Pitcher Takes Sign Off Rubber

[Umpete]

FED 6-1-1 says, "....(The pitcher) shall take his sign from the catcher with his pivot foot in contact with the pitcher's plate," but does not indicate a penalty (that I can find). I also could not find a case play involving the infraction. In my game tonight, PU called a balk on the pitcher for this. I did not think it was. What say you?

[UmpJM]

Umpete,

What exactly did the pitcher do that the PU considered a balk?

While the FED rule requires the pitcher to take the catcher's sign while on the rubber, it does not prohibit him from also taking a sign while not on the rubber.

JM

P.S. You will find the "penalty" for infractions of 6-1-1 in the Penalty section following 6-1-3.

[JaxRolo]

I believe you just tell F1 not to do it again then if he continues you eject

[Whonu19]

If my memory serves this is the same in obr; no penalty. Does this sound right?

[FVBump]

Regardless of a penalty or not, how did the PU see the catcher giving signs to the pitcher?

I will re-read the section JM provided, as I actually had this in a game this past weekend. With the exeption that the BU called it.

[noumpere]

Regardless of a penalty or not, how did the PU see the catcher giving signs to the pitcher?

I will re-read the section JM provided, as I actually had this in a game this past weekend. With the exeption that the BU called it.

If your taking a FED test, answer that this is illegal. Add a ball to the count

On the field, dont see it.

[sdix00]

In FED, an illegal pitch is any illegal act committed by the pitcher. Does not have to be a pitch.

The penalty for an illegal pitch is a Ball or a Balk.

Rule 2

SECTION 18 ILLEGAL PITCH

An illegal pitch is an illegal act committed by the pitcher with no runner on base,

which results in a ball being awarded the batter. When an illegal pitch occurs with

a runner, or runners, on base, it is ruled a balk.

Rule 6

ART. 1 . . .He shall take his sign

from the catcher with his pivot foot in contact with the pitcher’s plate. The pitch-

ing regulations begin when he intentionally contacts the pitcher’s plate.

Rule 6

ART. 5 . . . It is also a balk if a runner or runners are on base and the pitcher,

while he is not touching the pitcher’s plate, makes any movement naturally

associated with his pitch, or he places his feet on or astride the pitcher’s plate, or

positions himself within approximately five feet of the pitcher’s plate without

having the ball.

Imagine if the pitcher, after taking his signs off the runner, then threw to 3B without stepping. He is not in contact, so we cannot require a step. However, the act of taking signs has illegally deceived the runner into believing the pitcher was in contact.

[Forest Ump]

Imagine if the pitcher, after taking his signs off the runner, then threw to 3B without stepping. He is not in contact, so we cannot require a step. However, the act of taking signs has illegally deceived the runner into believing the pitcher was in contact.

I see your point and it's a good one but I sure would not go there. As some say, this is picking boogers or grabbing the dirty end of the stick, whichever you choose. The intention of the rule is to prevent a quick pitch. Penalize if he quick pitches.

[FVBump]

This rule makes no sense unless he is trying to decieve a runner. How can you call a balk if the pitcher is taking signs when not in a stance associated with a pitching stance or pitching motion?

Say he is just in front of the rubber. Just standing there looking at the catcher who is giving him a sign....but he is not in the set position or wind up. Just standing there.

Do you still have a balk or illegal pitch?

[Pops]

Imagine if the pitcher, after taking his signs off the runner, then threw to 3B without stepping. He is not in contact, so we cannot require a step. However, the act of taking signs has illegally deceived the runner into believing the pitcher was in contact.

I see your point and it's a good one but I sure would not go there. As some say, this is picking boogers or grabbing the dirty end of the stick, whichever you choose. The intention of the rule is to prevent a quick pitch. Penalize if he quick pitches.

That is correct per fed 6-1-1 penalty. It is viewed as a quick pitch, therefore a balk.

But here's where I disagree with the rule: What if the pitcher and catcher are not using signs? Maybe he's just throwing fastballs all day. He's going to get onto the rubber, set. pause, and pitch. Looking into the catcher for a sign really has nothing to do with the balk rule in fed.

