Pitching

[alan2703]

With the modified windup Im using both feet in contact with the pitching plate which make it some what easier to see ( of course if pitching plate where white) and am calling ileagal pitch for not being in contact with said plate.  How are the rest of you seeing it or is just another Jersey thing.

[noumpere]

Both feet do not need to be in contact with the pitching plate to be a legal windup.  The free foot just needs to be on or behind a line EXTENDING through the front of the rubber so the free foot could for example be off the end of the rubber and not touching it.

[Jimurray]

Both feet do not need to be in contact with the pitching plate to be a legal windup.  The free foot just needs to be on or behind a line EXTENDING through the front of the rubber so the free foot could for example be off the end of the rubber and not touching it.

BTW, in Texas we have been sent diagram that shows a pivot foot heel just touching the front of the rubber and a free foot heel tangent to the rubbers front line extension as illegal. This is said to not be ON the line. There has to be some contact with the top of the rubber with the pivot foot and some overlap by the free foot of the extended line.

[noumpere]

I have worked in TX and I'll try to remember that if and when I work there again.

[mstaylor]

You have to call it as told but I disagree that touching is not legal. 

[Rich Ives]

 There has to be some contact with the top of the rubber with the pivot foot . . .

 

Really?

 

How about in set?  A normal set position has the entire pivot foot in front of but touching the rubber.

[Jimurray]

 There has to be some contact with the top of the rubber with the pivot foot . . .

 

Really?

 

How about in set?  A normal set position has the entire pivot foot in front of but touching the rubber.

Really! The set is OK but what I described in the windup is illegal per our association. "Butting up" to a line is not on the line.

[mstaylor]

Call it as your assoc says but they are wrong. As Rich says, it is legal in the set, also the F3 touching the base on the foul side is legal. Two examples where touching is ok, ypur assoc has one. Incorrect interp but when in Rome.......

[Jimurray]

Call it as your assoc says but they are wrong. As Rich says, it is legal in the set, also the F3 touching the base on the foul side is legal. Two examples where touching is ok, ypur assoc has one. Incorrect interp but when in Rome.......

I thought they got this from FED national but this interp is for the whole state. If I'm parsing the rule, the windup pivot foot only has to be in contact as per 6-1-1. The non-pivot foot has to on or behind a line ....as per 6-1-2 but I'm not going to push the issue of a line and tangent to it and what does "on" mean. "When in Texas".

[mstaylor]

Absolutely, call it as instructed, you have to live there. It is ok to disagree in the assoc meeting but once they decide, you are stuck with it. 

[cbiesecker]

In Pennsylvania we were given the same interpretation for the windup position.  Having the heel of the free foot touching the front edge of the rubber is not sufficient.  Some part of the free foot needs to be on top of the rubber or clearly behind an imaginary line running across the front edge of the rubber.

[Rich Ives]

When pitching from windup the pitcher relocates his pivot foot to the front of and touching the rubber (like in set position) during the actual windup.

 

You have interpreters that would appear to be clueless.

[noumpere]

Further the FED rules don't say nothing about the pivot foot in the windup (other than it must be in contact with the rubber).

 

The rules address the pivot foot position in the set, and the free foot in both positions.

 

Now if someone wants to, and apparently they do, address whether tangent to is different from on or behind in the windup, they are becoming  a master plumber.

[JaxRolo]

Legal Positions

[Jimurray]

When pitching from windup the pitcher relocates his pivot foot to the front of and touching the rubber (like in set position) during the actual windup.

 

You have interpreters that would appear to be clueless.

I think it's an overreaction to the confusion over the hybrid position. But once they indicate the windup by this very strict interp, they are now free to relocate as you say. My beef was that on a badly maintained mound with a hole in front of the rubber this interp was impractical. I was told that since they normally reposition anyway that it wouldn't present a problem. Please don't call the interpreters from the states of PA and TX clueless:)

[noumpere]

Legal Positions

 

That's one example and it does show that the free foot doesn't need to be touching the rubber.  It's not the only legal windup position though.

[Rich Ives]

 Please don't call the interpreters from the states of PA and TX clueless:)

 

Please don't call coaches rats.

[mstaylor]

I won't call them clueless but I will call them wrong. There is nothing you can do about it though. 

[Jocko]

NFHS 6-1-2 "For the Wind-up position......The pitcher's non-pivot foot shall be in any position on or behind a line extending through the front edge of the pitcher's plate......."

NFHS 6-1-3 "For the set position......He shall stand with his entire non-pivot foot in front of a line extending through the front edge of the pitcher's plate and with his entire pivot foot in contact with or in front of the pitcher's plate....."

I don't understand the weird interps. It's pretty simple.