Illegal Pitches???
 

Illegal Pitches (NFHS)???

I have seen many times where the pitcher steps on the pitching plate and does illegal motions, such as: hands together while stepping onto plate, hands separating and coming together more than once, catcher not in catcher's box, etc.

The problem is the batter is not in the batter's box while these motions are happening.

Talking to the coach most likely, does not correct the problem.

What is the call? Can an illegal pitch be called if the batter is not in the batter's box? Any other advice?

What is the call in ASA?

Illegal pitch can be called without the batter in the batter's box.

I'd like to hear a little more about what you are have seen illegal regarding the catcher's box. I think the next time I have an illegal pitch regarding the catcher's box will be the first. :)

I

Thanks for the reply

NFHS
6-3-1 . . . The catcher shall be inside the lines of the catcher’s box when the
pitcher takes a position to pitch and when the pitch is released.
PENALTY: (Art. 1) An illegal pitch is called.

That box is huge' though. :D In over 20 years, I have never come close to seeing a catcher not in the box when the pitcher 'toes up' . I did call an IP last spring in HS ball for a 1st baseman not being in fair territory at the time of the pitch. (still not sure why as a right handed 1st baseman would want to 'straddle' the foul line like that))

That's the rule, I was just wondering if you've actually had occasion to make that call.

What about when the catcher is in front of the box (both feet)?

The box doesn't have a front.
Those lines are only the back edge of the batter's box.

Please explain how the catchers box does not have a front line?

Had a catcher set up outside the box once on an intentional walk.

Every umpire manual I have read (ASA, NCAA, ISF and NFHS) states it is the catcher's option to move up past the back of the batter's box WITHOUT penalty, albeit at risk of obstruction (since the batter is entitled to use the entire box, including backing up at the pitch).

The illegal pitch penalty should only be assessed if the (idiot) catcher is to either side or behind the catcher's box at the time of the pitch, not to the front. Any umpire that chooses to penalize a catcher for doing a GOOD thing, and helping us see the ball at the plate, needs retraining or rethinking.

Please give the rule that says that it is the catcher's option to move up past the back of the batter's box WITHOUT penalty before the pitcher releases the ball in fast pitch?

Rule books define the catcher's box as an 8.5 by 10 rectangle.

I would have to argue the catchers box does in fact have a front line, as it is described in Rule 2-3-D as being 8.5' X 10' in dimensions and is also shown as that dimension on the field diagram.

But, with that being said, rule supplement 8 does state if the batter is forward in the box, the catcher may move forward without penalty.

RULE does state that the catcher may not be out of the box prior to the release of the pitch.

RS for FP makes an allowance that if the batter moves up to the front of the BB, the catcher may move closer to the plate. Please note, that means that the batter must be in the box and "set" before the catcher can move up. If not (and this is something I would do because I like playing mind games), I would always enter the BB in the front and then step back when the pitcher steps on the PP. :rolleyes:

Personally, I don't care where the batter is and neither should the catcher. This allowance really doesn't make any sense since the pitcher should be throwing to the strike zone, not the batter. Yeah, I know the pitcher may try to fool the batter with a pitch that ends up in the dirt, but that is the battery's problem and shouldn't be supported with a special interpretation. But like I said, that is purely a personal opinion, not that of the rules.

Good discussion and comments, but keep in mind what the origional question is:
"Can an illegal pitch be called if the batter is not in the batter's box while the pitcher is doing illegal motions standing on the pitching plate?"

Are HugoTafurst and myself the only umpires who may call an illegal pitch?

Not sure if I see that in the text of 2-3-D... Doesn't it actually state?
I have never seen a rectangle drawn to define the catcher's box. The most I have ever seen was three lines, left, right and back.

And while this sounds self-contradicting, it essentially means that IF there was a frontal boundary, it is to be ignored.; which translates to its non-existence, at least as an enforceable boundary.


The only reference to for F2 being too far forward which appears in multiple places in the Rules, RS and Umpire's Manual all say the same thing
Here is where it gets interesting (at least for me) because I do not know the answer, and I enjoy these hypothetical, theoretical, TWP discussions. :D

Consider:

F2 is the only defensive player who is not required to be in fair territory.
But, is F2 required to be in foul territory?
Theoretically and TWP, with B is at the extreme fwd position in the batter's box it is possible for F2 to take a position in the opposite batter's box and be positioned in fair territory. Clearly at the risk of committing CO, or getting killed, but physically possible.

With the above references to CO caused by F2 being on, over or in front of HP, could it be that the enforceable frontal boundary of the CB be the Foul Lines?

I realize that this is "out there", but the board has been slow and we haven't had much trolling action lately. So humor me.

