Settle an argument please

[JaxRolo]

This is a FED Discussion

 

Here is a video on Facebook.

And here is a description:

 

First games in two months yesterday and starting F1 (a sophomore) is throwing 92. With no runners, he engages in the set. Once he comes to a stop, he then takes a step to the side and then goes to his balance point and delivers. So essentially, he's in a legal set and then winds up and pitches. Legal? If you say no, cite the specific rule he is breaking.

He did this only with no runners. With runners, he stepped directly home to pitch like a normal set position delivery.

 

 

 

Legal or not?

[johnnyg08]

Video isn't working.

[JaxRolo]

Video isn't working.

fixed

[johnnyg08]

Jax, what is the argument?

[MadMax]

 

Here is a video on Facebook.

[video here]

 

He did this only with no runners.

 

With runners, he stepped directly home to pitch like a normal set position delivery.

 

 

Legal. I would consider it all part of the wind-up and delivery. What's the problem?

 

 

(Side: Is this a home-made video starring Rolo?)

[johnnyg08]

 

 

Here is a video on Facebook.

[video here]

 

He did this only with no runners.

 

With runners, he stepped directly home to pitch like a normal set position delivery.

 

 

Legal. I would consider it all part of the wind-up and delivery. What's the problem?

 

 

(Side: Is this a home-made video starring Rolo?)

 

 

 

My guess is that the kid was striking out every batter he faced not because he was throwing 92, but because of that illegal motion...(says the parent coach)

[JaxRolo]

Jax, what is the argument?

This is FED

 

 

The OP says that he is in the SET Position.

 

I'm saying he can not take a rocker step from the set position. Therefore an illegal pitch.

Others say it is legal

[JaxRolo]

 

 

Here is a video on Facebook.

[video here]

 

He did this only with no runners.

 

With runners, he stepped directly home to pitch like a normal set position delivery.

 

 

Legal. I would consider it all part of the wind-up and delivery. What's the problem?

 

 

(Side: Is this a home-made video starring Rolo?)

 

 

The problem is that the OP says this is a SET Position.

[johnnyg08]

 

Jax, what is the argument?

This is FED

 

 

The OP says that he is in the SET Position.

 

I'm saying he can not take a rocker step from the set position. Therefore an illegal pitch.

Others say it is legal

 

 

Post the rule, let's analyze.  

[JaxRolo]

ART. 2 . . . For the wind-up position, the pitcher is not restricted as to how he shall hold the ball. A pitcher assumes the windup position when his hands are: (a) together in front of the body; (b) both hands are at his side; © either hand is in front of the body and the other hand is at his side. The pitcher's non-pivot foot shall be in any position on or behind a line extending through the front edge of the pitcher's plate. He is ­limited to not more than two pumps or rotations. After he starts his movement to pitch, he must continue the motion without interruption or alteration. With his feet in the wind-up position, the pitcher may only deliver a pitch or step backward off the pitcher's plate with his pivot foot first. After the pitcher has placed his pivot foot clearly behind the plate, he has the right to change to the set position or throw or feint to a base the same as that of any infielder. During delivery, he may lift his non-pivot foot in a step forward, a step sideways, or in a step backward and a step forward, but he shall not otherwise lift either foot.

 

 

ART. 3 . . . For the set position, the pitcher shall have the ball in either his gloved hand or his pitching hand. His pitching hand shall be down at his side or behind his back. Before starting his delivery, he shall stand with his entire non-pivot foot in front of a line extending through the front edge of the pitcher's plate and with his entire pivot foot in contact with or directly in front of and parrallel to the pitcher's plate. He shall go to the set position without interruption and in one continuous motion. He shall come to a complete and discernible stop (a change of direction is not considered an acceptable stop) with the ball in both hands in front of the body and his glove at or below his chin. Natural preliminary motions such as only one stretch may be made. During these preliminary motions and during the set position until a delivery motion occurs, the pitcher may turn on his pivot foot or lift it in a jump turn to step with the non-pivot foot toward a base while throwing or feinting as outlined in 6-2-4 and 2-28-5, or he may lift his pivot foot in a step backward off the pitcher's plate which must be in or partially within the 24-inch length of the pitcher's plate. In order to change to the wind-up position, he must first step clearly backward off the pitcher's plate with his pivot foot first. After the pitcher has placed his pivot foot on the ground clearly behind the plate, he then has the right to throw or feint to a base the same as that of any other infielder.

PENALTY (Art. 1, 2, 3): The ball is dead immediately when an illegal pitch occurs. If there is no runner, a ball is awarded the batter. If there is a runner, such illegal act is a balk. In both situations, the umpire signals dead ball.

