Mike D

We can get help on certain things. But this is a pulled foot appeal, not a pushed foot appeal. I think of it this way, I'm not going to make a safe call and say F3 was off the bag unless I see F3 off the bag. If I see it I am going to signal 'safe' then signal and say "He's off the bag." I would look pretty foolish doing all that on a guess then having to go to my partner for help. The other way I see it if I see that the BR has apparently been thrown out there are many more ways he can become safe...pulled foot, bobbled or dropped ball, etc. Once he's safe, he's safe, he can't get any more safe barring action after he is safe. Sent from my SM-G928V using Tapatalk

In both examples you call what you see. You try to get the best angle and watch the ball as it is thrown so you can make adjustments in your position if it is thrown wildly, but still, you call what you see. If you see the ball get there first and can't see the pulled foot it's an out and you can get help on appeal later. If you call the runner safe (even though you know the ball beat the runner) he is safe, this becomes a judgement call and can't be appealed. Sent from my SM-G928V using Tapatalk

There's a difference between intentionally dropping a ball and letting the ball drop. Intentionally dropping the the ball (the ball could be caught by a fielder but was touched, intentionally let go out of the hand or glove, or batted to the ground) is illegal 5.1.1f with a runner on first and less than 2 outs. It is an immediate dead ball & 8.4.1c and the BR is out and runners return. If the fielder permits the fair fly, line drive or bunt drop on touched it is legal and a live ball Sent from my SM-G928V using Tapatalk

We aren't in the coaching business. It is the responsibility of the player and the coach to be aware of the count and be alert in the game. After a 2nd strike I am going to signal and announce the count. If during or after that the batter is sitting on the bench and hasn't returned in the proper time I'm not going to the bench to beg him to finish his time at bat. Delay of game, strike three, he is out. Sent from my SM-G928V using Tapatalk

In the strike two case the batter could receive strike three for leaving the batters box, depending on the situation. Also, if the batter was not ready to receive the pitch after 20 seconds he could receive the third strike as a delay of game penalty Sent from my SM-G928V using Tapatalk

In that situation, no, but I'm still going to use judgement Sent from my SM-G928V using Tapatalk

If it is incidental contact it is not obstruction. I will allow the players to tangle and untangle once. If the catcher is purposefully laying on the runner so he can't get up, then you have obstruction. If the runner purposefully knocked the ball from the catcher's glove, then you have interference. I would also be looking for malicious contact if the runner is sliding into the catcher...the runner may slide and contact the catcher, even if it changes the playing action, but it may not be malicious. Sent from my SM-G928V using Tapatalk

When I start missing balls and strikes it's usually because I start to anticipate and thinking about what call or mechanic I will use if a pitch is a certain way. I just tell myself to stop thinking and just watch the ball.

I am assuming by "balance point" you mean lifting the leg so that the thigh is parallel to the ground, the knee is waist high and the knee is bent at a 90 degree or less angle. So, the pitcher does not have to do a "spin move" or jump in order to throw to first. - I agree, but why do we allow the LHP to make a move to first that looks just like he is starting his pitching movement with his free leg coming to the balance point? (or the RHP to third) Shouldn't the LHP have to make a direct step to first?

Question about Rule 8.01© as it relates to Rule 8.05(a) At what point does a movement become a pitcher's natural pitching motion and commit him to the pitch? I was talking with fellow umpires at tournament this past weekend about the differences afforded right and left handed pitchers regarding these rules in their pick-off moves to first base, and third obversely). In both scenarios the free foot does not break the plane of the rubber and there is no interrupted motion, so those are not issues. Are these the correct rulings? 1. A left handed pitcher is allowed to lift his free foot, even to the point that the thigh is parallel to the ground , the same initial motion as his natural pitching motion, and then throw to first. (no-balk) 2. A right handed pitcher is not allowed to lift his free foot and throw to first, he must use a "spin move" thus jumping with both feet at the same time. If the right handed pitcher lifts the free foot but not the pivot foot (even though there is no motion toward the plate) it is considered a natural pitching motion and thus a balk. My argument is OBR only states that a natural pitching motion commits the pitcher to the pitch, and that the pitcher must step ahead of the throw. It is impossible to step and throw without moving the knee and lifting the free foot from the ground. OBR makes no mention or requirement of a "spin move." Why would we allow the left handed pitcher to start with their natural pitching motion then throw to first and not the right hander? In my mind it is about the intent to deceive and where the free foot lands. Left handed pitchers are clearly trying to deceive the runner when they lift the free leg like they are going to pitch then throw to first and right handed pitcher isn't fooling anyone by simply stepping and throwing to first.

If the offensive player leans into one, or takes one for the team, it is a dead ball and a ball or strike depending on where the ball traveled. Usually only have to call this once to keep them from leaning into a pitch.