I can think of a couple of illegal actions that does not require the batter to be in the batter's box for me to call IP:
> Foreign substance
> Too many warm-ups
> F2 not returning ball to F1 with no runners on base

But not sure if i would bang:
> Double touch
> Taking plate with both hands together
With B out of BB, wouldn't we have a hand up holding up F1?

Now add "and 10' long" to that and you will have the complete 2-3-D. The catchers box in fast pitch is 8.5' X 10'.

I will concede this point but that doesn't change the enforcement of keeping the catcher behind the back lines of the batter's box. It may be a boundary, but it is an unenforceable boundary since there is no penalty associated with it, and that is explicitly allowed.

Turn the page

Bob Seger

And please note the word.. may. My original response was to the simple question "can" the illegal pitch be called with the batter out of the box.
With the further descriptions of situations, I can envision situations where IP WOULD NOT be called.
But those require further descriptive information.

I think too many warmups and F2 not returning the ball to F1 are simply a ball called on the batter.

I've seen pitchers throw all kinds of weird ways during their 5 warmups [FP] that definitely would be IPs if we're in live ball situations. Doesn't matter in warmups.

NFHS:
I don't think you can can call an IP for too many warm-up pitches.
Yes there is a penalty of a ball awarded to the batter, but it is not an illegal pitch (and no runners advance).
:)

Yes, I mis-stated.

Well, that is a point of contention with some. ASA 6FP.1.A specifically state that when taking the pitching position in contact with the PP, the pitcher must have their hands separated and must have the ball in either the glove or the pitcher hand.

Nothing about the position of the batter. Some believe this cannot be called until the pitcher actually makes a motion to pitch. However, there is no such provision in any of the rules, just that the pitcher cannot take the PP with her hands together.

The batter does not have to be in the BB for the pitcher to take the PP or take a signal or anything else as long as she doesn't start her motion to pitch.

Not necessarily, do you always hold your hand up when there isn't any obvious action to pitch? However, even if it is, it does not preempt the pitcher's action to prepare for the pitch, it just mean she cannot pitch.

For the sake of conversation:rolleyes:

On the "double touch"...

I'm not sure that would be an Illegal Pitch either, because........

As soon as she seperated her hands the first time (with the batter out of the box), you would have a Quick-pitch which is a dead ball and all subsequent action is cancelled - so the second touch didn't happen! :D

10 FEET!?!?! Really? Ten Feet front to back? Yeah ... I don't think so.

Yes, but what about the pitcher who takes her position on the plate with hands together, waits for the batter, takes her signal, and then separates. I HAVE seen this - and have had a partner IP it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by CecilOne
Rule books define the catcher's box as an 8.5 by 10 rectangle.

OK, college is only 7 feet, others are 10. The point was not the size, but that what matters is that it is a rectangle, not an irregular polygon.
To be a rectangle, all lines including the front line have to be straight lines from corner to corner.

I agree with your partner and not have waited for the separation.

And yes, it is 10' deep. Tried to have it changed a couple years ago, but ASA folks wouldn't buy it.

IRISHMAFIA
I share the same views. There is nothing in the rule book that states the batter has to be in the batter's box before an illegal pitch can be called. Keep in mind, illegal motions were made by the pitcher while standing on the pitcher's plate waiting for the batter to enter the batter's box.

What do you do if a runner (any base) steps off the base during this time?

How can the umpire call the runner out for leaving the base early and not call any illegal pitches? Both the runner and the pitcher were waiting for the batter to enter the batter's box.

Why reward the pitcher (defense) and not the runner (offense)?

I guess I should also add that I'm not suggesting an umpire go looking for boogers. Remember, the umpire can suspend play at any time especially to turn and direct the batter to the box :)

And example to what Tex is referring happened a few years ago to UCLA while Sue Enquist was still in the 3B box. Pitcher was in the circle, and the runner on 3B wondered off the base supposedly to clear a stone in the basepath. 3B umpire immediate killed the ball and declared the runner out. Now, there was no effort on the runner's behalf to advance and neither the pitcher or batter prepared for a pitch.

If I remember correctly, the coach didn't care for the call, but didn't dispute that it was the incorrect ruling.

Always consider the intent of the rule. The purpose of requiring the pitcher to step onto the pitcher's plate with her hands separated is to prevent the pitcher from quick pitching. If the pitcher steps on with her hands together, then the batter gets set, then the pitcher separates and pitches probably isn't quick pitching. If the batter doesn't even know what the pitcher is doing, the batter isn't being deceived. Realistic officiating would likely result in not calling technical violations such as this.

But we do need consider precedent and consistency.

So when the pitcher, standing on the pitcher's plate, brings the hands together to adjust the glove on the non-pitching hand, separates, steps back off the pitcher's plate, then steps back on the pitcher's plate should just be ignored because it is a technicality and the batter wasn't deceived? :D

Okay, got it.

