Jump to content

Register or Sign In to remove these ads
VolUmp

Improper footwork on pitch

Recommended Posts

On 9/28/2017 at 7:37 AM, maven said:

vituperation

 
vi·tu·per·a·tion
vəˌt(y)o͞opəˈrāSHən,vīˌt(y)o͞opəˈrāSHən/
noun
noun: vituperation; plural noun: vituperations
  1. bitter and abusive language.
    "no one else attracted such vituperation from him"
    synonyms:

    invective, condemnation, opprobrium, scolding, criticism, disapprobation, fault-finding

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Register or Sign In to remove these ads

It's rather odd for kids to pitch differently in summer ball than in HS ball. These are habits that are hard to break. (Going back and forth between rule sets, and thus, the pitching mechanics). 

I would sympathize with a brand of baseball that enforces safety rules for deflecting lawsuits ... but everything else, it would seem, would better serve the youths to coincide with MLB.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it would be best for HS age players to play under NFHS rules. It sucks that they have to adapt to 2 different rule sets for the same level of play.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, udbrky said:

I think it would be best for HS age players to play under NFHS rules. It sucks that they have to adapt to 2 different rule sets for the same level of play.

We agree in principle that they should be able to play under ONE rules set ... now I detect the sarcasm in your post ... but I would strongly push toward the rules set that makes most sense.  You cannot win, in any forum, an argument that HS (FED) rules overall make more sense than OBR.  I always cite the nearly 60-year-outdated balk rule as one example of the offense being penalized for a defensive infraction.  Not recognizing two specific types of OBS is another.  There are many, many more.  Modifications for participation, speed-up, and safety are fine.  Messing with the very essence of the game is not all right.

The logic of the FED Balk rule would be interesting if applied to other sports:

Basketball

When a defensive player is called for Goal Tending, but then the ball trickles in through the rim, the team in possession of the ball takes the ball out of bounds with a fresh shot clock.  Play was dead on the call.

Football

When a defensive player is called for Pass Interference for a completed pass thrown for 40 yards, the team in possession of the ball receives 5 penalty yards and replays the down.  They cannot decline the penalty.  Play was dead on the call.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't care what rule set it is. But there's not going to be a change from NFHS for HS, so it's easier to push for all kids to play on that than to change HS to OBR.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The uproar over the immediate dead ball on balks in Fed is unnecessary. I used to think it was ridiculous but now I think the tradeoff isn't worth it. There are thousands of Fed umpires across the country with a high percentage, IMO, that don't hone their craft to the point that they can administer a live ball balk properly. The number of times a ball is put into play following a balk is minuscule, and the number where a base hit is achieved is even less. I bet there were less than 10 home runs taken away by balks nationally out of tens of thousands of games. The impact of the dead ball balk is WAY overstated.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/30/2017 at 5:09 PM, grayhawk said:

The impact of the dead ball balk is WAY overstated.

It's still wrong.  It's still antiquated.  It's still unfair to the offense.  How about addressing it much more strongly with the lazy and incompetent FED Officials?

I watched a kid hit a ball over the home run wall with two men on base this past season, and it sickened me that I'd already called the balk.

He harmlessly grounded out and ended the inning.  That's 3 runs off the board, and a 3-run homer the kid will never have on his resumé.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think if we're being honest with ourselves, our opinions about rule sets are very closely related to the rules we know best.  We want the knowledge we have to be valued.  There are many stupid things in OBR that I've come to peace with.  The stupid things about NFHS annoy me personally more, but that's not really the fault of those rules.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, basejester said:

I think if we're being honest with ourselves, our opinions about rule sets are very closely related to the rules we know best.  We want the knowledge we have to be valued.  There are many stupid things in OBR that I've come to peace with.  The stupid things about NFHS annoy me personally more, but that's not really the fault of those rules.

 

 

I contend that they ARE their fault. OBR, though slow (and NCAA for that matter) seem to be more than willing to update their rules or change something that needs to be changed.

