Settle an argument please

[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.

The Windup Position. The pitcher shall stand facing the batter, his pivot foot in

contact with the pitcher’s plate and the other foot free. From this position any natural

movement associated with his delivery of the ball to the batter commits him to

the pitch without interruption or alteration. He shall not raise either foot from the

ground, except that in his actual delivery of the ball to the batter, he may take one

step backward, and one step forward with his free foot.

When a pitcher holds the ball with both hands in front of his body, with his pivot

foot in contact with the pitcher’s plate and his other foot free, he will be considered

in the Windup Position.

Rule 8.01(a) Comment: In the Windup Position, a pitcher is permitted to have his “free†foot

on the rubber, in front of the rubber, behind the rubber or off the side of the rubber.

I have absolutely no problem with this in OBR.

 

I do, unless you've got a contortionist. Find a pitcher that starts with this foot position that is also facing the batter.

"facing the batter" is also required in the set position. Do you have a problem with that? Do you have a problem with Cliff Lee, Madison Bumgarner and other MLB and MiLB pitchers who use the sideways stance?

[grayhawk]

Well, it took a while, but I got a reply back from Ken Allan on this.  For those that don't know him, Ken Allan was on the NFHS Rules Committee until he retired from it after last season.  If you look back at your 2014 rule book, his picture is in there.  I can't think of a better authority to give a definitive ruling.  Here is his response:

 

I am OK with that pitching move you described. From the set, the pitcher may take a short backward step with his non pivot foot provided he then steps forward and pitches. We had quite a discussion about this move a few years ago at one of the NFHS rules meetings.

 

I am allowing it with no runners if I see this pitcher again.

[goody14]

I guess it is what it is.

 

So, a pitcher who has his feet in the set position has to come to a complete stop and then he can take another short step and pitch.  Seems goofy to me, but I don't write 'em.

 

Not being sarcastic or stirring the pot but how short is considered short - does he have to gain ground to consider it backwards?

 

Thanks for reaching out to FED to clear this up.

[Jimurray]

Well, it took a while, but I got a reply back from Ken Allan on this.  For those that don't know him, Ken Allan was on the NFHS Rules Committee until he retired from it after last season.  If you look back at your 2014 rule book, his picture is in there.  I can't think of a better authority to give a definitive ruling.  Here is his response:

 

 

 

I am OK with that pitching move you described. From the set, the pitcher may take a short backward step with his non pivot foot provided he then steps forward and pitches. We had quite a discussion about this move a few years ago at one of the NFHS rules meetings.

 

I am allowing it with no runners if I see this pitcher again.

You may be allowing an OBR windup in FED. With no runners there should be no problem except for coaches that were forced to straighten out their pitchers who had wound up that way until reaching HS. They may want to return their pitchers to that windup also. Of course winding up that way precludes winding up with runners on which only happens in certain runner configurations if the pitcher wants to windup.

But if the rocker step is backward, what direction is forward? Toward 3B or HP? 

Edited to add, but why can't we allow it with runners also? LHP with R1. What would he be violating? Did Ken Allan say it was not ok with runners and why?

[ALStripes17]

Well, it took a while, but I got a reply back from Ken Allan on this. For those that don't know him, Ken Allan was on the NFHS Rules Committee until he retired from it after last season. If you look back at your 2014 rule book, his picture is in there. I can't think of a better authority to give a definitive ruling. Here is his response:

I am OK with that pitching move you described. From the set, the pitcher may take a short backward step with his non pivot foot provided he then steps forward and pitches. We had quite a discussion about this move a few years ago at one of the NFHS rules meetings.

I am allowing it with no runners if I see this pitcher again.

You may be allowing an OBR windup in FED. With no runners there should be no problem except for coaches that were forced to straighten out their pitchers who had wound up that way until reaching HS. They may want to return their pitchers to that windup also. Of course winding up that way precludes winding up with runners on which only happens in certain runner configurations if the pitcher wants to windup.

