Leaderboard

I am sure this has been said before, but seriously? The MSU Association?!

No, R1 stays at 3B and the balk is acknowledged for the batter. The approved ruling includes wild pitches and pickoffs, requiring you to leave the ball alive allowing the runner to advance at his own risk. "APPROVED RULING: In cases where a pitcher balks and throws wild, either to a base or to home plate, a runner or runners may advance beyond the base to which he is entitled at his own risk."

Too bad he didn't have an interpreter.

In a sense, I feel your pain, HumblePie. If one learned OBR through the Jaksa/Roder Manual (which I did as that was the textbook at the umpire school I attended), one would be banging their head up against the wall reading this approved ruling. J/R went to great lengths to differentiate between a pitch and throw...and took great pains to use the correct term each time...and that Manual would never used the language used in the "APPROVED RULING". (FWIW, J/R also went to great lengths to differentiate between a "catch" and merely "gloving the ball", too.) However, this is mostly semantics as the full language of the rule and MLBUM make clear how to handle a balk followed by a wild pitch.

Good point. Allude would be indirectly. You were rather direct. 😁👍

Oh, I didn't allude to it

Sorry to hear you have to retire. I hope it's not a life altering condition. I also hope you stick around on this forum. Always enjoy your knowledgeable comments.

Your question is EXACTLY why "fixing" the balk in HS baseball is a bad idea. There are just way too many scenarios that will lead to MASSIVE confusion on the part of all involved. The bottom line is that there will be so many more times umpires misapply the rule than there ever will be HRs taken away by immediate dead ball balks. Last Friday was the first time in AGES I can remember that a ball was put into play following a balk call. This was in an NCAA game and with R1 & R3, F1 failed to stop and the batter hit a fly ball to RF. As soon as the ball was caught, we called time, awarded bases and brought the batter back with the same count. No need to allow the rest of the play at that point since the BR didn't advance one base.

Okay...now I'll share my actual story. I'm open to criticism. This is the only illegal substitute I've ever had in nearly 25-years of calling FED baseball. High school game I'm the plate umpire. Game is being played between region (conference) rivals; both of whom are state championship caliber programs (they've each won titles and they're contenders every year). I'm not posting that information in an attempt to impress anyone with the fact that I was umpiring such a game. Rather, it is an attempt to convey in words (which is hard to do) the atmosphere of the game. (Intense game with a large and loud crowd.) This was also a very well-played game (as one would expect) that was moving at a good pace (the game was in a "defensive flow".) Late in the game (I believe bottom of the 6th), the home team's leadoff hitter got a single. The head coach (coaching third base) started walking down the line and said, "Sully, 26 is going to courtesy run". I took out my line-up cards and started to review. FWIW, I write the courtesy runners (and charged conferences) on the back of the lineup cards. I did a quick glance and saw that 26 had not been a CR previously. So, I wrote (in shorthand), "26 CR F2, 6th". Lo and behold, two pitches later the visiting head coach comes out of the dugout and says, "Sully, can he do that?" To which I replied, "do what?" The coach said, "number 26 was used as a pinch runner back in the second inning." (Aside: the teams knew that runs would be at a premium. So, when the home team had a big, slow kid near the bottom of the batting order get on base in the second inning, they used 26 as a pinch runner.) Now, should I have remembered that 26 was used as a pinch runner in the second? Maybe. The fact is that I did not. And the reason I did not is that I was totally focused on balls & strikes and outs & safes due to the competitiveness of the game. Should I have checked the front side of lineup card to make sure that 26 had not appeared in the game previously in some other capacity other than as a CR? Maybe. But, first, I wanted to keep the flow of the game going. I just glanced at my CR notes on the back of my card and moved forward. Second, I did (and still do) expect the coaches to know that you cannot use a player who had already appeared in the game in another capacity as a CR. So there you go...there is my actual illegal substitute play. As for the resolution? The good news is that having earned the respect of most head coaches in my area over the last 20+ years (and having a good working relationship with almost all of them), the home head coach heard the visiting team's head coach's protest. When I turned around to start walking toward the home team head coach, he walked towards me and just said, "I F*#Ked up didn't I?" I said, "yes." He asked what the penalty was, and I told him, and he simply said, "I'll never make that mistake again." We've laughed about it several times since then.

The case play says "...if R1 chooses not to slide, R1 must veer away from the base if the fielder is there attempting a play." My initial thought in reading your post was that the word "veer" could mean ducking as that would be getting out of the way. However, that is not what the casebook says. It reads, "veer away from the base". I don't think ducking would be "away from the base". If anything, his head would actually be closer to the physical location of the base as a result of ducking. So the lawyer in me says that the only way one can give substance to the phrase "away from the base" is by holding that if he doesn't slide, he must avoid by physically moving away from the base. Ducking obviously doesn't move one away from the base.

