FED quick pitch

[Stk004]

2 minutes ago, ElkOil said:

My narrative broke down the action to its fundamental components.  When the pitcher started his motion before the batter was ready, I had determined this to be a balk. So it may be more accurate to say that as I was saying "Time! That's a balk!" he delivered.

Ok, I got a little confused through this thread. So does the quick pitch occur as his motion begins, and thus this is when the balk occurs? Assuming there's runners on base. 

[ElkOil]

10 minutes ago, Stk004 said:

Ok, I got a little confused through this thread. So does the quick pitch occur as his motion begins, and thus this is when the balk occurs? Assuming there's runners on base. 

Yes. When the pitcher starts his motion and does something illegal, it's a balk with runners on. Without runners on, add a ball to the count.

[ricka56]

23 minutes ago, ElkOil said:

My narrative broke down the action to its fundamental components.  When the pitcher started his motion before the batter was ready, I had determined this to be a balk. This is where you are wrong...reference the OBR rules below  

OBR 5.07 If, however, in the umpire’s judgment, a pitcher delivers the ball in a deliberate effort to catch the batter off guard, this delivery shall be deemed a quick pitch...

OBR 6.01  Umpires will judge a quick pitch as one delivered before the batter is reasonably set in the batter’s box.

Delivery is required, the start of the pitching motion (as you say, was your criteria) is nothing yet. So the sequence is critical to the decision to issue a balk or not. If F1 starts his pitching motion and the umpire calls TIME before delivery, you have nothing. If the umpire allows a quick-pitch delivery before calling TIME (a dangerous situation) then that would be a balk. 

 

[ElkOil]

3 minutes ago, ricka56 said:

OBR 5.07 If, however, in the umpire’s judgment, a pitcher delivers the ball in a deliberate effort to catch the batter off guard, this delivery shall be deemed a quick pitch...

OBR 6.01  Umpires will judge a quick pitch as one delivered before the batter is reasonably set in the batter’s box.

Delivery is required, the start of the pitching motion (as you say, was your criteria) does not. So the sequence is critical. If he starts his pitching motion and the umpire calls TIME before delivery, you have nothing. If the umpire allows delivery before calling TIME (a dangerous situation) then that would be a balk. 

 

That's all well and good, but this game was under FED rules. 6-1-1 states  "[The pitcher] shall not make a quick-return pitch in an attempt to catch a batter off balance." It doesn't go into the minutiae OBR does. 

[ricka56]

11 minutes ago, ElkOil said:

That's all well and good, but this game was under FED rules. 6-1-1 states  "[The pitcher] shall not make a quick-return pitch in an attempt to catch a batter off balance." It doesn't go into the minutiae OBR does. 

Minutiae ? It is called specification. You did say your game was a select ball (U14)...I suppose that they could use HS rules, but where is your Fed rules difference justification ?

[scrounge]

How do you make a pitch without delivering it?

 

[ElkOil]

10 minutes ago, ricka56 said:

And your Fed rules difference justification is where ?

Not sure what you mean.

[ElkOil]

 

5 hours ago, ricka56 said:

Did you let a select ball F1 deliver a pitch with the batter looking away ? IMO that would be irresponsible. Or did you balk him when he began his pitch motion (prior to pitch delivery) ? The rule prohibits the quick-pitch (delivery is the OBR wording ... Fed doesn't say delivery). I don't think you have a quick-pitch until it is delivered. 

So pick your argument. You're saying I can't call a balk unless I'm being irresponsible.

[ricka56]

13 minutes ago, ElkOil said:

So pick your argument. You're saying I can't call a balk unless I'm being irresponsible.

Your past sitch seems to have "evolved". Pick your scenario and I'll pick my argument:
1. Call TIME, disrupt/stop F1's delivery and no balk call...no argument;
2. Call TME, disrupt/stop F1's delivery and call a balk for non-delivery of a pitch...Rule misapplication.
3. Call TIME before F1 delivers pitch and call a balk ... Rules misapplication.
4. Don't call TIME, allow the quick-pitch delivery and call a balk. Correct rule application...irresponsible umpire.   