Any other rules you want to have ignored?

I certainly didn't say to ignore anything. My point was that if officials had a better understanding of the intent of a rule, they can address the situation in a realistic manner. Not everyone driving 31 mph in a 30 mph zone requires a police officer to issue a ticket.

If the batter isn't even in the batter's box, you're going to start banging illegal pitches in that situation? Have you ever considered calling "time" and letting them regroup?

That's correct, only the ones caught get the ticket.

If I had a dollar for every time I've heard someone cite what THEY believe the intent of the rule is to ignore or apply their own application, Bill Gates and I would share the same investment counselor.

Unless one was involved in the discussion when the rule was enacted or has received authoritive info (which means the person providing it met the previous requirement), I would question any opinion not backed up by published rule, interpretation or clarification.

You wouldn't believe how many people have told me the intent of the 1-1 count in SP and not one has gotten it right.

Let's concentrate on this comment:

No one said you couldn't suspend play, but so what? Let's say the batter is in the box and requests time after the pitcher has taken her sign and puts her hands together. The umpire states "time" and raises his/her hand to indicate to the pitcher not to throw the ball. Batter steps out with the front foot only, tugs on her shirt and steps back in. The umpire states and/or signals "play".

If the pitcher then comes with the pitch, are you going to call an IP because she did not step back and reset?

[QUOTE=IRISHMAFIA;809915]That's correct, only the ones caught get the ticket.


WRONG ANALYSIS: Obviously only the ones who get caught get the ticket. But that doesn't mean that everyone who gets caught gets a ticket. Use some common sense and exercise some discretion.

No one likes an official who goes out on the field looking to teach everyone just how smart he is when it comes to the rules. Normally, it is that official who is universally disliked.

If you read this thread, you will note that we are talking about the rule and it was clearly stated that no one is suggesting an umpire go looking for trouble.

There is a reason there are rules in place and many of the softball organizations are very specific with their rules unlike some other sports that are vague in their rules and quite often reliant upon interpretations.

[rant]

The only problem with people determining intent and using discretion instead of following the rules is that the teams never know what type of game they are going to get. I see and hear this all the time. If you read team-oriented boards, it is a common complaint that this umpire/UIC said this or did that one weekend and they got something completely different the next. On at least two occasions in the past six years I have witnessed coaches being ejected at an 18U National and a 16U National simply because there were conflicting rulings by local umpires and then they hit the Nationals where the umpires apply the real rules.

No matter who was right or wrong, it is the umpire and, in this case, ASA that are going to look bad and suffer the loss of integrity and not just in the mind of that one coach.

Same thing with equipment. I saw the majority of 4 of 24 teams, and a few from each of a fair amount of other teams have to go to a couple sporting goods stores in PA to get legal facemask for batting helmets because they were told by their local associations that as long as the had a facemask to protect the batter's face, they really didn't have to have the NOCSAE approval stamp.

I do not disagree with your belief that discretion at some level, or preventive umpiring if you prefer, is important at times, but where you draw that line can be problematic. And if you turn a blind eye to an obvious violation once, do you let it go a second, third or fourth time?

Remember, the question was on procedure and what happens when there is a violation. The pitcher is given a specific procedure to follow. Yes, there is a purpose for it, but every pitcher is expected to follow that procedure every time. What happens in your world when you fail to follow specific procedures? In my world, we either lose business or our offer is disqualified from consideration.

Again, I don't think umpires should go looking for problems. And I don't have a problem if when an umpire sees something that may be questionable saying something to the coach. That doesn't mean that should be the standard instead of the exception.

[/rant]

Happy New Year

Don't want to rehash this entire thread, but a follow-up on this one point:

From the most recent ASA Case Book, 2011

PLAY 6.1-3
May Fl take the pitching position with the hands already together?
RULING: No, this is illegal. Fl’s hands must be apart when stepping onto the pitcher’s plate and
while taking the signal. An illegal pitch should be called as soon as the violation occurs. (6-IA)

But is she taking the pitching position if the catcher is not yet in a position to catch a pitched ball?

And if you read the citation, it had nothing to do with the catcher's location.

I agree that the pitcher cannot be in the pitching position until the catcher is in position. However, what do you do when the pitcher still steps on the PP with the hands together when the catcher enters the box, hesitates (take signals) and then separates and pitches? Would that be an IP or a NP?

a) Also add that some umpires state that the "Batter must be in the batter's box" before an illegal pitch can be called. Please state any rule in any rule book that states this.
b) Suppose the catcher is in the catcher's box. What do you do? Are the illegal motions still ignored because the batter is not in the batter's box?

in the case book cited, does the phrase take the pitchers position ... mean be in it when all parameters are met, ie the catcher in position? i guess we need to get out the real big dictionary to see all the definitions for take.