But if the rocker step is backward, what direction is forward? Toward 3B or HP?

Side question: what would keep a HS pitcher from doing a Robb Nen style toe tap as he delivers from the SET position? That wouldalso be considered a double step by all intents and purposes.

[JaxRolo]

Well, it took a while, but I got a reply back from Ken Allan on this. For those that don't know him, Ken Allan was on the NFHS Rules Committee until he retired from it after last season. If you look back at your 2014 rule book, his picture is in there. I can't think of a better authority to give a definitive ruling. Here is his response:

I am OK with that pitching move you described. From the set, the pitcher may take a short backward step with his non pivot foot provided he then steps forward and pitches. We had quite a discussion about this move a few years ago at one of the NFHS rules meetings.

I am allowing it with no runners if I see this pitcher again.

The thing is this move was legal 2 years ago. Now we the chafes from last year I don't see it as a legal move. Neither do any of the umpires in our association after we talked about it last not.

So we are balking it.

I'm officially done with this subject.

[Jimurray]

 

Well, it took a while, but I got a reply back from Ken Allan on this. For those that don't know him, Ken Allan was on the NFHS Rules Committee until he retired from it after last season. If you look back at your 2014 rule book, his picture is in there. I can't think of a better authority to give a definitive ruling. Here is his response:

 

I am OK with that pitching move you described. From the set, the pitcher may take a short backward step with his non pivot foot provided he then steps forward and pitches. We had quite a discussion about this move a few years ago at one of the NFHS rules meetings.

I am allowing it with no runners if I see this pitcher again.

 

The thing is this move was legal 2 years ago. Now we the chafes from last year I don't see it as a legal move. Neither do any of the umpires in our association after we talked about it last not.

So we are balking it.

I'm officially done with this subject.

 

The move was not legal 2 years ago. The rule has been in the books for a long time. It just became a POE a few years ago. You can't balk it if he does it with no runners. You can IP it.

[JaxRolo]

Well, it took a while, but I got a reply back from Ken Allan on this. For those that don't know him, Ken Allan was on the NFHS Rules Committee until he retired from it after last season. If you look back at your 2014 rule book, his picture is in there. I can't think of a better authority to give a definitive ruling. Here is his response:

I am OK with that pitching move you described. From the set, the pitcher may take a short backward step with his non pivot foot provided he then steps forward and pitches. We had quite a discussion about this move a few years ago at one of the NFHS rules meetings.

I am allowing it with no runners if I see this pitcher again.

The thing is this move was legal 2 years ago. Now we the chafes from last year I don't see it as a legal move. Neither do any of the umpires in our association after we talked about it last not.

So we are balking it.

I'm officially done with this subject.

The move was not legal 2 years ago. The rule has been in the books for a long time. It just became a POE a few years ago. You can't balk it if he does it with no runners. You can IP it.

That's what I meant!!!!

[grayhawk]

 

Well, it took a while, but I got a reply back from Ken Allan on this.  For those that don't know him, Ken Allan was on the NFHS Rules Committee until he retired from it after last season.  If you look back at your 2014 rule book, his picture is in there.  I can't think of a better authority to give a definitive ruling.  Here is his response:

 

 

 

I am OK with that pitching move you described. From the set, the pitcher may take a short backward step with his non pivot foot provided he then steps forward and pitches. We had quite a discussion about this move a few years ago at one of the NFHS rules meetings.

 

I am allowing it with no runners if I see this pitcher again.

You may be allowing an OBR windup in FED. With no runners there should be no problem except for coaches that were forced to straighten out their pitchers who had wound up that way until reaching HS. They may want to return their pitchers to that windup also. Of course winding up that way precludes winding up with runners on which only happens in certain runner configurations if the pitcher wants to windup.

But if the rocker step is backward, what direction is forward? Toward 3B or HP? 