[Umpire in Chief]

For simply taking the signs off the rubber I've got a "don't do that"

If it's combined with intent to deceive or simulating a pitching motion, then I'll have a balk.

[sdix00]

For simply taking the signs off the rubber I've got a "don't do that"

If it's combined with intent to deceive or simulating a pitching motion, then I'll have a balk.

I think this is the best application and enforcement of the rule.

[Rich Ives]

You do realize the pitching signs are for both the pitcher AND the middle infielders. They use the info for coverage and anticipating the direction the ball will be hit..

[AE1M]

This happened to me and I charged the offending manager with a trip. He was communicating with the pitcher, giving instruction.

Between innings I asked the pitcher if he was getting signs from the dugout and he said he was. So when the first batter came up, he looked into the dugout from the rubber and the manager was clearly giving signs.

B

FED 6-1-1 says, "....(The pitcher) shall take his sign from the catcher with his pivot foot in contact with the pitcher's plate," but does not indicate a penalty (that I can find). I also could not find a case play involving the infraction. In my game tonight, PU called a balk on the pitcher for this. I did not think it was. What say you?

[UmpJM]

This happened to me and I charged the offending manager with a trip. He was communicating with the pitcher, giving instruction.

Between innings I asked the pitcher if he was getting signs from the dugout and he said he was. So when the first batter came up, he looked into the dugout from the rubber and the manager was clearly giving signs.

B

FED 6-1-1 says, "....(The pitcher) shall take his sign from the catcher with his pivot foot in contact with the pitcher's plate," but does not indicate a penalty (that I can find). I also could not find a case play involving the infraction. In my game tonight, PU called a balk on the pitcher for this. I did not think it was. What say you?

WOW!! That's amazing!!

That is wrong on so many levels and in so many ways, I hardly know where to begin.

JM

[Mr Umpire]

This happened to me and I charged the offending manager with a trip. He was communicating with the pitcher, giving instruction.

Between innings I asked the pitcher if he was getting signs from the dugout and he said he was. So when the first batter came up, he looked into the dugout from the rubber and the manager was clearly giving signs.

B

FED 6-1-1 says, "....(The pitcher) shall take his sign from the catcher with his pivot foot in contact with the pitcher's plate," but does not indicate a penalty (that I can find). I also could not find a case play involving the infraction. In my game tonight, PU called a balk on the pitcher for this. I did not think it was. What say you?

WOW!! That's amazing!!

That is wrong on so many levels and in so many ways, I hardly know where to begin.

JM

Yeah. I'm wondering did the coach remain in the rest of the game? I don't know of a HS coach who would be able to control themselves after being charged a visit for giving signs to the pitcher or yelling instructions for the whole field to hear.

The rule is simply for if he takes them from the catcher, he needs to be on the rubber. If he gets them from his coach, he does not. The rule does not limit him to just the catcher. Just if he does get them from the catcher, be on the rubber. It is to prevent a quick pitch or any illegal advantage.

I have a "Don't do that" issue only.

[D62 blue]

Imagine if the pitcher, after taking his signs off the runner, then threw to 3B without stepping. He is not in contact, so we cannot require a step. However, the act of taking signs has illegally deceived the runner into believing the pitcher was in contact.

I see your point and it's a good one but I sure would not go there. As some say, this is picking boogers or grabbing the dirty end of the stick, whichever you choose. The intention of the rule is to prevent a quick pitch. Penalize if he quick pitches.

That is correct per fed 6-1-1 penalty. It is viewed as a quick pitch, therefore a balk.

But here's where I disagree with the rule: What if the pitcher and catcher are not using signs? Maybe he's just throwing fastballs all day. He's going to get onto the rubber, set. pause, and pitch. Looking into the catcher for a sign really has nothing to do with the balk rule in fed.

i have called this a balk in a varsity gm , neither coach said a word or questioned the call . with runners on its a balk .

marc

[mstaylor]

Leave the coach alone on giving signs, nothing illegal. Many will give them to the catcher and he gives them to the pitcher. Either way is fine but if the coach gives both at the same time it saves time. What you do not want is the pitcher quick pitching the batter.

