Vikki

14U Babe Ruth (OBR). Visiting pitcher (RH) was working from the set with NO runners on base. He started in a normal stretch, then drew his free foot back with his shoulder quite open and came to a full and complete stop. From there he lifted his free foot and came set again with his shoulder now in a traditional closed position. Then he delivered to the plate. I’d never seen this before. I called his coach over and told him that even though there aren’t runners on base, he is still violating the rules of the set position. Once he sets, he has to deliver or step off. (And he doesn’t have to set at all…he just can’t do it twice.) The pitcher made an adjustment so that he only rocked off his free foot on the first movement, staying in one continuous motion, and then came fully set. Coach asked me if it’s an automatic ball if he did it again. I told him no, it’s not an illegal pitch, I’m just going to kill it and it will be a no pitch. But there were no issues the rest of the game. Did I get that right? This was a fall ball tournament so I was surprised that he may have been doing that the entire year and not been called on it.

Thank you very much! That all makes sense. I will keep an eye on their hands.

Cal Ripken (OBR), 11-12 year olds. I have seen this move from several different pitchers and I don't know if I should balk it or not (so far, have not). R2, RHP in the set position. After coming set, the RHP picks up his pivot foot as if disengaging, but actually steps toward second. He leaves his free foot planted. At the same time, he twists his body around backwards as he's awkwardly stepping to second with his right foot and attempts a pick off with a horrible, limp throw. I would add that I: 1) hate seeing this move 2) know that it's the result of poor coaching 3) have seen a 0% effective rate So far I've treated this as a disengagement and then a throw and thus allowed it, but I would like to hear from the forum. I now suspect it's actually a balk, so if so, I would appreciate the rule book language or umpire manual that I should cite that makes it a balk. Thank you!

Thank you. Yes. That's the rule I should have applied. In the Babe Ruth book it's 4.09b. And I agree with the implied logic of "refusal" - to me that sounds like the umpire can make a reasonable attempt to get him to go to first before calling him out. In this case he certainly wasn't refusing, he made it halfway and didn't think he needed to complete the touch. So knowing this, if I had it to do over again, as he turned away from the base path, I'd just tell him hey, you gotta touch first. It feels somewhat uncomfortable because I'm telling a player what to do to comply with a rule, but from your explanation it sounds like it's acceptable in this situation. Now I'm glad they ended up winning anyway and it didn't determine the outcome.

11-12 yr old Cal Ripken/Babe Ruth (OBR) semifinal. Bottom 6th (last inning), home team has come back to tie the game 8-8. With bases loaded and two outs, batter is hit by pitch. R3 comes across the plate. But the BR gets only halfway to first before turning around and heading to celebrate with his teammates outside of the third base dugout. Most of the visiting team has come off the field into foul territory and are lining up to shake hands when I start to hear them figure out that he never touched first. Hearing this, I quickly checked to see who was left on the field. The shortstop and two outfielders were still in fair territory. The BR was at this point in foul territory on third base line, lining up to shake hands. The SS takes the ball and throws to first. I upheld the appeal, BR out, no runs score. We go to extra innings, where the home team eventually wins (again) 10-9 on a steal of home. No arguments from the offensive head coach, who was actually coaching first and blamed himself immediately for what happened. This coach told me in between the inning that he had realized the error, but seeing his BR had started to run across the field towards the third base dugout, he thought he was already out for running out of the baseline and/or abandoning his effort to touch the next base, so he gave up trying to call him back. His statement to me brought up some questions: Babe Ruth 7.08 (a) 2 states “Any runner is out when -- after touching first base, he leaves the baseline, obviously abandoning his effort to touch the next base.” I’m asking for confirmation that this rule does NOT apply here because he must touch first base first. Correct? If he cannot be ruled automatically out (without appeal) for abandoning effort, then it must be appealed to get the out. My question is, how much leeway does the BR have to realize what he’s done and correct his mistake? Or asked another way, at what point would you start considering the appeal from the defense? I was imagining a scenario where the kid makes it past the pitcher’s mound, then realizes it, and turns to run to first. Would I allow that? What if the defense is already appealing? But what if he’s crossed third base line into foul territory? Or the dugout? Can he still turn around and run to touch first? Where is the line drawn so that the defense can begin the appeal?

If you had any suspicion at all that this was planned, I think you have a decent case for offensive interference, as it is an act that "confuses any fielder attempting to make a play." Batter is out. But even if you didn't know, I think you're also well within your rights, if you see this happening, to kill it and reset with R3 and 2 strikes on the batter. Especially at 10U. Bush league coaches can deal with it.

Thanks, everyone. Very helpful. I guess it's just a good reminder that just because it looks funky, it doesn't necessarily make it illegal.

OBR (Babe Ruth), I was solo umpire at HP. R1, 0 out. With the runner on first, F1 engages the rubber as if he's in the windup (intentionally, he didn't forget the runner). With both toes pointed at the plate, hands together, he stands very still as if coming set, then proceeds to step ONLY with his free foot forward and deliver the pitch. It looked VERY odd, like something out of old-timey baseball. I issued a balk warning (this was a scrimmage) and he switched to the set position until the next inning (see below). No argument from DHC. But now that I've thought about it, I'm not sure that it's illegal, because Babe Ruth 8.01 (a) book says, "he MAY take one step backward, and one step forward with his free foot." Thoughts? Same pitcher in the following inning, same situation R1, 0 Out. Again he engages the rubber in the windup. This time, though, with toes pointing forward toward home, he makes a quick jab step move and picks the runner off first. I let the play stand because I could not find anything illegal - he used essentially the same move one would use from the set, except he was rotated 90 degrees closer because he was facing home. His pivot foot came slightly away from the rubber and he gained distance and direction to first in one continuous motion. I'd appreciate feedback on both of these rulings.