buchholz balk

[BalkHawk]

[Thunderheads]

????????????????????????????????????????????????

[gnhbua93]

I think BalkHawk is turning to BalkBird

[maven]

The pivot foot lands first, so it's a step balk.

 

Not a booger that any umpire should pick at any level.

[iankelleyumpire]

????????????????????????????????????????????????

 

I was thinking the exact same thing. Upon review, I see what Maven is saying. Very close..

[noumpere]

The pivot foot lands first, so it's a step balk.

 

Not a booger that any umpire should pick at any level.

Disagree.  I don't see any requirement that on a jump turn the free foot has to land first.  In fact it almost has to on all of them to make a good strong throw to the base (not that he threw here).

[mstaylor]

I didn't think he cleared the rubber with his non-pivot foot. Terrible camera angle to make a ruling. 

[Mr Umpire]

I didn't think he cleared the rubber with his non-pivot foot. Terrible camera angle to make a ruling. 

This is what I was thinking if I were to have one.  Did he step toward 2B?

[Forest Ump]

R1 and R2. He stepped towards first and then continued on to second.

[noumpere]

If you see a step more toward first than to second, I agree.  I don't see that -- I see the free foot moving more toward second and given the entirety of the move I don't see it as a feint to first.

[blue23ll]

What about the knee flex after he comes set? I also see the free foot pointing toward 1st, not toward 2nd.

[Mr Umpire]

What about the knee flex after he comes set? I also see the free foot pointing toward 1st, not toward 2nd.

The direction of the point doesn't matter.  Only the direction of the step.

[grayhawk]

 

What about the knee flex after he comes set? I also see the free foot pointing toward 1st, not toward 2nd.

The direction of the point doesn't matter.  Only the direction of the step.

 

 

Which makes those reverse pivot "steps" where a RH F1's foot lands towards third, but he turns his ankle so it "points" to second an interesting call to make/not make.

[blue23ll]

 

What about the knee flex after he comes set? I also see the free foot pointing toward 1st, not toward 2nd.

The direction of the point doesn't matter.  Only the direction of the step.

 

Okay, I see him stepping toward first, not second. BUT, I still am leaning toward a start/stop.

[noumpere]

What about the knee flex after he comes set? I also see the free foot pointing toward 1st, not toward 2nd.

He never came set until after the knee flexing stopped.  

 

One of those reasons why its hard to teach balks by watching the pros.

[blue23ll]

It's awfully close, to me. I see a 'set' at the 2 second mark, but that may only be ME...LOL    It is very hard to make calls off video's though.

[acpar72]

Perhaps thats a balk by the book, but I go to the "there was no deception coach" if there is a complaint.

[Mr Umpire]

Perhaps thats a balk by the book, but I go to the "there was no deception coach" if there is a complaint.

Then, you need to remove that from your vocabulary as it should be removed from the book.

[grayhawk]

 

Perhaps thats a balk by the book, but I go to the "there was no deception coach" if there is a complaint.

Then, you need to remove that from your vocabulary as it should be removed from the book.

 

 

Agreed.  "Deception" is a catch-all used by umpires who don't know how to properly explain their balk calls.  Stick with the stated balks and you'll be much better off:

 

"Feint to first"

"Start, stop"

"Didn't gain distance"

"No stop"

 

etc...

[mstaylor]

The deception phrase is a casebook comment that was added to the rulebook in the early seventies, it was intended as a tiebreaker but has morphed into the basis of a balk, which is completely wrong. Dropping a ball while on the rubber has absolutely nothing to do with deception but it sure is a balk. 

[acpar72]

Agreed, however...what did Clay do in the video? Balked. So call it. What do you suppose the umpires saw? Everything as usual. Runner at first slowly moved back to first and runner at second slowly if at all moved back to second.  However, no one called it? And why? No deception. It was a balk period. If you guys call it then good for you. No one saw it save for you. 

[grayhawk]

Agreed, however...what did Clay do in the video? Balked. So call it. What do you suppose the umpires saw? Everything as usual. Runner at first slowly moved back to first and runner at second slowly if at all moved back to second. However, no one called it? And why? No deception. It was a balk period. If you guys call it then good for you. No one saw it save for you.

I wouldn't have called it - his step was okay for me. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free

[mstaylor]

To be honest, I'm not sure what they had. From the video it is hard to tell, but the only thing I had was maybe not clearing the rubber. The concerning thing is you seem hellbent that deception is the basis for a balk, it isn't. 

[acpar72]

If he stepped "directly" towards second, then I stand corrected. Furthermore, if this actual play were NCAA do you think the grad assistant and then the head coach followed by the entire dugout wouldnt be screaming? How bout the second or third time? Eventually you would offer an explanation if not a warning. Maybe Im wrong, but my explanation would be, no deception there.

[Mr Umpire]

If he stepped "directly" towards second, then I stand corrected. Furthermore, if this actual play were NCAA do you think the grad assistant and then the head coach followed by the entire dugout wouldnt be screaming? How bout the second or third time? Eventually you would offer an explanation if not a warning. Maybe Im wrong, but my explanation would be, no deception there.

Then, you shouldn't be doing many NCAA games.  And, my explanation would be how the play is not a balk.  Not falling back on something that shouldn't be in the rule book to begin with.  It is up to the coach to tell me how he thinks it is a balk.  Then, when he can't, there is no balk.