Fake to 3rd question

[mikecw_1968]

I did a search for this specific play but I couldn't find one.

 

Runner on 2nd.  If that runner takes off for 3rd, the pitcher can throw to an unoccupied base for the purpose of making a play.  However, if R2 breaks for 3rd...the pitcher, while on the rubber, steps to 3rd to make a play...R2 stops and goes back to 2nd...the pitcher doesn't throw to 3rd because R2 went back.

 

Is this considered a fake throw to 3rd and hence a balk?  My gut and common sense tells me that it is not a balk because R2 caused the pitcher to not throw to 3rd by going back to 2nd.

[mstaylor]

 

 

 I look forward to an MLB umpire balking F1 on a hung-up R2 and see what shakes out.

Ok, message sent. I gave the play, explained the two views without indicating which side I was on. We will see what happens. 

[ricka56]

I'll bet there is a better example out there somewhere. I know that this clip is from 2012 and F1 probably stepped a bit more towards 2B than 3B, But if R2 was a bit further down the line, F1's footing was slightly different and his first step was a bit more towards 3B than 2B, do you think that anyone would have even thought to balk that ammended play in 2013?

 

http://wapc.mlb.com/play/?content_id=23052829&query=leaning

 

Keep it real

[ricka56]

 

 

 

 I look forward to an MLB umpire balking F1 on a hung-up R2 and see what shakes out.

Ok, message sent. I gave the play, explained the two views without indicating which side I was on. We will see what happens. 

 

No offense, but I doubt anyone with a bias could reasonably explain two views without unconsciously  their bias showing (and spreading the bias) and/or unconsciously short shrifting the other. Why not show that video, amend the scenerio to F1 stepping slightly more towards 3B and see what they say. Keep it real

[mstaylor]

I gave it to him as it was argued here. 

[mstaylor]

From HW's manual:

P154, pg 209, Reference Plays: R1(stealing), R2(stealing), two outs, 3-2 count. After coming stopped in the Set Position, and anticipating the runners on the move, he steps directly towards third base to make a play on R2. However, when R2 holds up about 3/4 the way to third, he stops, chases towards R2, and gets him in a rundown. Ruling: That is a balk.

[th3]

well that was with a 3-2 count! lets talk apples to apples here....

[mstaylor]

What does the count have to do with it?

[mikecw_1968]

Seeing R2 break for 3rd is not anticipating he's going to 3rd, he is going to 3rd....until he stops.

[th3]

i was kidding - that was as about as spot on a reference as we've had

[mstaylor]

Sorry about that, my sarcasm button was broken.

[th3]

is HW's manual something that is available to public?

[ricka56]

Yes, it is a balk even last year it was a balk. It is a 8.05(d) violation balk. There was no play at the unoccupied 3B before F1 steps towards 3B.

[Texas Manny]

is HW's manual something that is available to public?

Yes, go to Wendelstedt's Umpire School website, publications link, and you can order it.

 

Manny

[BalkHawk]

Any time he steps to third, he must throw there.

With 3B unoccupied, he can only throw there legally when he is making a play. If the runner stops and goes back to 2B, the umpire has to judge if F1 was making a play or if he was deked into throwing to an unoccupied base.

[mstaylor]

Yes, it is a balk even last year it was a balk. It is a 8.05(d) violation balk. There was no play at the unoccupied 3B before F1 steps towards 3B.

What? You all were saying on a legit break you could feint to third. I show you the interp that says no and I'm still wrong? Please explain. In the interp he went 3/4 of the way, that is an attempt. What am I missing?

[mstaylor]

Any time he steps to third, he must throw there.

With 3B unoccupied, he can only throw there legally when he is making a play. If the runner stops and goes back to 2B, the umpire has to judge if F1 was making a play or if he was deked into throwing to an unoccupied base.

Everyone agrees there. What was being argued was that in the same play he could feint, I said no. I showed an interp that says no. 

[BalkHawk]

.

[ricka56]

 

 

Yes, it is a balk even last year it was a balk. It is a 8.05(d) violation balk. There was no play at the unoccupied 3B before F1 steps towards 3B.

What? You all were saying on a legit break you could feint to third. I show you the interp that says no and I'm still wrong? Please explain. In the interp he went 3/4 of the way, that is an attempt. What am I missing?

 

No, that is not what I have been saying. My vision of OP is that R2 is on the move prior to F1 committing (broke too soon...got himself hung-up, like in that video) and F1 is making a play on him. The HW play I envision, R2 holding until F1 commits. If F1 commits to 3B (steps directly towards third base)  while R2 is holding then, he did so before there was anybody to make a play on. HW says it was a balk. I agree, but for a different reason that you do.

 

I'm more interested in the "steps directly towards third base" part. If the HW reference is to be interpreted that (b) is the reason for this balk, do we have another mystical 45 degree line that we have to judge. The HW reference is very cut and dry, he steps directly to a base. I don't think 8.05(b) is going to even occur to umpires when there isn't a clear step directly towards 3B.   

[mstaylor]

HTH does the runner get 3/4 of the way to third if he didn't break? HW simply says the pitcher anticipates him doing it. Either way it's a balk. The caseplay is spot on.

[mstaylor]

 

 

I'm more interested in the "steps directly towards third base" part. Do we have another mystical 45 degree line that we have to judge. The HW reference is very cut and dry, he steps directly to a base. I don't think 8.05(b) is going to even occur to umpires when there isn't a clear stepdirectly towards 3B.   

Yes, you get the same 45 for the step but you have to throw to the bag. Think the same question at first. 

[Richvee]

@ricka56 it's time to concede. You're getting ridiculous now with the attempts to twist interps and basically ignore the fact that everybody has told you now that a feint to 3rd is a balk regardless of baserunner and his actions, PERIOD. Time to lock this thread. 

[mstaylor]

2013 MLB Umpire Manual pg. 67 says: 8.05(D-H)Under the changes made to the OBR for 2013, the pitcher while in contact with the rubber, may no longer fake a throw to third base (in addition to not being allowed to fake to first). this rule change outlaws the so-called "Third to First Move"

[ricka56]

HTH does the runner get 3/4 of the way to third if he didn't break? HW simply says the pitcher anticipates him doing it. Either way it's a balk. The caseplay is spot on.

If he did break and is 3/4 of the way, WTH doesn't F1 throw the ball? ...that's only 2-3 strides away...he ain't gonna run him down. The case play is ambiguous in its description of what rule makes it a balk. I think that if we knew whether R2 broke before F1 committed would clear it up.  

 

 

 

 

I'm more interested in the "steps directly towards third base" part. Do we have another mystical 45 degree line that we have to judge. The HW reference is very cut and dry, he steps directly to a base. I don't think 8.05(b) is going to even occur to umpires when there isn't a clear stepdirectly towards 3B.   

Yes, you get the same 45 for the step but you have to throw to the bag. Think the same question at first. 

 

I can't wait to see it called.

[mstaylor]

What you fail to realize is it makes no difference which came first,the egg or the chicken, or break or feint. If you feint to third for any reason it is a balk. 

[Texas Manny]

In addition to the HW Manual, and the MLB Umpire Casebook, the 2013 PBUC Manual, pg 92, 8.5 Balk Regulations, Article G says:

 

The pitcher, while in contact with the rubber, may not fake a throw to third base (in addition to not being allowed to fake a throw to first base.)