Illegal or Legal, what are your stipulations?

[blueballs]

I recently umpired an 18U Gold game. Home pitcher is textbook legal. Push, drag the whole nine yards.

Second pitcher pushes off but the push off foot kicks up and goes off to the right. I call illegal. Coach is upset, never been called, blah blah.

I keep calling it and end up ejecting two coaches, etc. UIC agrees but one umpires says to me after the game: "I wouldn't have called it because it really wasn't an advantage."

My arguement. 1) I don't see anywhere in the rule book (ASA) that I have the right to determine "advantage" in the FP pitching rule. My argument is, if she can't push and drag to pitch and has to lift her foot, it's an advantage.

2) When she tried to drag, she couldn't pitch.

Do you guys feel I made the right call?

[Coachtindell]

I attended a 12U state tourny 2 weeks ago and every single pitcher on the 4 fields I observed for 2 hours left contact with the ground for anywhere from 4 to 12 inches. You had to really pay attention to see some of them, but it happened.

My daughter developed this about 2 weeks ago and I debate how much emphasis I need to put on it until season end as no one is calling it.

So I am interested to hear your responses.

[Dakota]

Originally posted by blueballs
I recently umpired an 18U Gold game. Home pitcher is textbook legal. Push, drag the whole nine yards.

Second pitcher pushes off but the push off foot kicks up and goes off to the right. I call illegal. Coach is upset, never been called, blah blah.

I keep calling it and end up ejecting two coaches, etc. UIC agrees but one umpires says to me after the game: "I wouldn't have called it because it really wasn't an advantage."

My arguement. 1) I don't see anywhere in the rule book (ASA) that I have the right to determine "advantage" in the FP pitching rule. My argument is, if she can't push and drag to pitch and has to lift her foot, it's an advantage.

2) When she tried to drag, she couldn't pitch.

Do you guys feel I made the right call?

This "no advantage" no-call drives me nuts. If her mechanic was illegal, you made the right call. "Advantage" isn't supposed to enter in.

However, if you watched the college Div 1 championships, there were enough illegal pitches to provide film for all the umpire training clinics you could ever want.

ASA, NCAA, etc., need to either re-write the pitching mechanics to legalize what is defacto accepted practice, or crack down on umpires, pitching coaches, etc., to call what is in the book.

[Edited by Dakota on Jul 7th, 2003 at 12:22 PM]

[Dakota]

Originally posted by Coachtindell
I attended a 12U state tourny 2 weeks ago and every single pitcher on the 4 fields I observed for 2 hours left contact with the ground for anywhere from 4 to 12 inches. You had to really pay attention to see some of them, but it happened.

My daughter developed this about 2 weeks ago and I debate how much emphasis I need to put on it until season end as no one is calling it.

So I am interested to hear your responses.

A small "leap" will not be called if there is a hole in front of the pitcher's plate, because no umpire is going to get down like a golfer lining up a shot to determine for sur whether she is above the level of the surrounding ground. However, I am surprised the larger leaps (you said up to a foot - I assume you mean vertical distance?) were not called. Those would be called in a heart-beat around here.

You should break her of it for two reasons:

1) It will get called, and it will happen when you are in a critical game, and it will shake up your pitcher.

2) It is a waste of energy that should be imparted into the pitch, and not in lifting her body weight off the ground.

Remember, a leap is not a crow hop. A leap (even though it is illegal) is a waste of energy and a waste of potential pitch speed (IMO).

[Coachtindell]

Working hard on eliminating it. She is having trouble timing the forward lean with the push off. She is too upright when she pushes off. Sometimes the pivot foot leaves the ground because of the hole in front of the rubber, but when she really drives off it comes up 2 or 3 inches and doesn't land for about 10 inches.

Obviously Illegal, she knows it and I know it. Hasn't been called yet, but she has only pitched 3 games since starting it.

There were some really bad ones at the 12U tourny I attended. Didn't see one called.

[CecilOne]

Originally posted by Dakota
This "no advantage" no-call drives me nuts. If her mechanic was illegal, you made the right call. "Advantage" isn't supposed to enter in.

However, if you watched the college Div 1 championships, there were enough illegal pitches to provide film for film for all the umpire training clinics you could ever want.

ASA, NCAA, etc., need to either re-write the pitching mechanics to legalize what is defacto accepted practice, or crack down on umpires, pitching coaches, etc., to call what is in the book.

Thanks for the image. My responses are ABSOLUTELY, ABSOLUTELY, ABSOLUTELY and I prefer the latter solution!

My question is why are we all so hesitant to call illegal pitches? Some concerns I have about calling illegal pitches are:
1) inconsistency with other umpires
2) the "disrupting the game" reaction which I believe hurts my ratings
3) the coach who charged at me when his daughter was out at the plate after I called several illegal pitches by her
4) the HS coach who was buddies with several inner-circle umpires, didn't like me in slow pitch and weakened my reputation after I called one illegal pitch by the pitcher he coached (starting with my "partner")
5) the effect of #1 on my confidence
6) the endless inconsistency in discussions of what is illegal, including this forum, especially non-plate pushing off.
In spite of all that, it seems I call more illegal pitches than average, usually followed by the pitcher adjusting.