[maven]

OK. How about this:

FED does not define 'quick-return pitch', so let's ask, when does it become an illegal pitch? It's illegal because it's too quick, so presumably it's illegal — just like a pitch from the hybrid position — at TOP. Before that (for both infractions) F1 can fix it: for a quick pitch, he can slow down; for the hybrid stance, he can disengage and re-engage legally.

Odd as it might sound, we don't need an actual pitch in order to have an illegal pitch. We have this in 2-28-2: "When a pitcher commits a balk and completes his delivery to the batter, or delivers an illegal pitch, it is not considered a pitch, because the ball became dead at the time of the infraction." FED does not require a pitch in order to have an illegal pitch: once the infraction is committed, the ball is dead. Even if he does pitch, it's no pitch.

OBR is different mainly because a balk is live-ball: so you'd have to have a delivery even if you called a balk on the quick pitch.

All that said, I enforce this the same in both codes: if I see F1 come set too early, I kill it to prevent a pitch. If I waited till TOP I could probably get a balk by rule in FED, but I don't. Handled like this, the rule difference is moot.

I've never seen an F1 who wouldn't slow down after this, so I can't report how I've handled it.

[ElkOil]

1 minute ago, ricka56 said:

Your past sitch seems to have "evolved". Pick your scenario and I'll pick my argument:
1. Call TIME, disrupt F1's delivery and no balk call...no argument;
2. Call TME, disrupt F1's delivery and call a balk for non-delivery of a pitch...Rule misapplication.
3. Call TIME before F1 delivers pitch and call a balk ... Rules misapplication.
4. Don't call TIME, allow the quick-pitch delivery and call a balk. Correct rule application...irresponsible umpire.   

How do ever call a balk for a quick pitch then without, in your opinion, being irresponsible?

[Stk004]

7 minutes ago, ElkOil said:

How do ever call a balk for a quick pitch then without, in your opinion, being irresponsible?

I think the point he is making is that in OBR you can prevent this whole quick pitch balk scenario by killing the play as soon as F1 begins his motion before the batter is ready. Or at least in the box. 

[ElkOil]

10 minutes ago, maven said:

FED does not require a pitch in order to have an illegal pitch: once the infraction is committed, the ball is dead.

To more directly answer @ricka56's question, when the pitcher started his motion is when it became a quick pitch, so I called time, yet he delivered anyway. I can't make someone not throw a baseball -- he did that on his own. I made the call as soon as I saw the infraction.

To address your list of options above, @ricka56, number 1 is flawed because you incorrectly conclude that since the delivery was interrupted, there can be no pitch and therefore no balk.

So let me ask this: Since there is a provision in FED rules for balking quick pitches, what set of circumstances would you have to see -- and how would you handle -- calling one such that it is a balk and umpire handling it responsibly? Or can it never be a responsible balk call in your opinion?

[ricka56]

3 minutes ago, ElkOil said:

How do ever call a balk for a quick pitch then without, in your opinion, being irresponsible?

The premise of your question is faulty. I don't ever call balks for quick-pitches at all because they never occur...I responsibly prevent them. If I see the start of a delivery before the batter is ready, I act responsibly, come up big, call TIME and disrupt F1's delivery and it alerts the batter that something is going on. Everything after that is nothing...even if F1 delivers the baseball (notice I didn't say pitch).  

[ElkOil]

3 minutes ago, ricka56 said:

The premise of your question is faulty. I don't ever call balks for quick-pitches at all because they never occur...I responsibly prevent them. If I see the start of a delivery before the batter is ready, I act responsibly, come up big, call TIME and disrupt F1's delivery and it alerts the batter that something is going on. Everything after that is nothing...even if F1 delivers the baseball (notice I didn't say pitch).  