What are the "all parameters are met" besides the catcher in position? Indicate supporting rule.

I believe most of us have been to clinics and have seen video(s) on illegal pitching. Most videos are focused only on the pitcher doing illegal motions, such as: stepping onto the pitching plate with hands together, hands double touching while on the pitching plate, etc. We all say illegal pitching.

Now if the same video(s) could be expanded to include the batter's box, and now observe that the batter is not in the batter's box, is the pitch still illegal? Again where is the supporting rule that states the batter has to be in the batter's box before the illegal pitch can be called?

Resurrected Due to April Clarification
 

Okay, so we got the interpretation we didn't have before. Good thing.

However, maybe I'm just missing it, but we still have a question concerning the "hands" issue.

It seems that the question has been answered about doing something before the batter enters the box, but what if the illegal act continues and the pitcher doesn't correct it? If you cannot have an IP without the batter in the box, how can you have a legal pitch where the requirments began prior to the batter entering the BB?

The pitcher takes her position on the PP and brings the hand together while you are holding up a stop sign waiting for the batter to enter the box.

Now what do you do? However, if the pitcher doesn't reset, do you call the IP for not assimilating taking the signals with the hands separated? If you proceed to direct the pitcher to pitch, s/he will only be doing what you instructed him/her to do.

Well, here we go again. :D

xtreamump
 

I read all posts and the best statement was do not look for BOOGERS. Play ball. Being Over Officious is not Good Umpiring. Call Good IP's don't go out of your way to find them, they will find you.

From 2012 Rule Clarifications and Plays ASA web site...

Rule 6, Section 1A and B When taking the pitching position in contact with the pitcher’s plate, the pitcher must have their hands separated and must have the ball in either the glove or the pitching hand. The pitcher shall not be considered in the pitching position unless the catcher is in position to receive the pitch.

Rule 6, Section 10B The pitcher attempts a quick return of the ball before the batter has taken a position in the batter’s box or when the batter is off balance.
EFFECT: Section 10 A-E: The ball is dead, all subsequent action on that pitch is cancelled.

Rule 7, Section 3A: Prior to the pitch, the batter must have both feet completely within the lines of the batter’s box. The batter may touch the lines, but no part of the foot may be outside the lines prior to the pitch.

These three rules show the preliminaries of the pitch, what an umpire should do if the batter is not in the box or ready to receive a pitch, and that the batter has to be completely in the batter’s box prior to the pitch. So when looking at these rules together we have rule support that a batter must be in the box before a pitch legal or illegal can be delivered.

This is a great example why we say apply the rules to the play and not the play to the rule. Get to know the rules better and use the entire ASA Rules of Softball as a body of work to help guide you in those situations.

xtreamump
 

Good Post, The more games you do the better you will get ad calling IP's. Sunday I Umpired 2 12u FP games and I had IP's, LBR, OBR. and we had a great time. These Coaches are volunteer's. I hate to say this but that is a huge difference. Work all of the games that you can, If you try hard enough every Umpire can learn something new.

In a high school game played under NFHS rules this evening I had a pitcher who was very quick to get back on the plate once she recieved the ball. Often after a ball was put into play, once my partner was in position and we made the eye contact "hand off" I would move back to set up for the next pitch only to find F1 already standing on the PP, hands together, waiting.

I have no idea if she toed up with her hands together or not. I just gave the "wait to pitch" signal until the batter was in the box, and away we went.

Just as I am not going to guess an out, I don't guess an IP. I assumed she had her hands apart then came together and stopped and waited until I released her.

And that is where I disagree with those of the philosophy of seeing/searching for all the elements which make a pitch legal occur. AFAIC, every pitch is legal until I see something which makes it illegal.

This is one of the most ludicrious rules in ASA and many other codes.

What sense does this make:

1: Pitcher steps on the PP with her hands together. Pitcher takes a signal. Pitcher pitches to a batter who is read in the batter's box. Rule - Illegal pitch.

2: Pitcher steps on the PP and delivers the ball in a dangerous and unexpected manner in a deliberate attempt to quick pitch. Rule - No pitch.

A quick pitch is dangerous. It's unexpected. And it is deliberate almost all of the time, with a possible exception of very low level play with new pitchers. Any second act of quick pitching is clearly deliberate because it has already been called once.

So why is there NO penalty for a deliberate, dangerous, unexpected and unsportsmanlike act (unless you think "no pitch" is a penalty - wrong), but we are willing to give a potential winning runner on 3rd home when the pitcher walks on with her hands together?

My beef isn't so much with number "1" above, it's with number "2" and the wholly inappropriate penalty.