NFHS seems to ignore the clamor for change on stuff to come in line with the other rule sets. It is frustrating.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

It's still wrong.  It's still antiquated.  It's still unfair to the offense.  How about addressing it much more strongly with the lazy and incompetent FED Officials?

I watched a kid hit a ball over the home run wall with two men on base this past season, and it sickened me that I'd already called the balk.

He harmlessly grounded out and ended the inning.  That's 3 runs off the board, and a 3-run homer the kid will never have on his resumé.

In 7 years of working Fed games, year round, I have never seen a home run follow a balk call. I get that it sucks when it does happen, but I believe the impact of players not knowing what to do during a live ball balk, and poorly trained umpires not administering live ball balks properly would be greater. It's not just keeping the ball live, it's also knowing the right time to kill it, when to acknowledge but disregard it, and when to call an out in spite of it.  I've seen the much simpler catcher's obstruction call get butchered enough to know that live ball balks are beyond many average Fed umpires.

If Fed were to change it, I would personally like it, at the same time knowing that associations across the country would struggle with training umpires on how to officiate it (with many umpires not up to the task).

 

 

Share this post


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

In 7 years of working Fed games, year round, I have never seen a home run follow a balk call. I get that it sucks when it does happen, but I believe the impact of players not knowing what to do during a live ball balk, and poorly trained umpires not administering live ball balks properly would be greater. It's not just keeping the ball live, it's also knowing the right time to kill it, when to acknowledge but disregard it, and when to call an out in spite of it.  I've seen the much simpler catcher's obstruction call get butchered enough to know that live ball balks are beyond many average Fed umpires.

If Fed were to change it, I would personally like it, at the same time knowing that associations across the country would struggle with training umpires on how to officiate it (with many umpires not up to the task).

 

 

I agree that many FED umpires would butcher the OBR balk rule. @VolUmp believes there are none in his association but has not taken up my suggestion to ramrod the rule waiver for just his home state. As an alternative, maybe FED could avoid the dead ball dilemna by not adopting the OBR rule but adopting the myth, "coach choice" something I've seen some recreational OBR umpire chapters adopt, feeling that either they could not train or their umpires could not grasp the OBR rule. I would not be happy with that compromise.

Share this post


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

As an alternative, maybe FED could avoid the dead ball dilemna by not adopting the OBR rule but adopting the myth, "coach choice" something I've seen some recreational OBR umpire chapters adopt, feeling that either they could not train or their umpires could not grasp the OBR rule. I would not be happy with that compromise.

That's a significantly better rule than either the OBR one or the NFHS one.  It's easy to understand, fair to the offense, and consistent with catcher's interference/obstruction.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/29/2017 at 9:40 PM, VolUmp said:

It's rather odd for kids to pitch differently in summer ball than in HS ball. These are habits that are hard to break. (Going back and forth between rule sets, and thus, the pitching mechanics). 

I would sympathize with a brand of baseball that enforces safety rules for deflecting lawsuits ... but everything else, it would seem, would better serve the youths to coincide with MLB.

Not as hard as you think.  It's not much different than switching between the windup and the stretch during the course of a game - pitchers make that adjustment between batters.  It's a strategic adjustment, but it's still an adjustment.   Why not just stay in the stretch all game (and some pitchers do)...the biggest reason is they pitch more effectively from the windup, so they'll only use the stretch if they have to.

Likewise, if a pitcher is more effective from the hybrid, he will use it until he can't.  Whether that is between batters, innings, or even leagues.

No different than the many people who play baseball on Tuesdays, fastpitch on Wednesdays and slowpitch on Thursdays, and pitch in all three games without any troubles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was talking to a friend yesterday and he was talking through plays that happened in his OBR game the day before.  He said that he screwed up a balk penalty and his partner had to correct him.  R1 and a 3-1 count.  Pitcher blows through his stop (balk is called) and delivers the pitch.  It's ball 4.  He sent the BR to first which forced R1 to second.  His partner (a 30 year veteran umpire) comes in and says it's no pitch because the ball wasn't hit, so the batter stays at bat and R1 goes to second on the balk.  My friend, who is a college umpire, wasn't sure enough to stay with his ruling and decides his partner is right.

