Balks

[widac]

Situation:

Runners on 1st and 3rd. Pitcher is set. From set pitcher steps directly towards third foot still on rubber and fakes a throw to third and does NOT turn to throw to 1st. Balk?

I am not sure if I understand you completely. If he just steps towards 3rd and feints, he is fine. Is there something else happening also?

[Robert Roe]

I am not sure if I understand you completely. If he just steps towards 3rd and feints, he is fine. Is there something else happening also?

Nothing else was happening. I was field ump in a two-man HS game and the UIC asked why I didn't call a balk. I told him the move was legal, but he didn't think so. We are both rookies so we don't completely understand the balk rules yet, but I was sure of the no-call so he didn't push it. His understanding, and don't ask me why, was that unless the pitcher stepped behind the rubber he could not feint.

[widac]

Nothing else was happening. I was field ump in a two-man HS game and the UIC asked why I didn't call a balk. I told him the move was legal, but he didn't think so. We are both rookies so we don't completely understand the balk rules yet, but I was sure of the no-call so he didn't push it. His understanding, and don't ask me why, was that unless the pitcher stepped behind the rubber he could not feint.

He CAN feint to 2nd or 3rd

[Bigdog]

If F1 jump turns towards first and doesn't throw it is a balk for an illegal feint, doesn't matter what the runner's doing.

Hey all,

If the pitcher throws to first, the pitcher HAS TO throw to first in an attempt to get the runner out. Meaning if F3 is standing 10 feet behind the runner and F1 does a pickoff move and throws to F3, without the throw going/pulling F3 toward the base, it is a balk. My interp, there has to be an obvious attempt to try to make a play, therefore, if R1 REALLY breaks for second, not just fakes a start, wouldn't this eliminate the requirement for the throw? R1 is ,physically anyway, no longer at/around first base.

Or, am I just confusing the rule?

Bigdog:cool:

Edited March 25, 2009 by Bigdog

[widac]

Hey all,

The pitcher HAS TO throw to first in an attempt to get the runner out. Meaning if F3 is standing 10 feet behind the runner and F1 does a pickoff move and throws to F3, it is a balk. My interp, there has to be an obvious attempt to try to make a play, therefore, if R1 REALLY breaks for second, not just fakes a start, wouldn't this eliminate the requirement for the throw? R1 is ,physically anyway, no longer at/around first base.

Bigdog:cool:

A jump turn is considered engaged. If F1 is engaged he can't feint to 1st

[Bigdog]

A jump turn is considered engaged.

Hey all,

I understand that part, no question.

If F1 is engaged he can't feint to 1st

Even though R1 is on his way to second? Is it still a feint if the runner is no longer there?

Bigdog:cool:

[widac]

Even though R1 is on his way to second? Is it still a feint if the runner is no longer there?

Bigdog:cool:

I think so. If he has stepped towards (jumpturned) towards 1st he has to complete the throw. If he doesn't it's a feint and he can't feint towards 1st. "BALK"

[Bigdog]

Hey all,

I know that is true if the runner is going back to first, but the question I have ,maybe, is reading into the rule a little too much. It is illegal to feint because it is an illegal deception of the runner. If it doesn't deceive the runner, because he took off on the first movement, then is it a violation of the "spirit" of the rule? OR, am I just reading too much into it?

Bigdog:cool:

[widac]

Hey all,

I know that is true if the runner is going back to first, but the question I have ,maybe, is reading into the rule a little too much. It is illegal to feint because it is an illegal deception of the runner. If it doesn't deceive the runner, because he took off on the first movement, then is it a violation of the "spirit" of the rule? OR, am I just reading too much into it?

Bigdog:cool:

I do like to know why the rules are the way they are but whatever the rule is, that is what I enforce. This seems cut and dry to me, no feints to 1st. If we let him feint to 1st when the runner heads to 2nd then the runner is being punished. F1 can then just turn and throw ahead of the runner. by rule F1 has to throw to 1st and F3 would then have to throw to 2nd. I try not to even consider whether or not F1 "decieves the runner" or tries to. Of course he is trying to decieve the runner. if he can do so and stay within the rules good for him. If he balks, he balks, I just enforce the rules.

[mstaylor]

Even if the runner breaks, it is definitely a balk. Some guys have argued for years that it is a balk if you throw to second, when the runner breaks, because it is an unoccupied base. Now we have the unique position that it might not be a balk because he has vacated first.

A serious answer is you are reading too much into it and it would be a balk.

[Bigdog]

Hey all,

'Nuff said, then.

Bigdog:cool:

[Lhaber9]

Hey all,

It is illegal to feint because it is an illegal deception of the runner. If it doesn't deceive the runner, because he took off on the first movement, then is it a violation of the "spirit" of the rule?

Bigdog:cool:

It seems to me that you just described the purpose of the rule. You said that it doesnt decieve him if he takes off on first movement. If this rule was not in place you could spin to first and trick the runner if hes going on first movement.

[alex7]

While engaged, you have to either pitch or make a pickoff throw to a base that the runner is either on, or, to answer a previous comment, to a base that the runner is going to ("making a play on a runner" is covered in the rulebook).

Edited February 9, 2010 by alex7

[BT_Blue]

Agreed. And dont ever tell someone that "just because the runner took off" that the base is not "unoccupied". That is completely wrong. Just look at the example of when a runner takes off, gets in a rundown, and ends up back at the base he started from with a following runner standing at the same base.

When both players get tagged you call the trailing runner out because THE FIRST RUNNER STILL HAS POSSESSION OF THAT BAG UNTIL HE TOUCHES THE FOLLOWING BASE.

So, Alex, your reasoning is flawed though correct to a certain point.

[semper_fi_72]

Agreed. And dont ever tell someone that "just because the runner took off" that the base is not "unoccupied". That is completely wrong. Just look at the example of when a runner takes off, gets in a rundown, and ends up back at the base he started from with a following runner standing at the same base.

When both players get tagged you call the trailing runner out because THE FIRST RUNNER STILL HAS POSSESSION OF THAT BAG UNTIL HE TOUCHES THE FOLLOWING BASE.

So, Alex, your reasoning is flawed though correct to a certain point.

Bt_Blue

Not Always

The following runner is not always called out if the the preceding runner is forced by the trailing runner he can not return to previous base. He would be the one called out and the following runner would be safe.

[BT_Blue]

Bt_Blue

Not Always

The following runner is not always called out if the the preceding runner is forced by the trailing runner he can not return to previous base. He would be the one called out and the following runner would be safe.

A point well made and one that I forgot. I just went with the assumption that the runners were not being forced. Of course, I could have been wrong.... right?

[semper_fi_72]

A point well made and one that I forgot. I just went with the assumption that the runners were not being forced. Of course, I could have been wrong.... right?

Always be careful of that word.

Ass U Me :Horse:

[BT_Blue]

Always be careful of that word.

Ass U Me

Yeh yeh, I know I know.:HS

[alex7]

edited original post. Thanks for the clarifications on my attempt to clarify something =)