RBIbaseball

Active Army 2008-present

That's the comment I was remembering but didn't find initially. Thank you. To be more clear, I wouldn't call it a toe tap. When I think toe tap, I think subtle and little weight distribution. This pitcher's free foot came in line with the plate (body sideways to the plate), he actually rocked a bit with his body distributing over 50% of his weight to front foot, rocked the weight back, then delivered. It was similar to Carl Edwards Jr article, although a bit more pronounced with putting weight on the foot and coming back up. I'm not sure it's relevant, because I suppose both are illegal. However, he was not breaking the "spirit of the rule" in that he was gaining to additional distance to the plate. But, "The pitcher may not take a second step toward home plate" I think puts a fork in it.

I was at a high school scrimmage (on the sideline) and was watching a pitcher do the following during his delivery: step sideways, pivot foot turn parallel to pitchers plate, small step forward landing on lead foot, then lifting his lead foot back up and stepping forward to deliver the pitch I felt strongly it was an illegal pitch, but the other guy on the sideline with me said no (as long as they have a continuous motion blah blah). The two calling umpires didn't call anything either. One is a new guy, but the PU was a veteran and he said he thought it was illegal but wasn't 100% sure so he let it go. Anyways, if illegal, what part of the rule book text makes it so? Is it simply "During delivery, he may lift his non-pivot foot in a step forward, a step sideways, or in a step backward and a step forward, but he shall not otherwise lift either foot.", stating that you only get ONE step forward?

Yep. This is pretty much the answer... open and shut case. It being a flippantly wrote addition in the tourney doc empowered me to think I had to agency to apply a "spirit of the rule" interpretation. I would have let it go personally. But U2 was definitely right to enforce it.

Ya Lol. Mid tier travel tournament - maybe slightly better than most. On one hand they write their rules amendments with little thought. On the other hand they pony up for 3 man crews for semis and 4 man for championship at full rate for each umpire. I'm confused on how much they care.

Def not very thought out. Here is the snip from the document:

Low threat question here that I had a slight bit of curiosity about on what others think NFHS ruleset with a modification that with 2 outs courtesy runners are mandatory Championship of a 50 team tourney, 4 man crew Bot 8th (extras), tie game, two outs Catcher hits a double. U2 knows its the catcher and takes it upon himself to call time and signal to dugout for a courtesy runner (I personally would have waited for a complaint from the other team). Conversation ensues because catcher is very fast, and the last batted out is very slow. Coach tells umpire that he isn't going to catch anymore, and they will switch catchers next inning. Ultimately, U2 forces coach to use courtesy runner per the rule. Once the opposing coach saw what was going on, he was verbally lobbying for the slow runner to be forced to run as well, naturally. Nothing eventful, 3rd out made. Same team ends up winning in the 9th. I just thought it was interesting. Is there an argument to be made that the coach should be able to announce a new catcher to circumvent that requirement? What if it was totally legit (ie not a retroactive response, but another kid in the dugout was already in full gear ready to go)... does that change anything? In the end the purpose is to keep the game moving, so why would we force a sub if he they legit were changing catchers (or if they pinky swore they would ). I understand we have a "catcher of record" and a rule as written, but was just curious if y'all would have also enforced the runner change. I'd argue that the fastest way to speed up the game is to keep the fast catcher in and hopes he scores 😆

I don't look forward to the next time a team is stealing signs and the pitcher catcher gets together a couple times to figure it out. Sure, Get Good, but some bush league play by the offense causing a bunch of drama because the defense isnt allowed to get together to change anything up. I actually had a batter, 16u, "stealing his own signs" (ie he was standing in the box, peeking back and forth under his armpit)... that was a lot of fun. The batter was as cool as cucumber, and wasn't bothered by all the fans and defense talking SH*# to him, but it almost led to an ejection of the pitcher the 2nd at bat. ----- Another thought. Does time need to be called for it to be a "defensive conference" ? What if a Shortstop runs up to the pitcher during live play to whisper about a pick play, and it doesn't slow down the game?... I'd imagine "delaying the game" would have to be a pre-requisite to charge a conference.

