MSB256

Appreciate the feedback and dialogue here. I love this game, still play over 40, and coach. I geek out a little about knowing the rules and I appreciate forums like this to help educate. Thanks blue!

Thanks for the feedback. I think the gray is the frustrating part. But I agree it’s an administrative issue and the best thing I can probably do as others have eluded to is focus on my pitchers learning, my base runners advancing, regardless of what their pitcher does or doesn’t do. I appreciate the dialogue and the advice.

Heard and fair points. I appreciate that. Thank you.

I appreciate the thoughtful comment! The parks in our league voted on “real baseball” vs little league (no leading off). One camp’s opinion is they have to learn, they might as well learn now and holding the runner is part of pitching. That camp won the vote. It’s not how I grew up playing and I could make the case to let them learn to pitch without having to worry about the runner but again, it was voted on and the lead off camp won the vote. I think one can also make the case it also puts more on the umpires, who as you eluded to aren’t ncaa umpires, to have to call real baseball rules for kids who are learning this part of the game. My ultimate point I suppose is I think calling a balk on a pitcher who was straddling the rubber was a reach to prove a point. I’m not convinced he could see whether or not his cleat was touching the back of the rubber from behind the plate, but if it was, what rule reference would cover that? Perhaps touching the back of the rubber is no different than standing on it might be the answer?

It’s sometimes hard to convey the point through written words, similar to a text message or email where you can’t hear someone’s tone or inflection. I never said I wanted the balks called. But I did want fairness for my kids and I’m not sure how to get that when the rules are being made grey. Totally fine with refraint as you’ve mostly picked me apart instead of addressing the question, but thanks for the third base pick confirmation.

I think we can shoot for a balance between lenient and fair. If they’ve got 10 balks to our two and we lose, is that fair to my kids? And if it’s all for developmental purposes, let’s stop the game and explain why what they’re doing isn’t legal. Any comment on if the rule book addresses a pitcher straddling the rubber and touching the back of the rubber with his back foot?

I get your point but if that’s case why are we leading off, stealing, etc?

We play USSSA then OBR. In the fall, the umps are being lenient regarding balks. I understand this because it’s 10U and kids are learning how to pitch while also learning to deal with base runners leading off, etc. But in a game where we’re down runs, I feel like there has to be a point where we get awarded the base. Well, it came up that they are repeatedly balking and the umpire said we’d be here all night (meaning if we call every ball). I made a comment that we were not balking as much as them. So he basically goes the ok, you want it you got it route. My pitchers are taught to straddle the rubber, then engage. Well, while straddling the rubber, pitcher touches ball to glove then separates. Ump calls balk. I objected that he’s not on the rubber. He says you wanted it. Later my assistant asks about it and ump said pitcher was touching the back of the rubber. I have never in my life seen that called. And I don’t believe he could see that from behind plate. If he could, is this covered in the rule book? He also insinuated a pitcher could simply throw to third which I know to be incorrect. Pitcher has to step off or step toward third in order to pick off to third. He can’t simply stand flat footed in the stretch and throw over there with a similar motion as he would if he had stepped off. Appreciate any input.

To clarify here, he can award home but he can also determine that in his judgement R2 wasn’t going to be safe at home even had there been no OBS, and call him out at home, correct?

Ah. Thank you for that correction. @noumpere I’m not sure if the scenario I presented is uniquely interesting or if I’m over complicating. On one hand, I think he should have been awarded second base because without the OBS, he makes it there safely. The OBS is what put him in the predicament to think I’m about to be out, let me turn around and go back. Does the retreat factor into your judgement?

@maven Would be grateful for your input. Wondering if this specific scenario was called correctly. Also interested in any scenario in which obstruction would be “voided.” I know once runner obtains the base he was obstructed from, if he keeps going he’s on his own. Not quite sure about the judgement of would he have made it to the base without the OBS.

I understand giving grace. I just want to understand the ruling and know whether or not the runner’s retreat voids the obstruction.

In 8U coach pitch, we follow MLB/OBR. Tonight, a batter hits a ground ball through the infield which ends up in right center. As is common at this age, he rounds first base en route to second and is significantly (contact made) obstructed by the first baseman. Umpire holds his arm out with a fist signaling that he has obstruction. Batter runner gets almost to second base, but feels like he’s about to be thrown out by a solid throw, turns around and retreats toward first base. The defender who caught the throw runs him down and tags him out. Umpire says he had obstruction, but when batter runner turned around and retreated toward first, obstruction is off and he is tagged out. Was this correct? I would have obstruction and awarded the batter runner second base. I can’t find a reference that obstruction is negated by the runner retreating back to the base he last touched after obstruction.