Jump to content

Balk

Thunderheads

By Thunderheads
in Professional

 Share
Umpire-Empire locks topics which have not been active in the last year. The thread you are viewing hasn't been active in 4219 days so you will not be able to post. We do recommend you starting a new topic to find out what's new in the world of umpiring.

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 25
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

maven
maven

Easy balk call. He did not step backward per 8.01(e), but clearly to the side. Since that step was not a legal disengagement, then, it's a balk for violating 8.05(c ).   I would call this 100% of th

blue23ll
blue23ll

And if you have to "slow it down" to make it look legal, it's a balk in real time!! I had one of my only bruhaha's this season calling this same move a balk. 

Replacematt
Replacematt

It actually looks worse, like a fake jump turn, in real time. Only when you slow it down do you see how close it is to being legal. 

maven

maven

Posted
Posted

Easy balk call. He did not step backward per 8.01(e), but clearly to the side. Since that step was not a legal disengagement, then, it's a balk for violating 8.05(c ).

 

I would call this 100% of the time at any level with balks. Major, major advantage to F1 if you don't.

  • Like 2
Jimurray

Jimurray

Posted
Posted

Ned Yost did not "dispute" the call. He would have been ejected. He was allowed to come out and get an explanation of this balk which is allowed unless a step balk was called.

JaxRolo

JaxRolo

Posted
Posted
Might be a knee pop in there also. I'm not strong on recognizing knee pops. Anyone else have one?
that was my first thought when I saw it.
zm1283

zm1283

Posted
Posted

He stepped off the back of the rubber, not to the side. The only thing I can figure is they thought he started his feint to first before he disengaged. Pitchers at all levels do this all the time and it's never called. I was watching this live and thought it was a weak balk call. I thought it was a quick disengage that looked worse from the home plate view than it really was. 

Replacematt

Replacematt

Posted
Posted

He stepped off the back of the rubber, not to the side. The only thing I can figure is they thought he started his feint to first before he disengaged. Pitchers at all levels do this all the time and it's never called. I was watching this live and thought it was a weak balk call. 

 

Not true. The only leeway given is if the front foot moves before the back foot lands. This is a no-SH*# call.

zm1283

zm1283

Posted
Posted

 

He stepped off the back of the rubber, not to the side. The only thing I can figure is they thought he started his feint to first before he disengaged. Pitchers at all levels do this all the time and it's never called. I was watching this live and thought it was a weak balk call. 

 

Not true. The only leeway given is if the front foot moves before the back foot lands. This is a no-SH*# call.

 

 

If you pause the video right when his pivot foot hits the ground on the back side of the rubber, his left (free) foot has barely moved and his heel looks like it is still on the ground. 

Replacematt

Replacematt

Posted
Posted

 

 

He stepped off the back of the rubber, not to the side. The only thing I can figure is they thought he started his feint to first before he disengaged. Pitchers at all levels do this all the time and it's never called. I was watching this live and thought it was a weak balk call. 

 

Not true. The only leeway given is if the front foot moves before the back foot lands. This is a no-SH*# call.

 

 

If you pause the video right when his pivot foot hits the ground on the back side of the rubber, his left (free) foot has barely moved and his heel looks like it is still on the ground. 

 

Doesn't matter, since the disengagement wasn't legal.

zm1283

zm1283

Posted
Posted

 

 

 

He stepped off the back of the rubber, not to the side. The only thing I can figure is they thought he started his feint to first before he disengaged. Pitchers at all levels do this all the time and it's never called. I was watching this live and thought it was a weak balk call. 

 

Not true. The only leeway given is if the front foot moves before the back foot lands. This is a no-SH*# call.

 

 

If you pause the video right when his pivot foot hits the ground on the back side of the rubber, his left (free) foot has barely moved and his heel looks like it is still on the ground. 

 

Doesn't matter, since the disengagement wasn't legal.

 

 

Why not?

Replacematt

Replacematt

Posted
Posted

 

 

 

 

He stepped off the back of the rubber, not to the side. The only thing I can figure is they thought he started his feint to first before he disengaged. Pitchers at all levels do this all the time and it's never called. I was watching this live and thought it was a weak balk call. 

 

Not true. The only leeway given is if the front foot moves before the back foot lands. This is a no-SH*# call.

