way I did and you may have to agree to disagree with the interpretation but enforce the rule as it should be applied.

Apply what rule? I apply every rule the book tells me to. There is no rule that forbids the use of dirt and/or chalk on the ball. Maybe it isn't addressed in the Rule Book because of the simple fact that dirt and/or chalk are already on the ball and putting on more makes no difference. If it's on the ball, it's going to get on the pitchers hand. What difference does it make if he/she puts on more dirt/chalk?

The rule governing substances on the ball specifically refers to a defensive player placing said substances on the ball.

There is no rule in the book about substances getting on the ball during playing action.

Difference enough for you?

Here's an extreme example that illustrates the difference: In between pitches, F6 spits into the dirt near second base. On the next pitch, B1 lines the ball which hops right into the loogie.

Do we both agree that saliva falls into the category of a foreign substance? So, what penalty applies on this play? None, of course, as the substance was not deliberately placed upon the ball by a defensive player.

But you're veering away from the main point here. The crux of the question is what constitutes a foreign substance, not how the substance gets on the ball.

There's a guy in our board that every game he's the PU, he takes both balls and grabs a handful of dirt and rubs 'em both down. Should I warn him on the first one and then dump him on the second one?:D

Since he is doing exactly what we should all be doing, yeah, why not?:rolleyes:

How about for all the other situations in it that will help you become a better umpire?

I'd type the case play for you, but it would apparently be a waste of time. It completely refutes your position that dirt is not a foreign substance.

I'll do it Tom. It's Monday, I'm at work, and not really interested in working right about now.

Play 6.6-4
F5 rubs dirt on the ball and then gives it to F1 to pitch.

Ruling: Illegal pitch. If a player continues to place a foreign substance on the ball, the player should be ejected from the game. (6-6)

Play 6.6-5
F1 places resin directly on the ball or in the glove and the resin transfers to the ball, F1 then pitches the ball before the umpire can stop play.

Ruling: Illegal pitch. Resin may be used only to dry the hands. (6-6A)

Play 6.6-8
F1 spits on the ball or licks their fingers without wiping them off on the uniform and then pitches the ball before the umpire can stop play. B1 (a) hits a double; (b) is thrown out at second base; (c) does not swing at the pitch.

Ruling: In (a) and (b) the illegal pitch is ignored and play stands since B1 reached 1B safely. In (c) the illegal pitch is enforced. (6-6A)

NDblue - buy the casebook. It is pretty useful.

The "hangs" huh??? :D

I must have been really bored. Couldn't even proof read my typing.

Scott,
Don't go there - you can't apply resein directly to the hangs.