[Jimurray]

ART. 2 . . . For the wind-up position, the pitcher is not restricted as to how he shall hold the ball. A pitcher assumes the windup position when his hands are: (a) together in front of the body; (b) both hands are at his side; © either hand is in front of the body and the other hand is at his side. The pitcher's non-pivot foot shall be in any position on or behind a line extending through the front edge of the pitcher's plate. He is ­limited to not more than two pumps or rotations. After he starts his movement to pitch, he must continue the motion without interruption or alteration. With his feet in the wind-up position, the pitcher may only deliver a pitch or step backward off the pitcher's plate with his pivot foot first. After the pitcher has placed his pivot foot clearly behind the plate, he has the right to change to the set position or throw or feint to a base the same as that of any infielder. During delivery, he may lift his non-pivot foot in a step forward, a step sideways, or in a step backward and a step forward, but he shall not otherwise lift either foot.

 

 

ART. 3 . . . For the set position, the pitcher shall have the ball in either his gloved hand or his pitching hand. His pitching hand shall be down at his side or behind his back. Before starting his delivery, he shall stand with his entire non-pivot foot in front of a line extending through the front edge of the pitcher's plate and with his entire pivot foot in contact with or directly in front of and parrallel to the pitcher's plate. He shall go to the set position without interruption and in one continuous motion. He shall come to a complete and discernible stop (a change of direction is not considered an acceptable stop) with the ball in both hands in front of the body and his glove at or below his chin. Natural preliminary motions such as only one stretch may be made. During these preliminary motions and during the set position until a delivery motion occurs, the pitcher may turn on his pivot foot or lift it in a jump turn to step with the non-pivot foot toward a base while throwing or feinting as outlined in 6-2-4 and 2-28-5, or he may lift his pivot foot in a step backward off the pitcher's plate which must be in or partially within the 24-inch length of the pitcher's plate. In order to change to the wind-up position, he must first step clearly backward off the pitcher's plate with his pivot foot first. After the pitcher has placed his pivot foot on the ground clearly behind the plate, he then has the right to throw or feint to a base the same as that of any other infielder.

PENALTY (Art. 1, 2, 3): The ball is dead immediately when an illegal pitch occurs. If there is no runner, a ball is awarded the batter. If there is a runner, such illegal act is a balk. In both situations, the umpire signals dead ball.

The windup rule allows a step, the set rule does not have this permission and you can or should infer that a rocker step is not allowed. Thus in FED he is winding up from an illegal foot position. At some point with certain runner configs he probably would wind up. What does he do then? IN OBR and NCAA this is a legal windup.

[JaxRolo]

Those saying its legal are saying that the Set rule doesn't identify a step as illegal

[maven]

The feet dictate that this is the SET position. A "rocker step" is not legal from that position. With runners on, I would treat the rocker step as a step toward 1B (for RHP) and failure to throw: balk. With no runners on, this is an illegal pitch: ball.

 

I would treat it the same for amateur ball under OBR. I allow the hybrid stance + windup with no runners on, but if his feet say SET position with runners on, he has to be in the SET and respect its restrictions.

[Jimurray]

The feet dictate that this is the SET position. A "rocker step" is not legal from that position. With runners on, I would treat the rocker step as a step toward 1B (for RHP) and failure to throw: balk. With no runners on, this is an illegal pitch: ball.

 

I would treat it the same for amateur ball under OBR. I allow the hybrid stance + windup with no runners on, but if his feet say SET position with runners on, he has to be in the SET and respect its restrictions.

Why would you use FED restrictions in an OBR game? Note that NCAA has eliminated any foot restrictions on the pitcher.

[Replacematt]

 

The feet dictate that this is the SET position. A "rocker step" is not legal from that position. With runners on, I would treat the rocker step as a step toward 1B (for RHP) and failure to throw: balk. With no runners on, this is an illegal pitch: ball.

 

I would treat it the same for amateur ball under OBR. I allow the hybrid stance + windup with no runners on, but if his feet say SET position with runners on, he has to be in the SET and respect its restrictions.

Why would you use FED restrictions in an OBR game? Note that NCAA has eliminated any foot restrictions on the pitcher.

 

 

This is still a set in any ruleset. If you step towards a base, it has to be part of a legal throw or feint.

[Jimurray]

 

 

The feet dictate that this is the SET position. A "rocker step" is not legal from that position. With runners on, I would treat the rocker step as a step toward 1B (for RHP) and failure to throw: balk. With no runners on, this is an illegal pitch: ball.

 

I would treat it the same for amateur ball under OBR. I allow the hybrid stance + windup with no runners on, but if his feet say SET position with runners on, he has to be in the SET and respect its restrictions.

Why would you use FED restrictions in an OBR game? Note that NCAA has eliminated any foot restrictions on the pitcher.