[greymule]

And once you have called one illegal pitch on that replant, you have nailed yourself to constant vigilance to call every one either side makes for the rest of the game. Since many illegal pitches are borderline affairs, why look for trouble?

I did six 18U tournament games two weekends ago, and I could have called dozens. I've had games where as BU I figured I could have called every pitch by both pitchers illegal. Why should I be the only one in the park who notices? I know very well that if I started calling them, I'd soon wish I hadn't.

I agree that you see plenty of illegal pitches on TV. So many pitchers avoid the obvious airborne hop but still drag the foot and replant, and that's the main problem. Yet there are many pitchers who push off and deliver properly, without any sort of replant. Rewrite the rule? Maybe. What would it say? You can replant if you don't hop in the air?

[Skahtboi]

Most of you who have been on this board for a while know how I feel about the illegal pitch and the mythical "gaining an avantage clause." If not, go back and read the thread linked below:

http://www.officialforum.com/showthr...?threadid=8803

[turk]

There is another good thread on 5/19/03 on this issue.

I understand there is no "gaining an advantage" clause in the rules. However, the rules were drafted to prohibit pitchers from starting closer to the plate, with the most prominent evil being a replant and then a leap from the newly established point.

If a pitcher pushes off from the pitcher's plate with a pivot, and her back foot catches a little air because she is driving hard, it does not necessarily constitute a leap, depending on where her non-pivot foot is and her release. If she jumps up instead of out, and catches a lot of air, she will be throwing a poor pitch anyway, based on the simple physics of the West Coast pitching style.

One of the better points I saw in this thread relates to the fact that if you focus on technical violations, very few good pitchers would pass muster and you would be making illegal pitch calls all day. Thus, review the intent of the rule, which is certainly an umpire's duty (even when there is no "unfair advantage" clause), and judge accordingly.

I agree that rewriting the rules is probably a better solution than the endless debating. I saw a draft rule on some website that included langauage which provided that "it shall not be illegal if the pivot foot merely loses contact with the ground" and then qualified the circumstances. I wish I had bookmarked it, because I cannot remember which organization it was.

This is not about why the chicken crossed the road as much as it is about whether they used the crosswalk to do so.

[Panda Bear]

This problem with illegal pitches seems to be becoming a bigger and bigger problem, based on this and other threads. Some have asked how it is handled in other areas, and the answers seem to vary, which further highlights the problem.

Out here in the northwest, I have faced all the quandries others have brought up. The problem is that even senior umpires and district administrators can't seem to come to agreement. And I agree, it doesn't serve the developing players and coaches to subject them to inconsistent calls or open disregard for the written rule.

But what to do if you don't have the support of higher ups in the area? The sanctioning bodies seem more concerned with standards of shirt color, pant style, bat brand, etc. than dealing with this. (End of rant.)

The last thing I want is another heavy-handed mandate from the National level. Does anyone think we, as the umpires on the line, can gently persuade the sanctioning bodies to align the rules with reality, in the best interest of the sanctioning body, so they look better?

I don't like some of the extremes I'm seeing as pitching styles, but if it is to be "o.k."; i.e. its o.k. in the national spotlight, and we don't want to give ourselves the grief of being the local 1 man pithcing rules crusade, then it would be best if the rules allow what practice has established as the norm. We allow uniforms that would have been deemed outrageous 30 years ago. Is it time to move up to modern times with the pitching rules?

[turk]

The one norm that emerges when I talk to coaches and umpires in Florida is that re-planting and true crow-hopping is bad, whereas leaping is not. I hate the leaping rule because I do not believe that a pitcher who pushes off the plate is doing anything that the rule was meant to prohibit. The leap off a re-plant is the true danger, and that is covered by the crow-hop rule.

The funny thing is no one seems to care unless the pitcher is throwing well!

[Skahtboi]

Originally posted by turk
I hate the leaping rule because I do not believe that a pitcher who pushes off the plate is doing anything that the rule was meant to prohibit.

But it is a violation of the rules, regardless of what you may believe. ASA 6:3:1 clearly states: Pushing off and dragging the pivot foot in contact with the ground is required.

Please note that it does not say that "the pitcher can leap so long as she does not get an impetus that takes her further than she would have been had she dragged the pivot foot." So, until there is a rule change, you must enforce it the way it is written. There are no options.

[WestMichBlue]

Illegal or Legal, what are your stipulations?

Round and round we go, and where this stops - nobody knows! Part of the problem is that too many people do not really know what is legal.

Let's take a look at the typical delivery with respect to the legs and body movement. Forget all the hand and arm preliminary gynamistics and focus on the feet.

1. The pitching motion really starts with a weight shift, a body lean forward.

2. The knee of the pivot leg buckles (spring winding up).

3. As the pivot leg knee starts to straighten (spring uncoiling), the stride foot takes off in a giant step.

4. With the body now traveling forward, the pivot foot breaks contact with the plate and travels forwards.

5. As the body opens up (facing 3B) the pivot foot travels behind the body.

6. When the stride foot lands, the arm should be in the last 90 degrees of the rotation and the ball is released a fraction of a second later.