Edited to add, but why can't we allow it with runners also? LHP with R1. What would he be violating? Did Ken Allan say it was not ok with runners and why?

 

 

 

 

Well, it took a while, but I got a reply back from Ken Allan on this. For those that don't know him, Ken Allan was on the NFHS Rules Committee until he retired from it after last season. If you look back at your 2014 rule book, his picture is in there. I can't think of a better authority to give a definitive ruling. Here is his response:

 

I am OK with that pitching move you described. From the set, the pitcher may take a short backward step with his non pivot foot provided he then steps forward and pitches. We had quite a discussion about this move a few years ago at one of the NFHS rules meetings.

I am allowing it with no runners if I see this pitcher again.

 

The thing is this move was legal 2 years ago. Now we the chafes from last year I don't see it as a legal move. Neither do any of the umpires in our association after we talked about it last not.

So we are balking it.

I'm officially done with this subject.

 

 

A friend of mine said that even though Ken Allan agreed that it's legal, that so many people dug in so far on it being illegal that it wouldn't matter.  I knew he was right.

[Jimurray]

Well, it took a while, but I got a reply back from Ken Allan on this.  For those that don't know him, Ken Allan was on the NFHS Rules Committee until he retired from it after last season.  If you look back at your 2014 rule book, his picture is in there.  I can't think of a better authority to give a definitive ruling.  Here is his response:

 

 

 

I am OK with that pitching move you described. From the set, the pitcher may take a short backward step with his non pivot foot provided he then steps forward and pitches. We had quite a discussion about this move a few years ago at one of the NFHS rules meetings.

 

I am allowing it with no runners if I see this pitcher again.

You may be allowing an OBR windup in FED. With no runners there should be no problem except for coaches that were forced to straighten out their pitchers who had wound up that way until reaching HS. They may want to return their pitchers to that windup also. Of course winding up that way precludes winding up with runners on which only happens in certain runner configurations if the pitcher wants to windup.

But if the rocker step is backward, what direction is forward? Toward 3B or HP? 

Edited to add, but why can't we allow it with runners also? LHP with R1. What would he be violating? Did Ken Allan say it was not ok with runners and why?

 

 

Well, it took a while, but I got a reply back from Ken Allan on this. For those that don't know him, Ken Allan was on the NFHS Rules Committee until he retired from it after last season. If you look back at your 2014 rule book, his picture is in there. I can't think of a better authority to give a definitive ruling. Here is his response:

 

I am OK with that pitching move you described. From the set, the pitcher may take a short backward step with his non pivot foot provided he then steps forward and pitches. We had quite a discussion about this move a few years ago at one of the NFHS rules meetings.

I am allowing it with no runners if I see this pitcher again.

The thing is this move was legal 2 years ago. Now we the chafes from last year I don't see it as a legal move. Neither do any of the umpires in our association after we talked about it last not.

So we are balking it.

I'm officially done with this subject.

 

A friend of mine said that even though Ken Allan agreed that it's legal, that so many people dug in so far on it being illegal that it wouldn't matter.  I knew he was right.

We are still not sure what Ken Allen agreed was legal. With runners or not? Short step or any length step? Is the backwards step to 1B and the foward step to 3B or HP. Since I do not care for the FED pitching restrictions (there should be some differentiating due to no pick from the rubber) I would be happy to not look at a FED pitcher's foot position. But they wrote the rule and I'm not sure what Allan is envisioning.

[Richvee]

Someone needs to explain to me difference between taking a rocker step from a set position, and a hybrid windup. 

[Jimurray]

Well, it took a while, but I got a reply back from Ken Allan on this.  For those that don't know him, Ken Allan was on the NFHS Rules Committee until he retired from it after last season.  If you look back at your 2014 rule book, his picture is in there.  I can't think of a better authority to give a definitive ruling.  Here is his response:

 

I am OK with that pitching move you described. From the set, the pitcher may take a short backward step with his non pivot foot provided he then steps forward and pitches. We had quite a discussion about this move a few years ago at one of the NFHS rules meetings.

