Balk explanation?

[soapbox]

The real shame is that after reading all the responses (very much appreciated), speaking with a Trustee for the NFHS in our area, and then speaking with the Rules Interpreter for our area, I am no clearer on calling it or not. If not for one bad guy coach, nobody would look for this. But he made such a spectacle of himself in a summer game, looking for a technical call, that I want to consistently do the right thing. To me, unless he settles into his pre-set, taking signs, and then does it, it seems like nothing to me. Just settling in, and I hate to balk it. I'm grabbing that Jim Evans video and watching again. Of course, would this apply to H.S?

[RichMSN]

The real shame is that after reading all the responses (very much appreciated), speaking with a Trustee for the NFHS in our area, and then speaking with the Rules Interpreter for our area, I am no clearer on calling it or not. If not for one bad guy coach, nobody would look for this. But he made such a spectacle of himself in a summer game, looking for a technical call, that I want to consistently do the right thing. To me, unless he settles into his pre-set, taking signs, and then does it, it seems like nothing to me. Just settling in, and I hate to balk it. I'm grabbing that Jim Evans video and watching again. Of course, would this apply to H.S?

It would not. His only covers professional rules and in professional rules this is *definitely* not a balk.

It's a technical balk, yes, but it's not one that would be called in my area as I said before.

[mstaylor]

Simply remember this, stepping on and settling, nothing;after he has settled, balk. Your bad boy coach be damned.

[Mudder]

Also, the balk rules only prevent the pitcher from illegaly deceiving the runner, and the pitcher's "intent to deceive" rarely enters into the decision to call a balk.

UmpJM, please elaborate on this comment?

[wek29]

I've had a ton of young pitchers lately not coming to a stop...so much that I've started doubting myself. Funny thing is, only one rat has noticed it. I could almost never call it, but I know the kids are going to get nailed on it later if they don't learn it now. Although one kid I've had several games with does it every game. :shakehead:

[UmpJM]

Also, the balk rules only prevent the pitcher from illegaly deceiving the runner, and the pitcher's "intent to deceive" rarely enters into the decision to call a balk.

UmpJM, please elaborate on this comment?

Mudder,

Well I can certainly try.

First, there is no rule that prohibits a pitcher from trying to deceive a runner in order to pick him off or constrain his lead-off or "jump" - they do it all the time, and if they didn't, every R1 would become an R3 (see your average 12U game).

A LHP might check an R1 and then look towards the plate, trying to deceive the runner into thinking he's going to deliver the pitch, as he initiates a pick-off move to 1B.

Or, he might begin lifting his leg to balance while facing the plate, then abruptly glance at the R1 - trying to deceive the runner into thinking he's going to throw a pick-off - and then continue on with his delivery of the pitch.

With an R2, a pitcher might exaggerate his hip rotation and look directly back at the R2 in the middle of his delivery - trying to deceive the runner into thinking he's going to make a move to 2B, and then continue and deliver the pitch.

With an R1, a RHP might very deliberately look in to get his signs, then very deliberately begin to bring his hands together in front of his body and then make a quick jab step move to 1B, hoping to deceive the runner into extending his lead as he came set in hopes of catching the runner leaning the wrong way.

There are all kinds of legal ways for a pitcher to legally try to deceive a runner, and that's just a handful of examples.

Conversely, a pitcher might completely accidentally drop the ball after he's engaged the rubber without an inkling of deceitful intent, but, it's still a balk.

A pitcher might be intending to make a "good faith" pick-off attempt to 1B only to discover, to his genuine surprise, as he turns to throw that his F3 is playing well of the bag and in no position to make a play as he throws the ball to him. No intent to deceive, but a balk nonetheless.

Or, having come set, as the F1 initiates his delivery his helpful coach yells some crucial last minute instruction to him that causes him to arrest his delivery. Again, a clear balk without any intent to deceive.

Again, countless ways to balk without intent to deceive and where such intent is simply not relevant to the call.

To me, the two balks in which the judgement of "intent to deceive" DOES come into play in most cases are:

1. The pitcher on or astride the rubber without possession of the ball.

2. Simulating a pitching motion while not in contact with the rubber.

For example, a pitcher has just delivered a pitch to the batter, was frustrated with the quality of the pitch, "walks it off" and happens to stop with his feet astride the rubber as he waits to receive the return toss from the catcher. You going to balk that? Me neither. It's only of he's on or astride the rubber without the ball for the purpose of deceiving the runner that he has committed a violation.

Or, a pitcher has been struggling with his control so he steps off the back of the mound and goes through a portion of his pitching motion to remind himself of his proper mechanics. You going to balk that? Me neither. It's only if he simulates the motion in order to trick the runner into believing he's engaged when he's not that he has committed a violation.

Make sense?

JM

[Jimurray]

"It's only of he's on or astride the rubber without the ball for the purpose of deceiving the runner that he has committed a violation."

FED requires even more judgement of intent because the pitcher can come close to violating 6-2-5 bolded part after the ball has been put in play:

"ART. 5 . . . It is also a balk if a runner or runners are on base and the pitcher, while he is not touching the pitcher's plate, makes any movement naturally ­associated with his pitch, or he places his feet on or astride the pitcher's plate, or positions himself within approximately five feet of the pitcher's plate without ­having the ball."

[UmpJM]

Jim,

I actually had occasion to ask Kyle McNeely about the part of the rule you bolded when I attended the Bruce Doane clinic a few years back.

He told me that their intent was to mimic the NCAA rule which prohibits the pitcher from stepping on the mound without the ball. But, due to th variability of HS diamonds across the country, some with "skin" infields some with no visibly raised "mound at all, they came up with the "...within approximately five feet..." language as the best they could to convey the intent of the pitcher not being allowed on the mound while recognizing the reality that many HS fields do not have a clearly demarked "mound"..

JM

[Jimurray]

I had a MSBBL game where they liked to try the hidden ball trick. I was using on or astride and the told me it was "on the mound". I didn't ask them if they wanted me to balk the pitcher w/runners after every pitch since he would be violating their rule.

[mstaylor]

The deception comment in the OBR is an instruction to the umpires that was incorporated into the rulebook in the seventies. The Sporting News rulebooks italicized the comments. The comment is to used as a tie breaker, not a basis. Another example of legal deception, for the old guys, was Luis Tiant. He used to turn almost completely toward second on his pitching motion home. Nothing in the rules says you can only bring your nonpivot foot a little by the rubber or a lot.