Register or Sign In to remove these ads
ricka56

Texas State Tournament - Balks in winning run

55 posts in this topic


Register or Sign In to remove these ads

I didn't sign up to see it. They wanted $$$ for the live-stream, but that was two weeks ago and viewing is free now...not sure what incantation is required.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, ricka56 said:

I didn't sign up to see it. They wanted $$$ for the live-stream, but that was two weeks ago and viewing is free now...not sure what incantation is required.

Sorry, Rick — I did view it. I thought, both the very first time I viewed it (which is all that should count), and the successive views of it show him clearly disengaging (in the direction of 3B) before he faked to 1B.  FED still has the stupid rule where you don't even have to disengage in the direction of 3B to spin and throw to 1B, but this was a big "nothing."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, VolUmp said:

Sorry, Rick — I did view it. I thought, both the very first time I viewed it (which is all that should count), and the successive views of it show him clearly disengaging (in the direction of 3B) before he faked to 1B.  FED still has the stupid rule where you don't even have to disengage in the direction of 3B to spin and throw to 1B, but this was a big "nothing."

Thus not being a legal disengage behind the rubber but a jab step toward 3B and a feint to 1B. Considered from the rubber in all codes. Balk. 

Edited to add that my view of the available video did not include the step and feint to 3B. Please read the entire thread to come to a conclusion. I would delete this post but it would only add to the confusion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Jimurray said:

Thus not being a legal disengage behind the rubber but a jab step toward 3B and a feint to 1B. Considered from the rubber in all codes. Balk. 

What ? Are you talking about the OP balk ? That was a fake to 3B (legal in HS). That move takes F1 off the rubber. From there he is another infielder and pitching rules (balks) do not apply.  

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Jimurray said:

Thus not being a legal disengage behind the rubber but a jab step toward 3B and a feint to 1B. Considered from the rubber in all codes. Balk. 

Jim,

I'm not arguing ... but can you please cite the FED Rule and/or Caseplay that supports your statement?  The Jim Evans balk video, dated as it may be, shows this very move to be legal in High School.  I realize things could have changed in the 15-20 years since that video was produced.  I thought Evans and his kids that posed as pitchers and players did an excellent job of showing the 3 different rules sets (OBR, NCAA, FED).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's 100% legal.  There are two ways to legally disengage:

(1) Step back behind the rubber with the pivot foot.
(2) Break contact from the rubber with the pivot foot after feinting to a base (except to first, of course).

This pitcher made a legal step to third (distance and direction), broke contact and wheeled and feinted to first.  This was a big miss that balked in the winning run.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, ricka56 said:

What ? Are you talking about the OP balk ? That was a fake to 3B (legal in HS). That move takes F1 off the rubber. From there he is another infielder and pitching rules (balks) do not apply.  

 

32 minutes ago, VolUmp said:

Jim,

I'm not arguing ... but can you please cite the FED Rule and/or Caseplay that supports your statement?  The Jim Evans balk video, dated as it may be, shows this very move to be legal in High School.  I realize things could have changed in the 15-20 years since that video was produced.  I thought Evans and his kids that posed as pitchers and players did an excellent job of showing the 3 different rules sets (OBR, NCAA, FED).

 

10 minutes ago, grayhawk said:

It's 100% legal.  There are two ways to legally disengage:

(1) Step back behind the rubber with the pivot foot.
(2) Break contact from the rubber with the pivot foot after feinting to a base (except to first, of course).

This pitcher made a legal step to third (distance and direction), broke contact and wheeled and feinted to first.  This was a big miss that balked in the winning run.

I saw a blurry you tube video that did not show the fake to 3B. Found a better view. No balk, not even close. Losing coach said ump said F1 "did not replace his feet". WTF

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Jimurray said:

 

 

I saw a blurry you tube video that did not show the fake to 3B. Found a better view. No balk, not even close. Losing coach said ump said F1 "did not replace his feet". WTF

Yeah, I saw that video too.  I can only guess that by saying he didn't "replace his feet", U3 meant that F1 didn't gain distance.  Of course, that's not U3's call anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Jimurray said:

Losing coach said ump said F1 "did not replace his feet". WTF

Bad call, but bad coach rule understanding too. What HC said that U3 said makes no sense, and for HC not to get a clear understanding of what F1 did illegally is really inexcusable...not that that excuses the bad call. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So if we had a partner misapply a rule, we would correct the misapplied ruling. But balk calls have both judgement and "not-simple" rule application aspects to them. Do you think that the other 3 umpires, who had to be saying WTF, should have gone to U3 and clarify that he didn't bring an OBR balk rule with him onto the field and fix this mess ? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, BrianC14 said:

"replace his feet" ?   That doesn't even make sense.

I think it refers to the old "wheel" prohibition in OBR. There might be a case for a "wheel". But without a throw to 1B even if you judged a "wheel" you just have an infielder.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, grayhawk said:

Yeah, I saw that video too.  I can only guess that by saying he didn't "replace his feet", U3 meant that F1 didn't gain distance.  Of course, that's not U3's call anyway.

I actually took that to mean, F1 never disengaged toward 3B. You can almost see that when he spins toward 1B his left foot comes down in about the same spot as when he faked to 3B.

1) How can the Head Coach not be better versed in this legal move? Presumably his pitcher has done it for 2 or 3 years.

2) How can a 17-18 yr old pitcher not completely "lose it" when he's called for something he's done legally at the Varsity Level for 2-3 years?

3) How can the announcers be so ignorant as to say … (whoa … never mind … we all put up with Tim McCCarver for 25 years ...)