Fundamentally, I think we're at a point where we are discussing what are the umpire's responsibilities and options when presented with an illegal substitute. I think we can cast aside the portion of the discussion that is specific to courtesy runners, unless someone has a position that we would treat an illegal CR differently than other illegal substitutes. If the umpire doesn't catch it at the time of substitution, they don't. In this situation, we rely solely on the directed penalties if/when the substitute is discovered. No options here (but if it was an announced substitution, there is a question of why the umpire did not realize it at the time.) If the umpire catches it, the question seems to be can/should the umpire keep the illegal player from entering? I'll throw this out for the sharks: if we are given a lineup card with eight names, are we responsible for not accepting it until it is rectified? If there are multiple players with the same last name, are we responsible for getting initials? In every other situation that requires validation, recording, or changes involving the lineup, do we have responsibilities to ensure that it is proper? Why would this be any different? If HC comes out and attempts an illegal substitution on defense, whether intentionally or ignorantly, do we take the substitution and then eject the player before they can even get off the bench? Is that a good look? This isn't a playing situation. This is administrative, so to speak. I can say that anywhere I work, if I had the knowledge and the opportunity to prevent such an illegal act and at least one ejection, and did not do so, it would go over like a pregnant woman on a pole vault.

@The Man in Blue, I must also remind everyone...as you said, not only was the decision to put ANY sponsor's patch on the umpire's uniforms but, that it was a cryptocurrency commonly used to settle online gambling debts just adds to all the controversy. The thing about the FTX patch was that when MLB signed that deal with FTX, it caused the REMOVAL of existing memorial patches honoring recently deceased MLB umpires from their uniforms as well as prevented the MLBUA from adding additional memorial patches. The whole affair was rather disrespectful, frankly. Further, the sponsorship deal ended when FTX found themselves in an enormous and sordid financial scandal. ~Dawg

You don't have to let him take his spot. It's an announced sub. But I lean toward telling the coach that he already used him for the other position if I catch it.

OBR R1 No outs. 2-0 count. Pitcher balks by failing to stop, PU calls it, then pitcher delivers the pitch. Pitch is wild, kicks away from the catcher, and R1 advances safely all the way to 3B. Defensive Head Coach comes out and argues that the balk needs to be enforced, the ball was dead, and that R1 must return to 2B, all on the basis that the batter did not become a runner and reach 1B. He further argues that a wild pitch is not the same as throwing wildly to a base (including home plate). Please use the OBR rulebook and/or other interp manuals to officiate this play properly. For 25 years, I've considered a wild pitch in this scenario to end the action on the basis that the Batter cannot reach 1B. However, I'm now confused by wording in the MLBUM.

Yep. I was given a contact and reached out to the office with helpful intent. It's not that they don't know in Michigan, just that there are probably links out there that they haven't had time to review.

I ws OK until that note at the bottom...Caseplay 8.4.2 Y may have something to say about that note.

Backstory for those interested. This is 5 years old. Story published in mlb.com (for what that's worth) deems it not explicitly illegal but up to the umpire https://www.mlb.com/cut4/craziest-pitching-motion-ever-c303701370

Although, I have seen umpires who are so bad that coaches just stop arguing. The coaches literally give up. Those umpires are literally so bad, but think they're doing great because they have almost no arguments. They're having fun. I'm being totally serious in saying this. There was an umpire in our area of the country who was nowhere near good enough to work NCAA Division 1 baseball. But, somehow, someway, he kept getting games. In one game, he was calling strikes on pitches that were literally causing dirt clouds to form. The third base/head coach (who won a damn NCAA title in Omaha) just mumbled to U3, "I'd go argue, but what's the point. He's been horrible for ten years; ain't no amount of yelling going to change that and I don't want to get suspended." You could argue that U3 (not me) should have ejected him for calling his partner horrible. But should you really EJ when it is painfully obvious to the other umpires on the crew that the HC was not wrong??? LOL.

Way to go. You jinxed him.

Holy crap. Comment of the decade. I can't stop laughing.

Right there..is the balk. Kill it That never happened. Time was called after the start stop balk.

This isn't a balk followed immediately by a pitch or throw to a base. This is balk followed by a disengagement. We would call time here and enforce the balk.

One step backwards, one forward with the free foot. Pivot foot stays engaged. No hesitation or alteration. Starts in a windup position facing the batter. I don't like it, but I can't see anything illegal.

Wild stuff. My 9-5 job, my boss has each employee give a presentation on anything they like basically, my turn was last week. I did mine on youth officiating and I even went up on how to make it to college/MLB. I did a little spot on how good Hoberg is, then less than a week later, he's fired.

I think, as Replacematt said, I'd kill it and call the balk as soon as he stopped his motion.