 

I am allowing it with no runners if I see this pitcher again.

Since Ken was on the rules committee when this interp occurred would you mind asking him why a pitcher on the rubber that goes to his mouth should be balked but if he bypasses his mouth and continues upward to adjust his hat he does not have to be balked?

And what changed a stationary gorilla arm balk to only a swinging arm balk. Neither of which should be a balk anyway.

[ricka56]

 

Edited to add, but why can't we allow it with runners also? LHP with R1. What would he be violating? Did Ken Allan say it was not ok with runners and why?

 

 

Fed 6-2-4 a/b/d makes it illegal for any F1 with runners on.

[Jimurray]

Edited to add, but why can't we allow it with runners also? LHP with R1. What would he be violating? Did Ken Allan say it was not ok with runners and why?

 

Fed 6-2-4 a/b/d makes it illegal for any F1 with runners on.

So, regarding 6-2-4 d, a pitcher that winds up in a FED legal position with runners on is violating it?

And can a LHP wind up or "pitch from the set that way" since he would not be feinting to 1B?

[ricka56]

 

 

Edited to add, but why can't we allow it with runners also? LHP with R1. What would he be violating? Did Ken Allan say it was not ok with runners and why?

 

Fed 6-2-4 a/b/d makes it illegal for any F1 with runners on.

So, regarding 6-2-4 d, a pitcher that winds up in a FED legal position with runners on is violating it?

And can a LHP wind up or "pitch from the set that way" since he would not be feinting to 1B?

 

No, no, no...you know that is not true. This thread is about taking a rocker step from a legal set position. No violation with bases empty...grounds to balk him with runners on (6-2-4 a/b/d).

[Jimurray]

 

 

 

Edited to add, but why can't we allow it with runners also? LHP with R1. What would he be violating? Did Ken Allan say it was not ok with runners and why?

 

Fed 6-2-4 a/b/d makes it illegal for any F1 with runners on.

So, regarding 6-2-4 d, a pitcher that winds up in a FED legal position with runners on is violating it?

And can a LHP wind up or "pitch from the set that way" since he would not be feinting to 1B?

 

No, no, no...you know that is not true. This thread is about taking a rocker step from a legal set position. No violation with bases empty...grounds to balk him with runners on (6-2-4 a/b/d).

 

As @Richvee say, what's the difference between a hybrid windup and the OP. It hasn't been confirmed whether Allan doesn't allow it with runners and if the rocker step is back, where is the forward step. If they rule that way why not allow any foot position for the windup which the OP actually is and make it real FED simple/dumb? Prohibit pitching from the windup with runners on. 

[grayhawk]

 

 

 

 

Edited to add, but why can't we allow it with runners also? LHP with R1. What would he be violating? Did Ken Allan say it was not ok with runners and why?

 

Fed 6-2-4 a/b/d makes it illegal for any F1 with runners on.

So, regarding 6-2-4 d, a pitcher that winds up in a FED legal position with runners on is violating it?

And can a LHP wind up or "pitch from the set that way" since he would not be feinting to 1B?

 

No, no, no...you know that is not true. This thread is about taking a rocker step from a legal set position. No violation with bases empty...grounds to balk him with runners on (6-2-4 a/b/d).

 

As @Richvee say, what's the difference between a hybrid windup and the OP. It hasn't been confirmed whether Allan doesn't allow it with runners and if the rocker step is back, where is the forward step. If they rule that way why not allow any foot position for the windup which the OP actually is and make it real FED simple/dumb? Prohibit pitching from the windup with runners on. 

 

 

The hybrid is neither the windup, nor the set.  That's why the hybrid is not the issue here.  He is in the set and has come to a complete stop.  The rules for delivering from the set with no runners do not specify how the "delivery motion" must start.  The rules don't allow the free foot to come up to a balance point either before stepping to home, yet we allow it.