[yawetag]

Leave the coach alone on giving signs, nothing illegal. Many will give them to the catcher and he gives them to the pitcher. Either way is fine but if the coach gives both at the same time it saves time. What you do not want is the pitcher quick pitching the batter.

Mike, I don't think this will ever die. Until Fed releases a case play that allows a coach to give the pitcher signs (as long as the pitcher simulates taking signs from the catcher), there will be umpires that will call this a balk.

[JaxRolo]

This happened to me and I charged the offending manager with a trip. He was communicating with the pitcher, giving instruction.

Between innings I asked the pitcher if he was getting signs from the dugout and he said he was. So when the first batter came up, he looked into the dugout from the rubber and the manager was clearly giving signs.

B

FED 6-1-1 says, "....(The pitcher) shall take his sign from the catcher with his pivot foot in contact with the pitcher's plate," but does not indicate a penalty (that I can find). I also could not find a case play involving the infraction. In my game tonight, PU called a balk on the pitcher for this. I did not think it was. What say you?

So we are taking matters into our own hands and making up rules???

[mstaylor]

When I managed I had an asst coach that called pitches. He would give them to the catcher who would then give them to the pitcher. I asked him why not give them to both at the same time and save time. He said the catcher had to know what was coming. I then asked couldn't the pitcher read the same signs the catcher was. He insisted that it had to be done that way. I quit fighting. :notworthy:

[Rich Ives]

When I managed I had an asst coach that called pitches. He would give them to the catcher who would then give them to the pitcher. I asked him why not give them to both at the same time and save time. He said the catcher had to know what was coming. I then asked couldn't the pitcher read the same signs the catcher was. He insisted that it had to be done that way. I quit fighting.

He said the catcher had to know what was coming.

Based on your emoticon I wonder if you think this is not true. Believe me - it is. Does "cross-up" ring a bell - maybe yours?

Ths signs also have to get to the middle infielders.

Of course we don't want to have a balk called or a conference recorded for getting the sign from the coach.

It really works out for the best to give them to the catcher and have him relay them on to the others.

[yawetag]

He said the catcher had to know what was coming.

Rich, I think the point was that Mike asked "Why not give it to both at the same time."

[AE1M]

This happened to me and I charged the offending manager with a trip. He was communicating with the pitcher, giving instruction.

Between innings I asked the pitcher if he was getting signs from the dugout and he said he was. So when the first batter came up, he looked into the dugout from the rubber and the manager was clearly giving signs.

B

FED 6-1-1 says, "....(The pitcher) shall take his sign from the catcher with his pivot foot in contact with the pitcher's plate," but does not indicate a penalty (that I can find). I also could not find a case play involving the infraction. In my game tonight, PU called a balk on the pitcher for this. I did not think it was. What say you?

WOW!! That's amazing!!

That is wrong on so many levels and in so many ways, I hardly know where to begin.

JM

JM,

The Manager was taking 5-10 seconds every pitch to go through a complicated set of signs to the pitcher EVERY pitch. This can easily add 5-6 minutes every inning, or 1/2 hour to the game. This game was NOT a Fed rules game either, MA uses MLB, NOT FED. So, given there was a rule violation, and given it was impacting the quality of the game, what's the problem? There was no ejection, no serious penalty, and I got to explain to this manager the rule. If there is no penalty, and you take no action, it seems it could then escalate. This stopped it and no harm was done.

So, given that the umpire is allowed to charge a trip when the Manager is giving instruction to the pitcher, this seemed like a great solution to me and still does.

So, please explain why you think this is so wrong, and how you would handle it if you just told him to stop and he refused. Ejection?

Not trying to be argumentative, I am just surprised at your reaction to what I thought was a great solution. Never had this happen in 10yrs of HS umpiring.

B

[yawetag]

So, given there was a rule violation, and given it was impacting the quality of the game, what's the problem?

What's the rule violation? If you can find it, I'll bet you can find the appropriate penalty. I guarantee it's not charging a conference.

And, just because a coach doesn't argue it doesn't mean it's right.