Agreed ... point taken ... and yet, using the term "wild pitch" would make things so easy. So clear.

I'm racking my brain, and I cannot come up with a situation where a pitcher could throw (not pitch) to home and balk in a manner where the ball would remain live.

That's a little redundant. Acknowledging the balk literally means the count stays the same Ah yes BUT that's not the only thing that happens in acknowledging (i.e. enforcing) the balk penalty 99% of the time (that 99% being where runners don't advance past their awarded base). We kill it and award the bases. I think that's where the confusion comes from. The frame that gets in people's head is binary A) let the play stand in it's entirety (pitch included) or B) No pitch and award +1 base to all runners. I'm simply calling out that this half pregnant outcome of "let the play stand on runners that advanced past what would have been their award but there was no pitch" could be more clearly covered. I understand it may be clear as day in the language to some but for myself and others* there is a needed logical leap to differentiate "acknowledging" from enforcing and we'd benefit from more explicit language. * And they aren't dumb or generally ignorant folks

Your lineup cards are mobius strips?

Including me praying I was at home with you during my next sh**show 10U game of future MLB HOFers.

Best of wishes to you. our thoughts and prayers are with you.

Okay...that makes more sense. Thanks.

Whew. A few layers to this...I'll offer some thoughts. Too many games, too few umpires. In my area, 95% of the games are on Tuesdays & Thursdays so guess which days I'm required to use my less experienced staff? We also have to manage ego. Lots of umpires believe that they're significantly better than they really are...yet we don't want them to quit so we have to give them work. Finally...sometimes the game exposes us. Maybe this was too big of a game for him? I'm unwilling to call it a just a bad day because mechanically, he has a lot to work on so I suspect that even on "less" of a game, he's likely struggling. Hopefully he & his local group are open to an improvement plan. As the umpire, this can't be fun game in and game out. The game is a lot more fun to work when you're not struggling out there most of the time.

Two things are true; the play is live and the balk will either be acknowledged (enforced for batter) or not. Since the batter did not advance, the pitch is nullified, as the requirements to “ignore” the balk were not met. However, balks are live and runners are entitled to try and advance beyond the base they are entitled to, but do so at their own risk (if thrown out, out stands) If the wild pitch had been ball 4 or u3k and batter reaches first and runner took off, pitch would count bc the requirements to “ignore” the balk were met

I disagree. He balked while engaged? Like a flinch, or stop start after coming set? There’s the balk… call time. There’s no play if after he balks he steps off. Play only continues on balks along the lines of no stop and F1 delivers the pitch, or balks for not stepping towards the base F1 throws to a base. (as @grayhawk alluded to….herein lies the problem with live balls in high school.

Ducking is not considered a veer. If they wanted us to permit ducking, they wouldn't have stated "veer" Slide or get out of the way or we're grabbing two. Adding the "veer" case play might have been one of the best case plays added in the last decade. That is a very important case play and I think we should call those plays with that play in mind. FSPR...okay, runner is more than 1/2 way, now we're looking for a veer or a legal slide to stay clean.

Sorry to hear you have to hang it up.

This rule isn't an interference rule. It's a safety rule. The intent is to keep runners from hurting fielders or themselves by minimizing them creating conditions where there is the risk of contact while one or both are in vulnerable positions.

Would it help if this was approached keeping in mind the spirt and intent of the rule? Thus, by ducking, in the judgment of the umpire, did the runner avoid the fielder? That, to me, is the central question. If the answer is "yes," play on. If the answer is no, we have interference.

You can head off the problem, or you can have a lengthy discussion with the coach when you don't and it's discovered. Use preventive umpiring.

I get what you're saying, but I think there will be a lot less hell to pay if you tell the coach he can't use a particular player as a CR instead of allowing it and then getting the out and restriction. Both are equally valid ways to handle it, but I'll take the method that won't see the coach in danger of getting himself ejected.

Like @The Man in Blue, first the the humor: My LL UIC told me a saying I tell every partner after the plate meeting: "Don't suck. And if you do, do it consistently." And the serious bit: When you're making calls--whether in the field or behind the plate--SLOW DOWN. You will feel like you're too slow, but in all likelihood you're still too fast. Watch the play/pitch, then play it over in your mind to make sure you know what you saw--not what you think you saw. Take critiques well and have humility. I've worked with a couple of guys that no one wanted to work with because they would never take criticism. Lastly, visit this site regularly and read as much as you can. When I was starting out, I learned a metric crap ton from reading about the experiences of the other practitioners of The Craft. Oh, and lastly lastly: don't ever mention the baseball equipment company with the Yellow W to @MadMax.