 

Incidentally, another umpire had this team on Monday, and while this player didn't pitch, the umpire spoke with the coach about it.  The coach said that he was instructing this pitcher to stop using this move because we was concerned that he may have a brain fart and accidentally do it with runners on.  Sound advice.

[Jimurray]

 

 

 

 

 

Edited to add, but why can't we allow it with runners also? LHP with R1. What would he be violating? Did Ken Allan say it was not ok with runners and why?

 

Fed 6-2-4 a/b/d makes it illegal for any F1 with runners on.

So, regarding 6-2-4 d, a pitcher that winds up in a FED legal position with runners on is violating it?

And can a LHP wind up or "pitch from the set that way" since he would not be feinting to 1B?

 

No, no, no...you know that is not true. This thread is about taking a rocker step from a legal set position. No violation with bases empty...grounds to balk him with runners on (6-2-4 a/b/d).

 

As @Richvee say, what's the difference between a hybrid windup and the OP. It hasn't been confirmed whether Allan doesn't allow it with runners and if the rocker step is back, where is the forward step. If they rule that way why not allow any foot position for the windup which the OP actually is and make it real FED simple/dumb? Prohibit pitching from the windup with runners on. 

 

 

The hybrid is neither the windup, nor the set.  That's why the hybrid is not the issue here.  He is in the set and has come to a complete stop.  The rules for delivering from the set with no runners do not specify how the "delivery motion" must start.  The rules don't allow the free foot to come up to a balance point either before stepping to home, yet we allow it.

 

Incidentally, another umpire had this team on Monday, and while this player didn't pitch, the umpire spoke with the coach about it.  The coach said that he was instructing this pitcher to stop using this move because we was concerned that he may have a brain fart and accidentally do it with runners on.  Sound advice.

 

It is a hybrid windup with a more extreme foot position. To allow it with no runners and try to justify balking it with runners is not logical. MLB does not balk Cliff Lee, Madison Bumgarner or other sideways pitchers for winding up that way with runners. To call the backwards step to 1B a step is grasping for a reason. Has a normal pitcher balked with R3 when he takes a backward step toward 2B in his windup?

[grayhawk]

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited to add, but why can't we allow it with runners also? LHP with R1. What would he be violating? Did Ken Allan say it was not ok with runners and why?

 

Fed 6-2-4 a/b/d makes it illegal for any F1 with runners on.

So, regarding 6-2-4 d, a pitcher that winds up in a FED legal position with runners on is violating it?

And can a LHP wind up or "pitch from the set that way" since he would not be feinting to 1B?

 

No, no, no...you know that is not true. This thread is about taking a rocker step from a legal set position. No violation with bases empty...grounds to balk him with runners on (6-2-4 a/b/d).

 

As @Richvee say, what's the difference between a hybrid windup and the OP. It hasn't been confirmed whether Allan doesn't allow it with runners and if the rocker step is back, where is the forward step. If they rule that way why not allow any foot position for the windup which the OP actually is and make it real FED simple/dumb? Prohibit pitching from the windup with runners on. 

 

 

The hybrid is neither the windup, nor the set.  That's why the hybrid is not the issue here.  He is in the set and has come to a complete stop.  The rules for delivering from the set with no runners do not specify how the "delivery motion" must start.  The rules don't allow the free foot to come up to a balance point either before stepping to home, yet we allow it.

 

Incidentally, another umpire had this team on Monday, and while this player didn't pitch, the umpire spoke with the coach about it.  The coach said that he was instructing this pitcher to stop using this move because we was concerned that he may have a brain fart and accidentally do it with runners on.  Sound advice.

 

It is a hybrid windup with a more extreme foot position. To allow it with no runners and try to justify balking it with runners is not logical. MLB does not balk Cliff Lee, Madison Bumgarner or other sideways pitchers for winding up that way with runners. To call the backwards step to 1B a step is grasping for a reason. Has a normal pitcher balked with R3 when he takes a backward step toward 2B in his windup?

