Heel against rubber

[clev1967]

I have seen a number of pitchers start with their heel against the front of the rubber (not on or partially on as required by rule) thus when they are in their wind up and pushing they are pushing from a few inches in front of the rubber not from the rubber (again as required by rule) I have asked a few of my partners about this and they do not seem to understand what I am referring to. My interpretation is that this is an obvious illegal pitch. Talking Fed here.

Are you guys calling this????

[argodad]

Originally Posted by clev1967

I have seen a number of pitchers start with their heel against the front of the rubber (not on or partially on as required by rule) thus when they are in their wind up and pushing they are pushing from a few inches in front of the rubber not from the rubber (again as required by rule) I have asked a few of my partners about this and they do not seem to understand what I am referring to. My interpretation is that this is an obvious illegal pitch. Talking Fed here.

Are you guys calling this????

In Florida we are.

[DaveASA/FED]

I got my FED books yesterday in the mail, I will have to look at these, I thought the rule stated that they just had to be in contact with the pitching plate (girls don't use rubbers) not on top of it. The interpertation that I have always gotten is that toeing the pitching plate is acceptable (toe on back touching plate, heal on front touching plate is ok).

[CecilOne]

Originally Posted by DaveASA/FED

I got my FED books yesterday in the mail, I will have to look at these, I thought the rule stated that they just had to be in contact with the pitching plate (girls don't use rubbers) not on top of it. The interpertation that I have always gotten is that toeing the pitching plate is acceptable (toe on back touching plate, heal on front touching plate is ok).

No, pivot must be on or partially on.
The non-pivot does not have to be in contact (except ASA), but not in front.

[RKBUmp]

FED says on, or partially on and diagrams go on to show just a fraction of the heel on top of the plate.

ASA simply says in contact.

[clev1967]

Reason would be when you push off, your heel would then be in the air therefore pushing from a spot other than the "pitchers plate" (it will always be a rubber to me) which would also be illegal. My foot is bigger than most female pitchers but this would gain me 6 or 7 inches.

[BretMan]

The rule does specifically say that the pivot foot must be on or partially on the TOP SURFACE of the pitcher's plate.

The non-pivot foot may contact the plate. The rule does not require the non-pivot foot contact (if there is any) to be with the top surface.

That's the rule. But, as a practical matter, do you have any tips for telling the difference if the pivot foot is contacting only the front vertical edge of the plate or if the pitcher's heel is 1/8" on the top surface?

[Andy]

If her heel was 1/8" on the pitchers plate and she pushed off from her toes without moving the foot forward, she would still "technically" be pushing off from a location other than the pitchers plate even though she started with a portion of her foot "on" the pitchers plate.

This is a nit I choose not to pick.

[BretMan]

(Rhetorical question- not aimed specifically at Andy)

The FED "pitcher foot placement diagrams" under Rule 6 show the pivot foot starting with (gauging from the scale) maybe an inch or two of the heel on top of the plate and the rest of the foot in front of it and denote this as "Legal".

Wouldn't that have about the same net effect as having 1/8" or 1/16" of the heel on top of the rubber, with respect to where the pitcher was "pushing off"?

Yes, not a nit worth picking- and, possibly not even a nit to begin with!

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by BretMan

(Rhetorical question- not aimed specifically at Andy)

The FED "pitcher foot placement diagrams" under Rule 6 show the pivot foot starting with (gauging from the scale) maybe an inch or two of the heel on top of the plate and the rest of the foot in front of it and denote this as "Legal".

Wouldn't that have about the same net effect as having 1/8" or 1/16" of the heel on top of the rubber, with respect to where the pitcher was "pushing off"?

Yes, not a nit worth picking- and, possibly not even a nit to begin with!

In the same vein, if that really was a concern, would not the rule be changed to require contact with the portion/edge of the pitcher's plate away from home plate?

[clev1967]

Honestly I think there are "nits" more minor than this that are called. Pushing from a spot 6" in front of the plate is no different than a little crow hop.

To me this is a bigger deal than say touching your hair and not rubbing it off.

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by clev1967

...To me this is a bigger deal than say touching your hair and not rubbing it off.

What's illegal about that?

On the topic, in Fed, she has to have at least part of the pivot foot on top of the plate.

If all she does is lift the heel (no forward foot movement) from a legal starting position, I don't consider that illegal. Otherwise, no legal pitch could reasonably be made from the legal starting positions shown in the diagram!

[clev1967]

Dakota so you are in agreement- if she has her heel butted up against the rubber(which is not on top or partially on top) she is illegal.

Also, none of the diagrams address this in the FED book. They either show the foot on top, partially on top, or totally in front of the rubber.

By the way many think going to the hair violates the foreign substance rule. I don't call it but have seen it called many a time.

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by clev1967

Dakota so you are in agreement- if she has her heel butted up against the rubber(which is not on top or partially on top) she is illegal.

Yes, illegal in Fed.

Originally Posted by clev1967

Also, none of the diagrams address this in the FED book. They either show the foot on top, partially on top, or totally in front of the rubber.

The rule clearly states it, however, (... the pivot foot on or partially on the top surface of the pitcher’s plate...) so there is no ambiguity as I read it.

[clev1967]

I do not see any ambiguity either. I was merely referring to the diagrams because some people were. But in the OP scenario of heel against rubber- it is not addressed in the diagrams.

These forums are like talking to my wife, we are saying the same things just in different ways.

Thinking I will stick to my BBQ forum.