Balk or no balk

[umpref19]

Runner on 2nd. Pitcher makes a move to 2nd base by just twisting around towards 2nd base and he never throws the ball or disengages from the pitchers plate. Then he comes back around and places his foot in front of him to pitch again. Is this a balk or no balk

[noumpere]

If he didn't step toward second, it's a balk.

[zoops]

Good question.  I don't think it would be a balk even if he never disengages, as long as he steps toward 2nd as noumpere said.  

[maven]

I'm envisioning a step and turn, such that the pivot foot just rotates on the rubber. Then he rotates back, remaining in contact the entire time.

This feint to 2B is not a balk. I'd permit the "re-engaging" of the rubber, provided it doesn't become a quick pitch. I'd expect the battery and batter to reset prior to the pitch, and would not allow F1 to come set directly from this re-engagement.

If I'm on the ball, I'm killing it before he can quick pitch, and then it's a "don't do that." If he quick pitches before I can catch it, so be it.

[basejester]

When he rotates back around toward home while still engaged, is this motion normally associated with his pitch? 

[noumpere]

When he rotates back around toward home while still engaged, is this motion normally associated with his pitch?

​Similar to the "step to third step to first while engaged" under the old OBR / current FED.

 

Although, with no real "active" motion toward the plate, I'd probably lean on the "intent to deceive" clause and kill it before it could happen.

[maven]

When he rotates back around toward home while still engaged, is this motion normally associated with his pitch? 

​It depends what it looks like. If it looks as if he's coming set that way, or using it as his "stretch," then I'll kill it.

But if he's just swinging back around to reset, take a new sign, etc., then I'm probably allowing it.

As I said, if I can possibly avoid it, it won't be a balk.

Frankly, I can't imagine a HS F1 or above doing this. But, the game is full of surprises...

[umpref19]

The pitcher has to disengage from the rubber. Once the pitcher doesn't throw the ball and comes back with his foot that is a Balk

[maven]

The pitcher has to disengage from the rubber. Once the pitcher doesn't throw the ball and comes back with his foot that is a Balk

​Reference? For either one, really.

[umpref19]

The pitcher rotates to 2nd base and doesn't disengage and comes back with his foot and puts it back on the ground that is a Balk. He started a motion to either throw to 2nd base or to pitch the ball to home plate. He didn't throw to 2nd base and he didn't throw to home and he never disengaged from the pitchers plate.

[C12]

Are you describing a sorta Luis Tiant move? Because that is what I'm picturing.  I see a guy twisting to second but not throwing then coming back to his starting position. Is that correct?

[blue23ll]

These scenarios are so hard to answer for me. What I picture in my head here is not a balk. What you are picturing in your head may be, who knows. Some balks are difficult to call when you see them, these kind of questions are impossible to give definitive answers to. 

[maven]

The pitcher rotates to 2nd base and doesn't disengage and comes back with his foot and puts it back on the ground that is a Balk. He started a motion to either throw to 2nd base or to pitch the ball to home plate. He didn't throw to 2nd base and he didn't throw to home and he never disengaged from the pitchers plate.

​Yes, he feinted to 2B and subsequently re-engaged. And? What rule do you think he has violated?

[umpref19]

He never disengaged from the rubber. I understand this is difficult to understand. Just picture the pitcher doing the spin move to 2nd base without throwing the ball to 2nd base and not disengaging the rubber and then coming back and putting his foot down to restart his pitching motion again. Is that a balk

[umpref19]

Read page 70 and 71 of the obl rule book 2015

[Tksjewelry]

Read page 70 and 71 of the obl rule book 2015

​My page 70 and 71 is the old rule 7.08 (now 5.09). 

[maven]

Read page 70 and 71 of the obl rule book 2015

​Nope, none of those. Any other suggestions?

[BuckeyeMike]

Down-votes should be reserved for inaccurate citations and interpretations; not those that go against what you thought were the correct answers and don't agree with.

 

EDIT:   And magically it got rectified.   Thank you to whoever