As a self proclaimed balk expert, I have absolutely nothing here. And I probably call no stop balks more than anyone I've worked with in the past couple years as I've gained confidence. Some of these kids are really good and know exactly what they are doing, and we owe it to the running team to keep the pitcher honest imo. For anyone who says he start/stopped every time his leg goes down, I don't understand how you are coming to that conclusion. He is clearly continuing to move. Remember, everything has to stop, so feet moving, leg moving, arms moving, his body leaning - is movement... the hands/glove have to stop as well, but the glove 'slightly' moving while changing grip is nothing imo. Also, remember that "a change in direction is not considered an acceptable stop" (NFHS 6-1-3), ie it does not constitute a discernable stop. I agree with @MadMax . Not something that will ever be addressed or can reasonably be policed. We have to allow a pitcher to get his footing and gain his balance in coming set. The tradeoff: pitchers using that to bounce around, pushing the limits, annoying fans and umpires, and looking silly. Either to "change their timing" or gain a rhythm, it is what it is. IMO, It's not that big of a deal when 1. you understand it, and 2. (maybe more importantly) are focused / locked in EVERY PITCH. It's VERRRRY easy to miss if you're not lasered in. Then you go, hmm, did he stop, I should have called that... Then you got the 3rd base coach looking over at you giving you a subtle signal that he wants that call. Well let's be honest, more times than not most everyone misses it. At the varsity level its hit and miss on on teams catching it in my experience.

I have used this technique in the past. However I didn't this time After three very quick deliveries to the previous batter (no complaints from batter), I signaled to the pitcher visually (both palms down, and mimed "slow down", then pointing to the box and mimed a batter getting set). He clearly understood what I told him, because the next two pitchers he waited an extra 3 or 4 seconds. Next batter, first chance he gets on the 2nd pitch, he does it again, except this time it is egregiously early.

Thanks for the feedback. I'm relived to hear I wasn't misinterpreting the rule itself. I totally forgot to look for the case play. I'm sure I have read that before. However I may not be out of the woods yet. When I called it the pitcher did not throw the ball. I'll do my best to explain the sequence: 1. Batter 1 foot out of box taking sign. As batter picks up that foot to come back to the box, pitcher starts delivery with rocker step. 2. Batter lands in the box, looking at the plate presumably to ensure his foot positioning. Pitcher now adjusting his pivot foot. 3. Batter looks up (he was very quick to "be ready" in all fairness) as pitcher is lifting lead leg to step home and throw. 4. I simultaneously call time as batter gives the pitcher a wtf look. Pitcher maintains ball in hand as he stepped to the plate, preventing himself from releasing the ball. 5. I award a ball.

So 6-1-1 mentions "the pitcher shall not make a quick-return pitch in attempt to catch the batter off balance." The penalty after 6-1-1 through 6-1-3 says "the ball is dead immediately when an illegal pitch occurs... [ball or balk]" So that means every statement in art. 1-3 = parameters for an illegal pitch? Because 6-2-1 that defines illegal acts doesn't list many of these. Anyways, If a pitcher "quick pitches" I'm well within my rights to call an illegal pitch and award a ball, correct? I had an instance where I was working with the most veteran/respected umpire in my region, who said I made up that penalty. And that all I should have done is call time and tell him to slow down. For context, my preventive measures have avoided this call for 4 years now and this was the first time I ever called an illegal pitch with no runners on. New pitcher in the 6th inning, and I had signaled to the pitcher the batter before to slow down and let the batter get set because he was moving unfairly fast, imo, but nothing egregious. The next batter had 1 foot in 1 foot out and was taking a sign and the instant his foot hit the box the pitcher was half way through his windup. I called it and awarded a ball. A fan in the crowd said he'd never seen the call in 30 years, lol Was I correct in assessing a penalty here? Or had I misinterpreted 6-1-1 penalty all along? When I pressed my colleague about it on the way to the car and mentioned I'm gonna have to look it up cause I swore it was a thing. He said, "well even if it is a rule, you should never call that". Kinda seemed like he was backpedaling his criticism, but maybe there is wisdom to that being a tricky tack call that should never be made, idk, thoughts?

@jimurrayalterego @noumpere @maven Appreciate the insights. This windup thing is not something I want to have to penalize for, so I'll try to be proactive with it before something gets out of hand. I don't suspect too many coaches will be yelling for balks and illegal pitches from the windup, thankfully. Yes, I was only do NFHS at the moment, but I always like to understand the differences. Thanks everyone.

Both you and maven pretty clearly answered the question, but I want to ask again for my own sanity. F1 in windup, R3. Pitcher has ball/hand in glove against his chest. Before/during/after taking the sign, he stretches out both elbows and bring them back in as he sighs/takes a deep breath, and pauses for a couple seconds, then starts delivery ... BALK If he doesn't pause, but delivers directly after stretching arms, then LEGAL? Additionally . Are you calling illegal pitch on this with no runners on, if the batter is ready to go and it doesn't seem to affect anything ? Seems ticky tacky .

