Illegal Pitch?

[AtlUmpSteve]

I had a phone call from a coach at the 18 Gold Qualifier this past weekend in Florida (I was in Las Vegas, instead), asking about a TEAM FLA pitcher doing a similar thing that the umpire insisted was legal. As did the UIC (also state UIC).

The coach said (I wasn't there, just repeating his statements) that in an advanced umpire clinic, he was told 6.3.B (removes one hand from the ball and returns the ball to both hands) only applied if the ball was actually and completely placed inside the glove a second time, that despite the hands obviously touching together several times on most pitches, the other "touches" didn't count (in the violation commonly named "double-touch").

I may have missed that clinic. Am I missing something here?

[AtlUmpSteve]

Originally Posted by Dakota

No, I don't, but from the information on their web site, I see they are Chinese. The software may be great, but I would not give my cc number to a Chinese software company.

Just a suggestion. I keep one credit card just for those transactions where I have doubts; with a very low limit and consistent monitoring on line. I have declined payments before, had the account numbers changed when the account appeared compromised; and closed the account to another bank the one time I felt the customer support wasn't supportive enough.

[RKBUmp]

Originally Posted by AtlUmpSteve

I had a phone call from a coach at the 18 Gold Qualifier this past weekend in Florida (I was in Las Vegas, instead), asking about a TEAM FLA pitcher doing a similar thing that the umpire insisted was legal. As did the UIC (also state UIC).

The coach said (I wasn't there, just repeating his statements) that in an advanced umpire clinic, he was told 6.3.B (removes one hand from the ball and returns the ball to both hands) only applied if the ball was actually and completely placed inside the glove a second time, that despite the hands obviously touching together several times on most pitches, the other "touches" didn't count (in the violation commonly named "double-touch").

I may have missed that clinic. Am I missing something here?

Completely new one on me. 6-1-E says "shall bring the hands together". Any clinic I have ever been to has indicated a pitcher only has to touch the hands together to fulfill this requirement. Not sure how you get from the first touch to the second now requiring the ball to actually be placed inside the glove.

Not sure about the situation you have posted, but, based on the original video posted, even if the 2nd touch required the ball to be completely inside the glove, would we not now have a violation of 6-3-C? Once she has separated the hands and swung the arm back, has she not started her forward motion once the arm starts to come forward? Touching again, then dropping the arm to the rear a 2nd time would seem to me to be a stoppage and reversal of forward motion.

[Tex]

Not only did I miss that clinic, but I also received rule books that did not have that new change stated.

[hog]

A great video editor for .mp4 is Apple's Quick Time.

6-3-B --- Violation
6-3-C --- Violation

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by AtlUmpSteve

I had a phone call from a coach at the 18 Gold Qualifier this past weekend in Florida (I was in Las Vegas, instead), asking about a TEAM FLA pitcher doing a similar thing that the umpire insisted was legal. As did the UIC (also state UIC).

The coach said (I wasn't there, just repeating his statements) that in an advanced umpire clinic, he was told 6.3.B (removes one hand from the ball and returns the ball to both hands) only applied if the ball was actually and completely placed inside the glove a second time, that despite the hands obviously touching together several times on most pitches, the other "touches" didn't count (in the violation commonly named "double-touch").

I may have missed that clinic. Am I missing something here?

I find that, well, let's say "questionable". Hand and glove coming together only counts the first time, but not the next two or three times unless the ball/hand is completely submerged into the glove?

Think I'll wait for the clarification to come out before I address this to anyone else.

[SpringtownHawk]

Technically, the pitcher touched twice but, has she gained any advantage, especially at game speed, just say'n?

[RKBUmp]

Originally Posted by SpringtownHawk

Technically, the pitcher touched twice but, has she gained any advantage, especially at game speed, just say'n?

Where in the rule book does it say anything about only if gaining advantage? You enforce the rules as written otherwise you are picking and choosing what you personally wish to enforce.

[tmielke]

MHSAA (Michigan) would not say it is illegal. It has been sent to the fed rules committee I believe. ASA district UIC says definitely illegal. She has changed to a legal motion that should work for FED and ASA.

[DeputyUICHousto]

Originally Posted by AtlUmpSteve

It would do you a great service to find a specific rule reference for what you believe this to violate.

6.2 says the pitch starts when the hands are separated once they've been placed together

and I believe 6.3.D says "must not make two revolutions..."

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by DeputyUICHousto

6.2 says the pitch starts when the hands are separated once they've been placed together

and I believe 6.3.D says "must not make two revolutions..."

But the pitcher can pass the hip twice and make less than two revolutions. I believe the point is that the number of times the ball passes the hip is irrelevant to FP rules.

[Crabby_Bob]

I believe the language comes from RS 40.E. This pitcher is coming forward past the hip three times yet she isn't making two full revolutions.

[AtlUmpSteve]

Originally Posted by Crabby_Bob

I believe the language comes from RS 40.E. This pitcher is coming forward past the hip three times yet she isn't making two full revolutions.

And, if she waved her arms back and forth 8 times BEFORE bring her hands together, that could be 8 more times past the hip, without ANY revolutions yet.

My point is, there is no rule that addresses "past the hip" That is why I suggested finding a rule that applied to exactly THAT language. You would lose a protest based on misapplication of the rule because you used language that isn't in the rule; even if the pitch motion IS illegal, you have an obligation to reference rulebook terminology, since misapplication is protestable, even if your judgment isn't.

[MD Longhorn]

I think 95% of the good pitchers I've seen (maybe more) pass the hip exactly 3 times (back, forward, forward) while making their completely legal pitch that includes approx 1 1/3 or 1 1/2 revolutions (i.e. less than 2).

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by mbcrowder

I think 95% of the good pitchers I've seen (maybe more) pass the hip exactly 3 times (back, forward, forward) while making their completely legal pitch that includes approx 1 1/3 or 1 1/2 revolutions (i.e. less than 2).

ASA has, to the best of my knowledge, always allowed the dropping of the arm to the side when separating as of no importance. However, that is not what happened in the video offered.