 

 

This is still a set in any ruleset. If you step towards a base, it has to be part of a legal throw or feint.

 

The CWS two years ago had a pitcher who did this when NCAA still had the rule. It wasn't called and now NCAA allows pitcher to pitch the same way as Cliff Lee and a few others do in MLB. Are you saying that with with R2, R3 a normal windup pitcher can not step back towards 2B in his windup? 

[grayhawk]

Guys, I was the OP in the other thread that started all this. I first thought it was illegal when I saw it but didn't call it since I wasn't sure and there was no advantage. I looked it up after the game trying to find language that makes it illegal but couldn't find anything. 6-2-4 does not apply since there were no runners. And we all know that something that's a balk with runners is not automatically an illegal pitch with no runners. Folks are saying that you can't take a rocker step from the set with no runners. Fine, but the burden of proof is on you. What direct language makes this illegal? I have a game in 15 minutes, so will check back when it's over.

[Jimurray]

Guys, I was the OP in the other thread that started all this. I first thought it was illegal when I saw it but didn't call it since I wasn't sure and there was no advantage. I looked it up after the game trying to find language that makes it illegal but couldn't find anything. 6-2-4 does not apply since there were no runners. And we all know that something that's a balk with runners is not automatically an illegal pitch with no runners. Folks are saying that you can't take a rocker step from the set with no runners. Fine, but the burden of proof is on you. What direct language makes this illegal? I have a game in 15 minutes, so will check back when it's over.

The rocker step makes it a windup from an illegal foot position. FED has a penalty for violating anything in Art. 1,2,3. Ball or Balk. Or, don't ball it and let him pitch like that for the rest of his HS career. If he goes on to college that windup won't be a problem. 

[JaxRolo]

Guys, I was the OP in the other thread that started all this. I first thought it was illegal when I saw it but didn't call it since I wasn't sure and there was no advantage. I looked it up after the game trying to find language that makes it illegal but couldn't find anything. 6-2-4 does not apply since there were no runners. And we all know that something that's a balk with runners is not automatically an illegal pitch with no runners. Folks are saying that you can't take a rocker step from the set with no runners. Fine, but the burden of proof is on you. What direct language makes this illegal? I have a game in 15 minutes, so will check back when it's over.

The rocker step makes it a windup from an illegal foot position. FED has a penalty for violating anything in Art. 1,2,3. Ball or Balk. Or, don't ball it and let him pitch like that for the rest of his HS career. If he goes on to college that windup won't be a problem.

This is what I've been trying to say all along.

[JaxRolo]

I think the problem is that up until last year(I believe it was) this was allowed. FED changed it and umpires have not enforced it because either they just don't want to or don't understand it.

[MadMax]

Guys, I was the OP in the other thread that started all this. I first thought it was illegal when I saw it but didn't call it since I wasn't sure and there was no advantage. I looked it up after the game trying to find language that makes it illegal but couldn't find anything. 6-2-4 does not apply since there were no runners. And we all know that something that's a balk with runners is not automatically an illegal pitch with no runners. Folks are saying that you can't take a rocker step from the set with no runners. Fine, but the burden of proof is on you. What direct language makes this illegal? I have a game in 15 minutes, so will check back when it's over.

 

You lucky, lucky dog. GRRRRR!!! (looks outside at snow)

 

I think the problem is that up until last year(I believe it was) this was allowed. FED changed it and umpires have not enforced it because either they just don't want to or don't understand it.

 

I'm not arguing with you, Rolo, but let me amend that last statement... "or (they) don't understand why FED put it in."

 

It's flat out illogical.

[ALStripes17]

The argument being made for legality is this:

 

The pitcher is in a legal SET position and is governed by 6-1-3.  Nowhere in 6-1-3 is the pitcher restricted to stepping directly toward home plate to begin his delivery motion.  6-2-4 is referenced; however, it is my understanding that 6-2-4 can only be applied when there are runner(s) on base.

 

The argument is that no rule makes it illegal.  I do like the inference of 6-1-2 directly addressing a step; however, I don't think it is the ultimate tell-all, be-all.

[bam]

I think the problem is that up until last year(I believe it was) this was allowed. FED changed it and umpires have not enforced it because either they just don't want to or don't understand it.

 

What's the upside of enforcing this?  

 

Exactly.  

[JaxRolo]

I think the problem is that up until last year(I believe it was) this was allowed. FED changed it and umpires have not enforced it because either they just don't want to or don't understand it.

What's the upside of enforcing this?

Exactly.

We are talking about the legality. Not the enforcement.

[bam]

If I allow it, it's legal.  And I'm allowing it.  

 

Enforcing this would be akin to, say, making a catcher remove a stud in his tongue