Just because you prevent them and therefore are never in a position to call one, doesn't mean they don't happen. And the rule isn't reserved only for the more irresponsible umpires to call.  I seem to be the only person here who would call a quick pitch balk, so I'm willing to believe I'm wrong, however, I don't understand how. The provisions for such are in the rule book and the one I've called met the book criteria. I can't see a problem with that. As it happened, my partner for that game is the state association president and our rules interpreter. He had no issue with the call.

[scrounge]

I don't really think you two are disagreeing as much as you'd think. It sounds more like a difference in philosophy and game management. @ElkOil, you're not wrong by rule - it is a balk by strict letter. Also, @ricka56 is correct that if he kills the play in time, it very well could and likely is before the balk by letter of rule occurs. So where do we decide on which line to stand?

I would suggest - and had this happen to completion exactly once - that the very first time you see this near-QP happen - do as ricka56 suggests and kill the play immediately, telling the pitcher to wait till the batter has a reasonable chance to get set. Resume play. If he nearly does it again - well, I think you're on much sturdier ground calling that balk. Repeated stupidity should have a price. Or you could kill and warn one final time. After that? Heck yea, call that balk, warn the coach, dump the pitcher, whatever you gotta do. I've never seen this get past step 2.

[NorthTexasUmp]

2 minutes ago, scrounge said:

I don't really think you two are disagreeing as much as you'd think. It sounds more like a difference in philosophy and game management. @ElkOil, you're not wrong by rule - it is a balk by strict letter. Also, @ricka56 is correct that if he kills the play in time, it very well could and likely is before the balk by letter of rule occurs. So where do we decide on which line to stand?

I would suggest - and had this happen to completion exactly once - that the very first time you see this near-QP happen - do as ricka56 suggests and kill the play immediately, telling the pitcher to wait till the batter has a reasonable chance to get set. Resume play. If he nearly does it again - well, I think you're on much sturdier ground calling that balk. Repeated stupidity should have a price. Or you could kill and warn one final time. After that? Heck yea, call that balk, warn the coach, dump the pitcher, whatever you gotta do. I've never seen this get past step 2.

I agree. However, I have called this one time. It was a summer "select" game at a field that the batter's box was a sand box, not that it mattered. The batters obviously took a little longer to get set.  The pitcher started to pitched and I killed it. Immediately the coach says "He can pitch anytime he wants if the batter is in the box". "Coach, no, he must make sure the batter is ready". This did not go over well with the coach or the parents. After stopping the pitcher from quick pitching a couple more times, I warned him the next time he did it, I was calling an illegal pitch. Sure enough, with runners on base he did it again. I balked him. Coach decided he did not want to stay so I sent him to the parking lot and the game continued without any further issues.

[ricka56]

1 hour ago, maven said:

Odd as it might sound, we don't need an actual pitch in order to have an illegal pitch. We have this in 2-28-2: "When a pitcher commits a balk and completes his delivery to the batter, or delivers an illegal pitch, it is not considered a pitch, because the ball became dead at the time of the infraction." FED does not require a pitch in order to have an illegal pitch: once the infraction is committed, the ball is dead. Even if he does pitch, it's no pitch. 

I agree that there are times in Fed rules where an illegal act without an actual pitch is considered an illegal pitch. But those few items have been specified in the case book and written interps. I can't find (and don't believe there is) any quick-pitch reference that includes it in the few illegal pitch items where an actual pitch isn't required. The only  quick-pitch Case Book reference that I could find was 6.2.4B (old CB) As an example of the differences, with no runner(s), a quick pitch is an illegal pitch and is called a ball whether or not it goes through the strike zone. If the Fed rules makers wanted to include quick-pitch in the items where a pitch delivery was not required, then I think it would have been included here. Instead, what is written might lead one to believe that a quick-pitch requires the actual delivery of a live-ball pitch.