Question for the NCAA Guys RE: Illegal Pitch

[RadioBlue]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

You would think a comment as plain and simple as, "the pitcher must come to an obvious and deliberate stop while on the pitcher's plate with their hands separated" prior to beginning the pitch.

Taking a signal or simulate taking a signal would also require that the pitcher be looking in at the catcher. So merely coming to an obvious and deliberate stop alone would not satisfy the requirements of the current rule. (What if the pitcher steps on, hands apart, motionless, but looking at the third baseman then brings her hands together to begin the pitch?)

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by RadioBlue

Taking a signal or simulate taking a signal would also require that the pitcher be looking in at the catcher. So merely coming to an obvious and deliberate stop alone would not satisfy the requirements of the current rule. (What if the pitcher steps on, hands apart, motionless, but looking at the third baseman then brings her hands together to begin the pitch?)

Is the purpose of the rule to regulate where the pitcher looks or is it to avoid a quick pitch?

[KJUmp]

Originally Posted by RadioBlue

Taking a signal or simulate taking a signal would also require that the pitcher be looking in at the catcher. So merely coming to an obvious and deliberate stop alone would not satisfy the requirements of the current rule. (What if the pitcher steps on, hands apart, motionless, but looking at the third baseman then brings her hands together to begin the pitch?)

You're picking nits here...with everything we are required by NCAA mechanics to watch as a crew regarding IP's, why would we make the choice to focus on this one aspect of the Pitching Procedure (10.2) section of the Pitching rule?
IMO....I wouldn't.
My mental checklist as she comes up to the pitcher's plate (for legality) are hand (apart), feet, ball at side or front, [B]"taking a signal"[/B] from the catcher, hands (together/touch and in my vision), hands separating as the pitch starts.
Was she looking at the catcher when she was "taking the signal"? Yes. I saw her glance at the catcher as she was turing her head to look at her 3rd baseman.

[RadioBlue]

Sorry. My intended point was missed.
The rule currently requires the pitcher to take the signal or simulate taking the signal while on the pitcher's plate. The point I was attempting to make is changing the rule to require the pitcher to "come to an obvious and deliberate stop while on the pitcher's plate with their hands separated" as Irish suggested is not a less-wordy and clearer representation of the current rule because the requirements of the two rules are not precisely the same.
Would it be better to have this be the wording of the rule? Absolutely! Would it be the same as what is in place currently? No.

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by RadioBlue

...Would it be the same as what is in place currently? No.

Wasn't that HIS point? The current rule mentions taking signals as a proxy for coming to a pause, not to regulate the taking of the signal per se.

[RadioBlue]

Originally Posted by Dakota

Wasn't that HIS point? The current rule mentions taking signals as a proxy for coming to a pause, not to regulate the taking of the signal per se.

Wasn't I told in a different thread on this board that assuming the intentions of the rules writers is a slippery slope??

If, indeed, looking in for a signal (real or otherwise) is a proxy for a pause, then I believe we all agree. But is it possible that the signal requirement is in there to add one more requirement to the mix?

Merely mandating a pause doesn't mean the pitcher would ever have to make eye contact toward the catcher until, potentially, well after she has begun the pitch. By mandating taking the signal (real or otherwise), there is an understood requirement that the pitcher must look in toward the catcher in addtion to pausing. That very well could be the intention of the rules writers.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by RadioBlue

Sorry. My intended point was missed.
The rule currently requires the pitcher to take the signal or simulate taking the signal while on the pitcher's plate. The point I was attempting to make is changing the rule to require the pitcher to "come to an obvious and deliberate stop while on the pitcher's plate with their hands separated" as Irish suggested is not a less-wordy and clearer representation of the current rule because the requirements of the two rules are not precisely the same.
Would it be better to have this be the wording of the rule? Absolutely! Would it be the same as what is in place currently? No.

Actually, I do see your point. OTOH, if you want to be that specific, coaches should be forbidden to give the pitchers signals prior to the pitch.

Yes, that is ridiculous, but if you insist on being specific.......

[RadioBlue]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

coaches should be forbidden to give the pitchers signals prior to the pitch.

Why? This is not in violation nor am I contending that it is.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by RadioBlue

Why? This is not in violation nor am I contending that it is.

Hang on. I'll go find you a sense of humor.

You referred to the pitcher facing the catcher taking signals or simulating taking the signal.

Well, if they are looking at the catcher, I guess they cannot be watching the coach for a signarl.

[HugoTafurst]

Isn't it about time for the discussion to shift towards beer?