 

 

If you pause the video right when his pivot foot hits the ground on the back side of the rubber, his left (free) foot has barely moved and his heel looks like it is still on the ground. 

 

Doesn't matter, since the disengagement wasn't legal.

 

 

Why not?

 

 

It was more to the side, not the back.

Thunderheads

Thunderheads

Posted
  • Author
Posted

 

 

 

 

 

He stepped off the back of the rubber, not to the side. The only thing I can figure is they thought he started his feint to first before he disengaged. Pitchers at all levels do this all the time and it's never called. I was watching this live and thought it was a weak balk call. 

 

Not true. The only leeway given is if the front foot moves before the back foot lands. This is a no-SH*# call.

 

 

If you pause the video right when his pivot foot hits the ground on the back side of the rubber, his left (free) foot has barely moved and his heel looks like it is still on the ground. 

 

Doesn't matter, since the disengagement wasn't legal.

 

 

Why not?

 

 

It was more to the side, not the back.

 

And you think they saw that little (tiny) bit of direction change in real time?

Replacematt

Replacematt

Posted
Posted

 

 

 

 

 

 

He stepped off the back of the rubber, not to the side. The only thing I can figure is they thought he started his feint to first before he disengaged. Pitchers at all levels do this all the time and it's never called. I was watching this live and thought it was a weak balk call. 

 

Not true. The only leeway given is if the front foot moves before the back foot lands. This is a no-SH*# call.

 

 

If you pause the video right when his pivot foot hits the ground on the back side of the rubber, his left (free) foot has barely moved and his heel looks like it is still on the ground. 

 

Doesn't matter, since the disengagement wasn't legal.

 

 

Why not?

 

 

It was more to the side, not the back.

 

And you think they saw that little (tiny) bit of direction change in real time?

 

 

It actually looks worse, like a fake jump turn, in real time. Only when you slow it down do you see how close it is to being legal. 

  • Like 1
Thunderheads

Thunderheads

Posted
  • Author
Posted

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

He stepped off the back of the rubber, not to the side. The only thing I can figure is they thought he started his feint to first before he disengaged. Pitchers at all levels do this all the time and it's never called. I was watching this live and thought it was a weak balk call. 

 

Not true. The only leeway given is if the front foot moves before the back foot lands. This is a no-SH*# call.

 

 

If you pause the video right when his pivot foot hits the ground on the back side of the rubber, his left (free) foot has barely moved and his heel looks like it is still on the ground. 

 

Doesn't matter, since the disengagement wasn't legal.

 

 

Why not?

 

 

It was more to the side, not the back.

 

And you think they saw that little (tiny) bit of direction change in real time?

 

 

It actually looks worse, like a fake jump turn, in real time. Only when you slow it down do you see how close it is to being legal. 

 

this is actually a good explanation of this .......

ricka56

ricka56

Posted
Posted

Problem with the views given is that you don't see how far backwards the step was. With the CF camera you can't see any movement in the backwards direction. If you had a look from 3B you probably wouldn't be able to see any movement towards 3B either.  So how far to the right did he step? Look at the before/after move pics.

 

 

It looks like the movement to the rght was about 4 inches. The width of the rubber is 6 inches. If his step was behind the rubber (can't tell) and 4 inches to the right, which direction was the step more towards ?

 

There isn't enough video angles to tell one way or the other.

 

 

blue23ll

blue23ll

Posted
Posted

And if you have to "slow it down" to make it look legal, it's a balk in real time!! I had one of my only bruhaha's this season calling this same move a balk. 

  • Like 2
StrikeDavis

StrikeDavis

Posted
Posted

And if you have to "slow it down" to make it look legal, it's a balk in real time!! I had one of my only bruhaha's this season calling this same move a balk. 

 

Exactly.  While I appreciate all the freeze frames and slow motion breakdowns, I do not get that luxury in my games.  In real time I have this as a balk.  

mrumpiresir

mrumpiresir

Posted
Posted

I have always looked for a distinct move when he legally steps back off the rubber.  If I don't see the "distinct move", and in the video it looks more like a spin move from the rubber, he had better throw to first or I'm balking him.

zm1283

zm1283

Posted
Posted

And if you have to "slow it down" to make it look legal, it's a balk in real time!! I had one of my only bruhaha's this season calling this same move a balk. 

 

Or if you have to slow it down to justify that it was a balk, you were probably better off just leaving it alone to begin with.

 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...