AND SERIOUSLY

Are the State Officials on this crew going to be severely reprimanded?  Out of 4 of them (actually I don't know how many there were.  We use 6), not one of them knows the rule?  That falls on them, their Association President, the State Director who approves all nominated State Tournament  Officials, and their Assignor. It's not a rule that we would call a "TWP" or even rare. I'm sure I see it about once every 2 games.

Lastly, there should be a free protest allowed at the State Tournament — even if, for the regular season, the state votes "No Protests."

Those kids had our FRAT brothers kill their chance at a State Title. Yes, I realize they may have lost anyway, but as Girardi said before replay was expanded, "I like my chances better when they get it right. Something has to be done. There is too much at stake."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, ricka56 said:

But balk calls have both judgment and "not-simple" rule application aspects to them. Do you think that the other 3 umpires, who had to be saying WTF, go and clarify that U3 didn't bring an OBR balk rule with him onto the field and fix this mess?

YES.  HELL, YES!!

If I were the Crew Chief, until the official who called the balk convinced me that in his judgment, F1 either gained no distance or direction, I would tell him to his face, "You're misapplying the rule, and as a crew, we shall eat crow and fix this now!"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, VolUmp said:

YES. HELL, YES!!

If I were the Crew Chief, until the official who called it convinced me that in his judgment, F1 either gained no distance or direction, I would tell him to his face, "You're misapplying the rule, and as a crew, we fix this now!"

I doubt he misapplied the rule. I think he thought that F1 didn't disengage. So would it be proper umpire etiquette for CC to ask about a misapplied rule as a pretext to ask about his obviously bad judgement ? If no, does proper etiquette trump getting this BIG play right ? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, grayhawk said:

It's 100% legal.  There are two ways to legally disengage:

(1) Step back behind the rubber with the pivot foot.
(2) Break contact from the rubber with the pivot foot after feinting to a base (except to first, of course).

This pitcher made a legal step to third (distance and direction), broke contact and wheeled and feinted to first.  This was a big miss that balked in the winning run.

Your post highlights something interesting which I bolded. The question is is it a balk if he wheels and doesn't throw to first. You yourself judged a wheel:

Old OBR

"However, if, with runners on first and third, the pitcher, while in contact with the rubber, steps toward third and then immediately and in practically the same motion “wheels” and throws to first base, it is obviously an attempt to deceive the runner at first base, and in such a move it is practically impossible to step directly toward first base before the throw to first base, and such a move shall be called a balk. Of course, if the pitcher steps off the rubber and then makes such a move, it is not a balk"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Jimurray said:

Your post highlights something interesting which I bolded. The question is is it a balk if he wheels and doesn't throw to first. You yourself judged a wheel:

Old OBR

"However, if, with runners on first and third, the pitcher, while in contact with the rubber, steps toward third and then immediately and in practically the same motion “wheels” and throws to first base, it is obviously an attempt to deceive the runner at first base, and in such a move it is practically impossible to step directly toward first base before the throw to first base, and such a move shall be called a balk. Of course, if the pitcher steps off the rubber and then makes such a move, it is not a balk"

the obvious question is, does a similar "wheel" interp exist in FED?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, ricka56 said:

So if we had a partner misapply a rule, we would correct the misapplied ruling. But balk calls have both judgement and "not-simple" rule application aspects to them. Do you think that the other 3 umpires, who had to be saying WTF, go and clarify that U3 didn't bring an OBR balk rule with him onto the field and fix this mess ? 

 

3 minutes ago, Jimurray said:

Your post highlights something interesting which I bolded. The question is is it a balk if he wheels and doesn't throw to first. You yourself judged a wheel:

"However, if, with runners on first and third, the pitcher, while in contact with the rubber, steps toward third and then immediately and in practically the same motion “wheels” and throws to first base, it is obviously an attempt to deceive the runner at first base, and in such a move it is practically impossible to step directly toward first base before the throw to first base, and such a move shall be called a balk. Of course, if the pitcher steps off the rubber and then makes such a move, it is not a balk"

"Wheels" isn't the key part here.  The key is "immediately and in practically the same motion."  By breaking contact with the rubber (which is mentioned in the last sentence of your quote), it makes this a legal move.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Gfoley4 said:

the obvious question is, does a similar "wheel" interp exist in FED?

Well, in Fed, F1 isn't required to break contact with the rubber if he actually throws to first, rather than feints.  So the Fed interp has always been a little different.

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, grayhawk said:

Well, in Fed, F1 isn't required to break contact with the rubber if he actually throws to first, rather than feints.  So the Fed interp has always been a little different.

 

oh duh, my bad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, grayhawk said:

 

"Wheels" isn't the key part here.  The key is "immediately and in practically the same motion."  By breaking contact with the rubber (which is mentioned in the last sentence of your quote), it makes this a legal move.

Contact will be broken in an illegal wheel also. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, grayhawk said:

 

"Wheels" isn't the key part here.  The key is "immediately and in practically the same motion."  By breaking contact with the rubber (which is mentioned in the last sentence of your quote), it makes this a legal move.

Yes.   And it's at that point (the move to 3B) that he's disengaged and he's now an infielder, which negates the balk violations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Jimurray said:

I think it refers to the old "wheel" prohibition in OBR. There might be a case for a "wheel". But without a throw to 1B even if you judged a "wheel" you just have an infielder.

Well if - IF - that's what the thinking was, it's still wrong, since this is FED.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Jimurray said:

Contact will be broken in an illegal wheel also. 

I suppose.  Their version of "wheeling" is to spin on the free foot after stepping to third, with the pivot foot "wheeling" in an arc.  If F1 just spins, he can't gain ground to first base.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now