 

 

I looked at video of both Cliff Lee and Madison Bumgarner and I couldn't find any video of them doing this move with runners.  It would be foolish because it would be impossible to keep runners from stealing.

 

No, a normal pitcher has not balked with R3 when he takes a backward step toward second in this windup because it's specifically allowed in the rules.  Saying that because the rules specifically allow it in one position, but are silent in another does not make it illegal.  They can't think of every possible move, and unorthodox does not equal illegal.

 

Ask yourself what possible advantage a pitcher has gained by using this move with no runners.  There simply isn't one.  So why are people so up in arms about it?  I let it go, not one person said a word about it and we had a great game.  I would have looked seriously OOO if I called an illegal pitch and awarded a ball to the batter - especially if I couldn't quote an exact rule the pitcher was breaking.  Sure, I could have spouted off some crap and they most likely would have believed me, but I would still look like an ass.

[JaxRolo]

Well, it took a while, but I got a reply back from Ken Allan on this. For those that don't know him, Ken Allan was on the NFHS Rules Committee until he retired from it after last season. If you look back at your 2014 rule book, his picture is in there. I can't think of a better authority to give a definitive ruling. Here is his response:

I am OK with that pitching move you described. From the set, the pitcher may take a short backward step with his non pivot foot provided he then steps forward and pitches. We had quite a discussion about this move a few years ago at one of the NFHS rules meetings.

I am allowing it with no runners if I see this pitcher again.

You may be allowing an OBR windup in FED. With no runners there should be no problem except for coaches that were forced to straighten out their pitchers who had wound up that way until reaching HS. They may want to return their pitchers to that windup also. Of course winding up that way precludes winding up with runners on which only happens in certain runner configurations if the pitcher wants to windup.

But if the rocker step is backward, what direction is forward? Toward 3B or HP?

Edited to add, but why can't we allow it with runners also? LHP with R1. What would he be violating? Did Ken Allan say it was not ok with runners and why?

Well, it took a while, but I got a reply back from Ken Allan on this. For those that don't know him, Ken Allan was on the NFHS Rules Committee until he retired from it after last season. If you look back at your 2014 rule book, his picture is in there. I can't think of a better authority to give a definitive ruling. Here is his response:

I am OK with that pitching move you described. From the set, the pitcher may take a short backward step with his non pivot foot provided he then steps forward and pitches. We had quite a discussion about this move a few years ago at one of the NFHS rules meetings.

I am allowing it with no runners if I see this pitcher again.

The thing is this move was legal 2 years ago. Now we the chafes from last year I don't see it as a legal move. Neither do any of the umpires in our association after we talked about it last not.

So we are balking it.

I'm officially done with this subject.

A friend of mine said that even though Ken Allan agreed that it's legal, that so many people dug in so far on it being illegal that it wouldn't matter. I knew he was right.

One of our state interpreters says it's illegal. Every single baseball umpire in our association said illegal when I showed the video at our meeting.

So it would be wise for me to call it illegal.

[ricka56]

Ask yourself what possible advantage a pitcher has gained by using this move with no runners.  There simply isn't one.  So why are people so up in arms about it?  I let it go, not one person said a word about it and we had a great game.  I would have looked seriously OOO if I called an illegal pitch and awarded a ball to the batter - especially if I couldn't quote an exact rule the pitcher was breaking.  Sure, I could have spouted off some crap and they most likely would have believed me, but I would still look like an ass.

 

 

Exactly. In Fed is it illegal to abort a windup with no runners on, but no one balls it because no advantage was gained. It is illegal for F1 to take his signs off the rubber (and doesn't quick pitch), but no one calls it because no advantage was gained. In this case there is neither an advantage gained nor a rule against it, so why call it an illegal pitch? If you do and the DHC knows the rules, you may be in for a long game.