So here we have a 30 year veteran umpire and a college umpire screwing up a live ball balk penalty (or lack thereof, since the balk should have been acknowledged but disregarded).  My friend actually had it right, but wasn't confident enough to tell his more veteran partner that he's staying with his ruling.  He sent the rule to his partner last night, so hopefully they both learned something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, basejester said:

That's a significantly better rule than either the OBR one or the NFHS one.  It's easy to understand, fair to the offense, and consistent with catcher's interference/obstruction.  

Would you include the clause in CI that makes it fair to the defense also? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/2/2017 at 12:58 PM, Jimurray said:

, "coach choice" 

There is never an election (or an erection in Japanese Ball) on a balk ...

Share this post


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

Would you include the clause in CI that makes it fair to the defense also? 

At the risk of answering a rhetorical question, allow me to talk this through.

It seems apparent to me that immediate dead ball balks are unfair to the offense, such as the case when the batter hits the home run off the pitch when the pitcher fails to stop.  Agreed?   It's a debatable point how much that matters, but when it does happen, it's unfortunate.

Here's the actual OBR catcher's interference rule:
(c) Catcher Interference (6.08) The batter becomes a runner and is entitled to first base without liability to be put out (provided he advances to and touches first base) when the catcher or any fielder interferes with him. If a play follows the interference, the manager of the offense may advise the plate umpire that he elects to decline the interference penalty and accept the play. Such election shall be made immediately at the end of the play. However, if the batter reaches first base on a hit, an error, a base on balls, a hit batsman, or otherwise, and all other runners advance at least one base, the play proceeds without reference to the interference.

When the runners (including the batter-runner) attempt to advance past the base they would have been awarded, then  it feels fair for them to be in jeopardy.  In the NFL, there are those situations when it's apparent that the offense has a "free play" (due to penalty with the choice for the offense) and therefore make a risky downfield pass.  When the defense intercepts that risky downfield pass, does it feel fair to negate that interception with the penalty?

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Please cite where I stated this.

VolUmp

  • VolUmp
  • Members
  •  213
  • 949 posts
  • Location Tennessee

You speak about your tenure on the board like you're a mover and shaker in Washington DC reviewing the Comey/Trump hearings. 

I have been with my association for 13 years, and I can assure you it is unanimous, that the approximately 120 umpires in our Association and the 75 Head Coaches of th schools represented all see the balk rule as "FOLLY" the way it is currently written and enforced by FED. 

Give us something, Law, give me an example of an Umpire on the Rules Committee who feels the balk rule should remain as is, and why he feels that way. In doing so you would not be breaking any confidence. I wouldn't know the umpire or even the state in which he resides. 

Like

 

2017                             "Coach, I didn't get a real good look at it ... but it sure sounded like a strike ... "

..... 62  FED Varsity/JV Games                  ..... 78  HS Summer Tournament Games

..... 71  MS Tournament Games                ..... 05  HS Summer Ball Games

..... 05  18+ Summer Games                     ..... 38   HS Fall Ball Games

.... 259 TOTAL GAMES

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Jimurray said:

I can assure you it is unanimous, that the approximately 120 umpires in our Association and the 75 Head Coaches of th schools represented all see the balk rule as "FOLLY" the way it is currently written and enforced by FED. 

Jim,

Very lame ... I stated, and stand by, the fact that zero officials like the rule as is, and zero coaches like the rule as is, in my Association.

I never said that zero officials would screw it up on the field, and I certainly agree that considerable training would need to take place to have each of the umpires fully understand the MLB balk rule, and how to enforce it properly ... no matter what the scenario.  Grayhawk's example is a very good one.

So, please, retract your false statement above.

 

Furthermore, why do we have to use the extreme example of the batter hitting a home run that is negated by a balk in FED ... there are certainly very few home runs hit that are negated ... but any time a base hit is negated by a balk in FED, I daresay it is unfair ... 100% of the time.  What happens next doesn't ever justify the bad rule.