100% And just to clear up the last question. From the windup, F1 can move his hands up and down and pause as much as he wants, right? It's either he steps off with the pivot foot to disengage, or steps with the free foot and begins delivery?

Oh, I missed 2-28-2 , i only read chapter 6... even though it does refence that in chapter 6 - doh! But to sum up what you are saying in my own words... The video I explained SHOULD have been a balk. Because once the hands start moving, it is considered the "start of delivery", and therefore no long legal to pick off. A feint/pick off MUST start with an immediate step toward the base with the free foot. On the flip side, the hands can move as slowly up or down as the pitcher wants, as long is it doesn't result in another discernable stop, and culminates with the delivery of a pitch.

TL:DR - I'm confused. I know what a double set it. But can you just slowly move your hands before stepping toward a base to feint/pick or before delivering home? I feel like I'm having a bit of a brain fart here. I few days ago I saw a video of a pitcher coming set, I think it was college, (hands/glove near chin). Then the pitcher slowly moves his hands/glove down his chest to his belly button, then immediately picks off to 1B (no second stop). For some reason I thought this would have been a balk, but no call. Then last night during NFHS game, I had a pitcher (with runners on, from the windup), receive the sign with glove/hands at the chin, then he nonchalantly moves his gloves/hands down to the belt line and pauses for a couple seconds, then starts his delivery. Is this legal? Going back to the stretch question. Do the glove/hands moving up/down after coming set but prior to stepping to a base or delivering a pitch matter? Or is it just considered as part of "starting the delivery" or "stepping to feint/pick off"? Hopefully that makes sense what I'm asking. I get it's two separate questions from the windup/stretch, but similar idea.

I fear the worst. I wish we had some sort of point of contact outside of his forum username. I'll hold out hopes that either someone does or he is still around to say so.

Anyone know the health or wellbeing of Senor Azul? I tried to search the forums and I don't see any mention of his whereabouts. I first started lurking this site in 2017, and his presence and dedication to rules citations were always a highlight of this community. When I think of umpire-empire, his name comes to the forefront of my mind. I've missed his presence and it looks like his last post was may of 2024. According to his profile he's out of the San francisco bay area and was born in '47. Did/does anyone know him personally?

Yes the run scores. The "tag up" appeal at 2B is not a "force out". No runner was forced to advance. It's a time play.

I mean we don't know what we don't know, as far as what they hid about the severity of his gambling. However, some of those conditions had nothing to do with baseball or gambling. MLB commish seemed to just be on a power trip just as much as wanting him to "be a better person". It was a carrot they intentionally made impossible to get and seemed willing to move how far it was dangling in front of his face. That being said, I won't say whether I think he should be reinstated or not (cause I've always had mixed feelings), but I do agree that if MLB was going to clear his name they should have done it before he died... And definitely not a few months after. It's like the most disrespectful slap in the face with this timing... Just pissing on his grave. And to me is further evidence that the carrot they dangled was not in good faith.

Where do I get access to the fed umpire manual

Yep that's the exact play I'm thinking of. Thanks for the reminder. He kills it on type 1, as prescribed by rule. He treats type 2 the same as NFHS, meaning delayed dead ball BUT he kills it at any point a play is made on the previously obstructed runner (if he's still protected to next base) Hopefully I said that right

To anyone following the discussion, I asked a friend of mine who does both NFHS and recently started doing some D1 level. Anyways, he didn't seem to think that it's anything but an immediate dead ball upon tag of R1 coming into 3B. When I continued to argue, he used rule 6-1-3 to justify calling time. Essentially, his point being when he is tagged you are making an award, therefore must call time. I pointed out it says "when time is taken" and illudes to the time "when obstruction occurs", not later on during continuation of play. Seems kind of like a chicken or the egg type of thing. However, it's something. And after all the discussion, I'm leaning toward killing it, even at NFHS level where I ump... Would y'all say I'm outright wrong if I did? It seems like a lot less chance of a big kerfuffle by killing it.

Ya I remember seeing something similar last year in MLB, and the BU wasn't allowed to retroactively get it. It's what made me think of it. Could be conflating two things tho, I don't remember for sure. Either way it's a funny thought.