As a new umpire, you're going to be receiving A LOT of feedback from the other umpires in your association. Umpires are people and you're going to receive feedback in a variety of different tones and vibes because every one is an individual. There are the facts of what you are or are not doing...and there is the tone that's being delivered to you. It's easy to get fixated on the tone and miss the message. You might have a gruff and rough partner and you might have a New Age spiritualist partner. Don't be a, "Yeah, but..." guy. Simply LISTEN to what you are being told about your work and make a note of what you are being told (writing feedback down is extremely helpful...). If you start to hear the same kinds of feedback about the same things...this is perfectly normal. We all develop at different paces and in different directions. Repeated feedback related to the same concerns should be a flag to you that this is something you should be addressing. Does that mean if you only hear something once you should disregard it? No. Learning to accept and apply feedback is an important part of developing as an umpire. In closing, umpiring is very difficult. It takes a long time and a lot of games and situations to become even a low level somewhat competent umpire. Keep a copy of the rulebook on the back of your most used toilet at home. If at the end of the year your rulebook is still in one piece and all the pages are intact, you didn't spend enough time reading your rulebook that year. ~Dawg

I equate this with the umpires who crossed the line when the MiLB umpires went on strike. They tell people 'I worked pro ball." No, you didn't.

Let me take these four questions in order: (1) You're not punishing the team for the umpire's screw-up. You're punishing the team for their own screw up. Teams are required to know the rules. The fact that the umpire didn't preventatively catch the team about to break a rule (even if you believe the umpire should have) does not remove the requirement that the team is not allowed to break the rules (in this case, the courtesy runner rule). (2) A player who violates the courtesy runner rule is an illegal substitute. (See Paragraph 7 of the Suggested Speed-Up Rules on Pg. 67 of the 2025 rulebook and 2-36-3 (e)). An illegal substitute, unlike batting out of order, may be discovered by either team or "by an umpire" (3-1-1). So, if the umpire catches it two pitches down the line, the CR will be called "out" and restricted to the dugout for the remainder of the game. (3) No, the plate umpire is not supposed to stay silent. See (2), supra. and 3-1-1. (4) Yes, I'd call the runner out and restrict him to dugout for the remainder of the game. I will add: In my opinion, it is not even the umpire's screw up. If the umpire can catch it and can prevent it...great. But, it is not the umpire's fault if he doesn't; umpires are not required to pro-actively prevent teams from violating rules they may not fully understand. The primary reason you make notations and records on your lineup card is not to prevent rules violations (though commendable, that's a secondary reason) it is so you have a record that you can refer to in case you are requested to adjudicate a potential rules violation. The teams are supposed to know the rules and not violate them. If a team is saved by an umpire who happens to have done a great job and caught a potential violation before it occurred...then they are lucky. But if not, they are not off the hook because an umpire didn't do the team's job for them. I will further add: With respect to your comment, "I wouldn't punish them for my mistake and I would fix it on the spot,"...then you would likely lose a protest should the other team protest. At least you would in my state.

Your original post misses the other half...its not just that no run can score when the third out is against the B/R before touching 1B, its that no run can score on any play where the third out is recorded and that third out is a force out (against R1, R2, or R3). (I apologize for the incorrect number when quoting you...the system did it automatically and I cannot change the "1" back to a "3".)

I added the language that many NFHS umpires fail to grasp. There were numerous arguments (mostly on Facebook) that said a runner could not be called out for a FPSR violation if he didn't actually slide (went straight into the bag standing) because the rule says a runner never has to slide. It got so heated...and there was so much misinformation..,that I actually reached out to my contacts in Indianapolis and strongly suggested that they re-insert plays in the casebook that confirm that if the runner does not slide on a FPSR, he must avoid. After I reached out them, they did a little informal research of their own (thinking that I may have been blowing the scope of the problem out of proportion). However, they were quickly very surprised at how many umpires did not understand this requirement and how this requirement to avoid had been lost to a great number of umpires over the prior decade or two. So, they re-inserted those plays in the casebook two or three years ago. See 8.4.2 SITUATION Y (pg. 86, 2025) (I apologize for the incorrect number when quoting you...the system did it automatically and I cannot change the "1" back to a "9".)

I can confirm that Rule 21 is posted on the door into or inside the locker room of every professional umpire locker room I have been in. I can also confirm, though I have been in far fewer, that Rule 21 is also posted in every clubhouse/locker room I have ventured in.

I highly doubt it. NCAA baseball is more popular and visible than ever, and hiring a fired pro umpire, even one as good as Hoberg at the MLB level, for alleged gambling is an iron too hot to touch.

I have been forced to medically retire from umpiring. I have already sold off most of my gear, but found more stuff as I was cleaning out my closet. 1. 2024 baseball umpires CCA manual 2. All-Star catalyst neck cryoscarf, color is black 3. KOOLBLUES Umpire chest protector assist with four ice packs $25 shipped for all if you’re interested. All items are new. IMG_8835.heic IMG_8834.heic