In other words, a kid who has a base hit negated may hit a home run on the next pitch, or he may line out into a triple play on the next pitch, and everything in between.

If you're going to debate just "how" unfair it is, or "how much affect" it has, consider that every base hit and every batter reaching 1B on an error are negated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/30/2017 at 5:09 PM, grayhawk said:

The uproar over the immediate dead ball on balks in Fed is unnecessary. I used to think it was ridiculous but now I think the tradeoff isn't worth it. There are thousands of Fed umpires across the country with a high percentage, IMO, that don't hone their craft to the point that they can administer a live ball balk properly. The number of times a ball is put into play following a balk is minuscule, and the number where a base hit is achieved is even less. I bet there were less than 10 home runs taken away by balks nationally out of tens of thousands of games. The impact of the dead ball balk is WAY overstated.

 

I had one of them about 8 years ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, VolUmp said:

Jim,

Very lame ... I stated, and stand by, the fact that zero officials like the rule as is, and zero coaches like the rule as is, in my Association.

I never said that zero officials would screw it up on the field, and I certainly agree that considerable training would need to take place to have each of the umpires fully understand the MLB balk rule, and how to enforce it properly ... no matter what the scenario.  Grayhawk's example is a very good one.

So, please, retract your false statement above.

 

Furthermore, why do we have to use the extreme example of the batter hitting a home run that is negated by a balk in FED ... there are certainly very few home runs hit that are negated ... but any time a base hit is negated by a balk in FED, I daresay it is unfair ... 100% of the time.  What happens next doesn't ever justify the bad rule.

In other words, a kid who has a base hit negated may hit a home run on the next pitch, or he may line out into a triple play on the next pitch, and everything in between.

If you're going to debate just "how" unfair it is, or "how much affect" it has, consider that every base hit and every batter reaching 1B on an error are negated.

I assumed that if 120 umpires thought the FED rule as is to be folly then they would be confident in their application of the OBR rule and you would be confident that none of them would butcher the OBR rule. Maybe you meant 120 umpires don't like the unfairness of the FED rule and some, confident in their ability to read and comprehend, would want the OBR rule implemented, and others, not confident in their ability to read and comprehend, would not want the OBR rule to be implemented but want something different, such as a coach choice? I suspect that if you endeavored to train your group in the OBR rule you would have some complaining and asking why we couldn't just give the coach a choice. But why not start the change and convince your own state to make the change unilaterally?

Share this post


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

Wow.  And where is the retraction?  I missed it.

Retraction: My assumption was incorrect. @VolUmp does believe that some members of his association would butcher the OBR balk rule.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the benefits of going to the OBR rule would be very minimal and rare, while the complications would be much more plentiful. The benefits aren't worth the cost IMO, and it's a problem in search of a solution at the NFHS level.

In 7 years, I've seen exactly one balk where there was a hit of any kind. And it was a doozy, a double at least that would have plated 2 runs for a varsity team that was down by 3 in the fifth at the time. But not only did the coach understand, he even agreed with the balk ball - just wished it weren't so. Perhaps there is this rash of other hits and arguments elsewhere - just adding my personal anecdote that it is essentially a non-issue from what I've seen.

Without wading into the debate of how many in which association would or would not mess it up, I'm sure very few here would mess it up - but some would. Even MLB umps occasionally do so. Now think about the wider circle of partners you've had in varsity games, some outside your obviously well-trained association...even more would. Now let's go to the pool of umps doing JV and freshmen. Even more there. Add in MS and youth...you see where this is going. NFHS can't just assume that all are as diligent as the highly selective group that opts in to a site like this. They have to worry about the full gamut - from those like us who pay attention to the 30 yr vets still on their 1st yr of experience to the guys whose terminal level is JV to the newbies doing their first middle school game. This just isn't worth it to fight over.

Frankly, like a lot of things, I think this issue is one where we care far more than the coaches or participants.

  • Like 2

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



×