7. With the release, the hips will close and the pivot foot picks up and settles to the side with the pitcher now facing the batter (hopefully in a defensive position).

Now go back to #4 - one of two things will happen with the pivot foot. If the leg push and body drive is strongly forward, the pivot foot will be pointed down (the toe went into the hole in front of the plate and the push was from the instep area of the foot). The pivot foot will drag all the way - and that is a legal pitch.

If the body push is upward, then you get a little jump step with the pivot foot. The pivot foot will be level or even have the toes up; it will land from a few to many inches later. That landing is a replant, but that in itself is not illegal!

There are two parts to the definition of a crow hop - a replant, and a new push-off. To be illegal, that knee of the pivot leg must again bend, and again straighten, and add more impetus to the body's forward motion. I don't see that happening!

What I see is that pivot foot traveling forward, landing, twisting and kicking a little dust as it starts to drag behind the body. And I will not call that a crow hop.

HOWEVER - when the pivot foot breaks contact with the plate, the stride foot is still airborne, thus technically both feet are airborne and that is a LEAP. Now we get into discussions about how deep is the hole, and does the foot rise appreciably above the plane of the ground, and are the toes up or down, etc. etc.

The "Leap" is what you have to decide what and when you are going to call. IMO, if I call all the leaps I see, I will disqualify 50% - 60% of the pitchers I see; and I will be in an endless hassle with pitchers and coaches .

There is a crow hop you can call. When pitching under ASA rules (vs NFHS, ASSSSA, PONY) pitchers will attempt to compensate for the lack of a stride foot back by shifting their weight behind the plate. With their weight back on the stride foot, the pivot foot may lift and re-plant on the plate or in front of the plate. Obviously they are going to push off from that point so that would be a crow hop - and thus illegal.

Finally, an illegal pitch that I am calling more and more is when the stride foot lands well outside the 24" limits. This is coming down from the college ranks and more younger pitchers are being taught this. They drive the stride foot away from the batter, get a full body turn (often the pivot foot also drags outside the 24" limit) - and throw back into the batter - often a screwball.

IMO, that one you have to call. It is easy, for they leave the evidence in the dust. The rule book says the step must be within the 24" limit; it doesn't say whether it is completely or partially within. I go with partially; therefore all but the heel can land outside the limit and still be legal.

WMB

[turk]

WMB's points are well taken. When you read the definition of a leap, pivot and non-pivot must be airborne and moving toward the plate at the same time. The crow hop pitcher takes an extra step, not necessarily lifting the pivot foot, but then replants AND pushes off from the new point. With a leap, the umpire literally has to confirm pivot and non-pivot are airborne at the same time. The reality is most pitchers that push off from the plate and don't crow-hop may go airborne for an inch or two and then drag. Thus, the umpire's call is based on synchronizing the feet for those few inches, which make a leap call very difficult. Moreover, when a pitcher jumps up instead of out, they catch a lot of air, and generally throw a ball anyway.

Skahtboi, I am a relative newcomer to this site, and I enjoy your attention to this issue, even though I disagree in part with your position. Under Little League rules, the illegal pitch rule does say that the pivot foot must maintain contact with the ground, and push off and drag, but it then provides "IF NOT, IT IS CONSIDERED A LEAP" , and directs you to the leap definition (Rule 2.00), which does not require that the foot stay on the ground, but defines a leap consistent with WMB's analysis. The rules contradict one another, which leads some umps to call leap whenever they see air under the back foot. The Little League Rules are almost identical to ASA.

My daughter has been coached by Kaci Clark for almost 2 years, and we have literally spent entire lessons watching her back foot. The only time an umpire ever even pays attention to it is when a coach complains, and they generally will not call it as long as the jump is a few inches and there is a drag. I think that is consistent with the letter and spirit of the rule.

[Edited by turk on Jul 17th, 2003 at 10:55 PM]

[nickdangerME]

What I have seen recently in both an 11/12 and 13/14 LL tournaments are pitchers who begin with just the heel of their pivot foot on the plate, the rest of the foot in the hole in front of the plate and pointing towards home. As they stride forward, they pivot on the toes or ball of the pivot foot, removing their heel from the plate and reorienting the pivot foot parallel to the plate. Then they complete the push off and drag from this sideways foot position. They end up with the effective part of their push off perhaps 3 to 5 inches in front of the plate after they have lost contact with the plate by simply pivoting the pivot foot. They do not seem to have taken a "step" because the toes or ball of the pivot foot have reoriented without having moved horizontally or vertically and without losing contact with the ground.

I have not called this illegal, but it has been a marked visual contrast to other pitchers who start with their heel on the plate and toe in the hole, but maintain the orientation of the pivot foot towards the plate as they pitch. These other pitchers are presumedly also getting the effective part of the push from the ball or toes of the foot (3-5 inches in front of the plate), but it looks legal.

Of course, both contrast with pitchers who start with the toe or ball of the foot on the plate and clearly push off from the plate itself rather than the hole in front of the plate.

Any thoughts on this?

Nick