Odd pitching motion

[Called3rdStrike]

RHP straddling the rubber. ball in hand moves right leg onto rubber and comes set at the same time. Proceeds to pitch from this set position. Legal?

[noumpere]

Try this on for size.

--

Preparatory to coming to a set position, the pitcher shall have one hand on his side;

from this position he shall go to his set position as defined in Rule 8.01( b ) without

interruption and in one continuous motion.

--

Until he engages the rubber, he's an infielder and cannot fulfill the obligation for the pitcher to have one hand on his side.

Pitching regs don't start until he engages. Once engaged, he must stretch, set, and pause before delivery. Excellent point.

+1 to both of these except the pitcher does not need to stretch.

[Rich Ives]

basejester says he's not a pitcher until he engages.

fishman says he has to engage before the pitching regs kick in.

REALLY?

OK then -- then it's not a balk for being astride without the ball because he's not the pitcher yet - right?

And it's not a "don't do that" for taking pitching signs from the catcher while not engaged because he's not the pitcher yet - right?

Oh by the way. A week or so ago I was watching a MLB game and the pitcher came set before the batter prepped, waited until the batter was ready - then pitched. Regularly. No objection or call against it.

[Jocko]

fishman says he has to engage before the pitching regs kick in.

REALLY?

In Fed, really. He cannot imitate F1 while not on rubber.

[basejester]

basejester says he's not a pitcher until he engages.

fishman says he has to engage before the pitching regs kick in.

REALLY?

OK then -- then it's not a balk for being astride without the ball because he's not the pitcher yet - right?

And it's not a "don't do that" for taking pitching signs from the catcher while not engaged because he's not the pitcher yet - right?

Valid points.

[Rich Ives]

fishman says he has to engage before the pitching regs kick in.

REALLY?

In Fed, really. He cannot imitate F1 while not on rubber.

Did you read the comment correctly? You said at first that the pitching regs don't kick in until the pitcher engages,

My comment was So therefore there's no "on or astride without the ball" balk because the pitcher is not engaged?

But there is of course. 6-2-5 in FED . Astride is not engaged. 6-2-5 also includes "positions himself within about five feet of the rubber" which is also not engaged. Yet it too is a balk in FED.

[Jocko]

fishman says he has to engage before the pitching regs kick in.

REALLY?

In Fed, really. He cannot imitate F1 while not on rubber.

Did you read the comment correctly? You said at first that the pitching regs don't kick in until the pitcher engages,

My comment was So therefore there's no "on or astride without the ball" balk because the pitcher is not engaged?

But there is of course. 6-2-5 in FED . Astride is not engaged. 6-2-5 also includes "positions himself within about five feet of the rubber" which is also not engaged. Yet it too is a balk in FED.

yyyaaawwwnnn..... Splitting hairs is boring. You know as well as anyone what I said comes straight outta the book.

[mstaylor]

Nit pick, change subjects or whatever, the fact remains that in the OP the pitcher is using crap mechanics, he is gaining an advantage over both the batter and runner not intended by the rules, and he really isn't following 8.01b. Fix him period.

[Rich Ives]

Nit pick, change subjects or whatever, the fact remains that in the OP the pitcher is using crap mechanics, he is gaining an advantage over both the batter and runner not intended by the rules, and he really isn't following 8.01b. Fix him period.

It looks wrong so it must be?

Don't we usually say that's not a valid reason?

[Jocko]

Nit pick, change subjects or whatever, the fact remains that in the OP the pitcher is using crap mechanics, he is gaining an advantage over both the batter and runner not intended by the rules, and he really isn't following 8.01b. Fix him period.

my point exactly. No penalty. Make him do it right.

[mstaylor]

Nit pick, change subjects or whatever, the fact remains that in the OP the pitcher is using crap mechanics, he is gaining an advantage over both the batter and runner not intended by the rules, and he really isn't following 8.01b. Fix him period.

It looks wrong so it must be?

Don't we usually say that's not a valid reason?

No, I am not saying it looks wrong, I'm saying it is wrong, fix it.

[Jocko]

Watching my son (HSV) bat, R1, R3. RHP sets, then steps back with his L foot in a modified windup :

No call. F1 only did this with runners on.

[Jimurray]

Watching my son (HSV) bat, R1, R3. RHP sets, then steps back with his L foot in a modified windup :

No call. F1 only did this with runners on.

Illegal in FED, legal in OBR, why didn't the runners take off on the start of pitching motion? Possibly the first time it was a surprise but once you figure it won't be balked it's a free base anyway. Unless, of course the umpires you had who didn't know FED rules would have allowed the pitcher to stop his motion and try to throw to a base.

[Jimurray]

Watching my son (HSV) bat, R1, R3. RHP sets, then steps back with his L foot in a modified windup :

No call. F1 only did this with runners on.

Illegal in FED, legal in OBR, why didn't the runners take off on the start of pitching motion? Possibly the first time it was a surprise but once you figure it won't be balked it's a free base anyway. Unless, of course the umpires you had who didn't know FED rules would have allowed the pitcher to stop his motion and try to throw to a base.

I might be wrong. I don't see what is illegal about winding up from the stretch in FED. The only restrictions are that of the POSITION. Once you start your motion to pitch, other than the windup restrictions in FED and OBR regarding where the free foot can step, I can see no restriction on what you do with your foot in the stretch. In fact, Wendelstedt, in the 2010, edition, says that while possibly illegal, let the pitcher windup from the stretch because it actually is a disadvantage to the defense. I thought that OBR did not care about winding up from the stretch for a different reason but in any case it does not disadvantage a ( trained ) runner.

[mstaylor]

In OBR the feet can look very much the same between a set and a wind-up. What is different is what he does with his hands. Once he sets, his ability to wind-up has ceased. Fed does not allow the free foot to be in front of the rubber, not touching. So if his free foot is in front, he has to set.

[Jocko]

It was stupid. Every time he did it we ran like mad. About 7 SBs and several balks that game.