Feint to second/throw to first

[zoops]

R1 starts to steal second while RHP is still set.  P does the "inside" move to 2B, and when he does so R1 stops and start to retreat to 1B.  P then steps toward and throws to first and a rundown ensues.  The pitcher never disengaged the rubber.  I know the feint to second is legal, is the throw to first a balk? I don't believe it is because I know you can feint to third and throw to first without disengaging, but it just looked weird.  Fed rules if it matters.  

[bam]

It matters.

It's legal, although I find it hard to see where F1 feigns to 2d and then throws to 1st without disengaging

Of course, maybe if I see it described......

[zoops]

It's legal, although I find it hard to see where F1 feigns to 2d and then throws to 1st without disengaging

Of course, maybe if I see it described......

 

Spins towards 2B, then spins toward 1B.  Just stood up from my computer and did it, not that difficult surprisingly but I don't think I had ever seen it before today.  

[ricka56]

So F1 did an inside move towards 2B, but does not disengage, then spins back the other way and throws to 1B when he realizes the R1 is trying to get back to 1B? Is that correct ?

 

I'd probably balk that move and then be at a loss to justify it with a rule...that is if the ugly rule argument is ineffective. 

[Replacematt]

It is not illegal. Think about the third to first (back when it was or where it still is legal.) This is the same concept, just that it's still legal because it's not illegal to feint to 2B.

[zoops]

So F1 did an inside move towards 2B, but does not disengage, then spins back the other way and throws to 1B when he realizes the R1 is trying to get back to 1B? Is that correct ?

 

I'd probably balk that move and then be at a loss to justify it with a rule...that is if the ugly rule argument is ineffective. 

 

Yep, he spun towards first keeping his chest towards RF, if that helps visualize it.  

[maven]

 

So F1 did an inside move towards 2B, but does not disengage, then spins back the other way and throws to 1B when he realizes the R1 is trying to get back to 1B? Is that correct ?

 

I'd probably balk that move and then be at a loss to justify it with a rule...that is if the ugly rule argument is ineffective. 

 

Yep, he spun towards first keeping his chest towards RF, if that helps visualize it.  

 

 

The feint to 2B is legal, and FED does not require him to disengage.

 

At that point, pitching restrictions still apply to him, since he is still engaged.

 

So if he steps and throws to 1B, that's legal.

 

Failing to step ahead of the throw to 1B would be a no-step balk; failing to throw would be a feint to 1B and a balk.

 

Ugly ≠ illegal

[ALStripes17]

Perfectly legal.

Caveat: if he did not disengage on his feint to 2B, then he is REQUIRED to throw to 1B when he steps that way.

There was (is) a case play regarding a feint to 3B where the pitcher does not disengage and somehow wheels back to 1B without disengaging. Case book requires a throw in that situation. I imagine it applies to 2B as well.

In my eyes, he disengaged anyway. So it doesn't matter haha

[noumpere]

Here are two cases (from an older book, so the reference might have changed):

 

 6.1.5 SITUATION: With R1 on third base and R2 on first base, F1 steps and feints to third and then steps and throws to first attempting to pick off R2. The throw goes into dead-ball territory. The offensive team's coach wants a balk to be called because the pitcher never threw the ball toward third. RULING: When the pitcher stepped off the pitching plate in his feint to third, he became an infielder. Hence, when his throw goes into dead-ball territory, all runners are awarded two bases. R1 gets home and R2 gets third. Had F1 stayed on the pitching plate during his feint to third and his throw to first, all runners would be awarded one base. R1 would get home and R2 would get second. This would not be a balk as F1 made a legal feint and a legal pickoff attempt with no prior motion to pitch.

 

6.2.4 SITUATION C: With R1 on third and R2 on first, F1 comes set. He then feints toward third, or he removes one hand from the ball and makes an arm motion toward third but does not step toward third. He follows with a throw to first base. RULING: This is a balk. F1 must step toward third base when feinting there. F1 may not feint to first base. He must step toward the base and throw. He might, while he is on the plate, step toward occupied third and feint a throw, and then turn to step toward first and throw there with or without disengaging the pitcher's plate. If F1 steps and feints to first, he must first disengage the pitcher's plate or he is guilty of a balk.

[mbrown2097]

Unoccupied base?

[noumpere]

Unoccupied base?

Yes, second was unoccupied.  So what?  It's not always illegal to throw or feint to an unoccupied base, and this is one of those times.

[mbrown2097]

That was my question.  Was this one of those times.  A little touchy aren't we?

[Kevin_K]

That was my question.  Was this one of those times.  A little touchy aren't we?

It is not illegal to throw to an unoccupied base when attempting to make a play on a player advancing or attempting to drive said runner back to their place of origin.

[Umpstradamus]

I don't think you can throw or feint to an unoccupied base without balking unless in the umpire's judgment the runner was making a legitimate steal attempt. At camps I have attended the consensus seemed to be if the runner passes the halfway mark he could be considered to have made a legitimate attempt. In that case I think a feint and then a throw to first could be legal.