[Jimurray]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited to add, but why can't we allow it with runners also? LHP with R1. What would he be violating? Did Ken Allan say it was not ok with runners and why?

 

Fed 6-2-4 a/b/d makes it illegal for any F1 with runners on.

So, regarding 6-2-4 d, a pitcher that winds up in a FED legal position with runners on is violating it?

And can a LHP wind up or "pitch from the set that way" since he would not be feinting to 1B?

 

No, no, no...you know that is not true. This thread is about taking a rocker step from a legal set position. No violation with bases empty...grounds to balk him with runners on (6-2-4 a/b/d).

 

As @Richvee say, what's the difference between a hybrid windup and the OP. It hasn't been confirmed whether Allan doesn't allow it with runners and if the rocker step is back, where is the forward step. If they rule that way why not allow any foot position for the windup which the OP actually is and make it real FED simple/dumb? Prohibit pitching from the windup with runners on. 

 

 

The hybrid is neither the windup, nor the set.  That's why the hybrid is not the issue here.  He is in the set and has come to a complete stop.  The rules for delivering from the set with no runners do not specify how the "delivery motion" must start.  The rules don't allow the free foot to come up to a balance point either before stepping to home, yet we allow it.

 

Incidentally, another umpire had this team on Monday, and while this player didn't pitch, the umpire spoke with the coach about it.  The coach said that he was instructing this pitcher to stop using this move because we was concerned that he may have a brain fart and accidentally do it with runners on.  Sound advice.

 

It is a hybrid windup with a more extreme foot position. To allow it with no runners and try to justify balking it with runners is not logical. MLB does not balk Cliff Lee, Madison Bumgarner or other sideways pitchers for winding up that way with runners. To call the backwards step to 1B a step is grasping for a reason. Has a normal pitcher balked with R3 when he takes a backward step toward 2B in his windup?

 

 

I looked at video of both Cliff Lee and Madison Bumgarner and I couldn't find any video of them doing this move with runners.  It would be foolish because it would be impossible to keep runners from stealing.

 

No, a normal pitcher has not balked with R3 when he takes a backward step toward second in this windup because it's specifically allowed in the rules.  Saying that because the rules specifically allow it in one position, but are silent in another does not make it illegal.  They can't think of every possible move, and unorthodox does not equal illegal.

 

Ask yourself what possible advantage a pitcher has gained by using this move with no runners.  There simply isn't one.  So why are people so up in arms about it?  I let it go, not one person said a word about it and we had a great game.  I would have looked seriously OOO if I called an illegal pitch and awarded a ball to the batter - especially if I couldn't quote an exact rule the pitcher was breaking.  Sure, I could have spouted off some crap and they most likely would have believed me, but I would still look like an ass.

 

You would have to find video of bases loaded or R3 or R2, R3 where they were not concerned with a steal of home. If you allowed the OP consistently you would probably get a coach asking you why your chapter told everyone what a legal windup foot position was and yet you're letting this guy windup like that. They would ask why they had to retrain their LL and Pony pitchers who were doing the Cliff Lee windup and they had to change them to the FED foot position. When your OP steps back does he bring his hands up as in a windup?

[grayhawk]

He didn't. He kept his hands down. I'm not really concerned since this is the first pitcher I can remember using this motion, and nobody said a word.

[DVA7130]

Damn FED

[ricka56]

All this setup stance confusion is born out of the Fed rule difference that F1 can not throw to a base from the wind-up stance without disengaging first (thus the need to eliminate ambiguity in whether he is in the wind-up or set stance).  I can't figure out the reasoning for this rule difference. If its an allowance for the "lowest common denominator umpire", I don't see it...most of the lowest common denominator umpires that I come across don't even know that this rule difference even exists. I think there would be a lot less confusion if they just took away this pick-off rule difference. I pray I never have to make that balk call.