Balk or Let it Play

[LittleBlue]

I had a situation in my frosh game today. R2, outs don't matter. F1 comes set and begins his delivery. R2 breaks for 3rd. F1 (righty) steps to 3rd, but doesn't throw. He hesitstes and then throws. Took me a second, but after taking in all the information I balked F1 and put R2 at 3rd. No one had a problem with it, but talking with my partner after the half inning he wasn't sure it was a balk because the pitcher is allowed to make a play. I said I balked him because he started his delivery, stepped toward 3rd and never threw while still in contact with the rubber. I'm pretty sure that was the correct call, but would it have been a balk too if he did throw because it was an unoccupied base or is F1 allowed to make a play this way? I said F1 had to step off to throw to a base in this case, but my partner said he think he didn't have to. Now I'm questioning myself, but I still think it would be a balk. What would you guys do?

[stkjock]

from recent threads I've read on UE, the rules allow F1  to throw to a unoccupied base if he's making a play on the runner.

 

your first question I'm not qualified to answer

[basejester]

12 hours ago, LittleBlue said:

I had a situation in my frosh game today. R2, outs don't matter. F1 comes set and begins his delivery. R2 breaks for 3rd. F1 (righty) steps to 3rd, but doesn't throw. He hesitstes and then throws. Took me a second, but after taking in all the information I balked F1 and put R2 at 3rd. No one had a problem with it, but talking with my partner after the half inning he wasn't sure it was a balk because the pitcher is allowed to make a play. I said I balked him because he started his delivery, stepped toward 3rd and never threw  . . .

That's valid.  The details of "started his delivery" can be tricky.  Usually pitchers who change their mind about where they're throwing screw it up, so, without actually seeing the play, I would guess you ruled correctly.

Quote

 

 

while still in contact with the rubber. I'm pretty sure that was the correct call, but would it have been a balk too if he did throw because it was an unoccupied base or is F1 allowed to make a play this way?

He's allowed to throw to an unnoccupied base to make a play.

Quote

I said F1 had to step off to throw to a base in this case, but my partner said he think he didn't have to. Now I'm questioning myself, but I still think it would be a balk.

He doesn't have to step off to throw to a base to make a play.

Was the runner thrown out during the actual play?  If not, then it doesn't matter much if you balked this or not.

 

[LittleBlue]

43 minutes ago, basejester said:

That's valid.  The details of "started his delivery" can be tricky.  Usually pitchers who change their mind about where they're throwing screw it up, so, without actually see the play, I would guess you ruled correctly.

He's allowed to throw to an unnoccupied base to make a play.

He doesn't have to step off to throw to a base to make a play.

Was the runner thrown out during the actual play?  If not, then it doesn't matter much if you balked this or not.

 

We killed it before the play at 3rd happened but after he threw to the base. Sounds like we might have messed this one up.

[ricka56]

With R2, the start of a delivery (commitment to pitch) would include a movement towards HP, but you say that he committed to pitch and stepped towards 3B to make a play on R2 stealing. Those are mutually exclusive happenings. I dunno what you had. 

[maineump]

Depends on the rule set. In FED or NCAA, if you ruled the balk because of the double take to 3B (that is legal). He was making a play as the runner was going.

If you ruled the balk because he started to the plate then OK. You only kill the play in FED, the other rule sets, let it play out before making the call. This is really HTBT to see what happened.

[noumpere]

To add to the above, when the pitcher lifts his foot, he is committed to throw to the plate, to second or to the base he is facing.  Once the pivot foot crosses the rubber, he is committed to throw to second or the plate.  Only once there is motion toward the plate (could be with a body lean) is he committed to throw to the plate.

 

So, in your example, he might have "started his delivery" but he might bot have been "committed" to the plate -- so the move to third could be legal.

 

It's an interesting (to me) question as to whether the first "fake to third" would be legal under OBR.

[LittleBlue]

2 hours ago, noumpere said:

To add to the above, when the pitcher lifts his foot, he is committed to throw to the plate, to second or to the base he is facing.  Once the pivot foot crosses the rubber, he is committed to throw to second or the plate.  Only once there is motion toward the plate (could be with a body lean) is he committed to throw to the plate.

 

So, in your example, he might have "started his delivery" but he might bot have been "committed" to the plate -- so the move to third could be legal.

 

It's an interesting (to me) question as to whether the first "fake to third" would be legal under OBR.

Thinking about what's been said above,  it looks like I/we messed it up. Looked so odd to me that I balked it,  but I guess it was legal. That's a good question about OBR. 

[NovaScotiaBlue]

I'm strictly speaking OBR in this case (No FED in Canada) A pitcher cannot feint a throw to 3rd base. That's a rule that has been around for a couple of years now. Normally it's the fake to 3rd wheel and throw back to 1st. so what I get from the OP is the pitcher hitched and did not throw to 3rd and then threw the ball. Treat it the same way as you would if he did this to 1st base I feel you got it correct with the balk call.

[Rich Ives]

1 hour ago, NovaScotiaBlue said:

I'm strictly speaking OBR in this case (No FED in Canada) A pitcher cannot feint a throw to 3rd base. That's a rule that has been around for a couple of years now. Normally it's the fake to 3rd wheel and throw back to 1st. so what I get from the OP is the pitcher hitched and did not throw to 3rd and then threw the ball. Treat it the same way as you would if he did this to 1st base I feel you got it correct with the balk call.

In the OP: He's from NJ and said it was a frosh game. FED.

[noumpere]

7 hours ago, NovaScotiaBlue said:

I'm strictly speaking OBR in this case (No FED in Canada) A pitcher cannot feint a throw to 3rd base. That's a rule that has been around for a couple of years now. Normally it's the fake to 3rd wheel and throw back to 1st. so what I get from the OP is the pitcher hitched and did not throw to 3rd and then threw the ball. Treat it the same way as you would if he did this to 1st base I feel you got it correct with the balk call.

I know that the rule changed.   The question is did they intend for 6.02(a) (2) to apply to this play, or does 6.02(a) (4) apply?

[Replacematt]

3 hours ago, noumpere said:

I know that the rule changed.   The question is did they intend for 6.02(a) (2) to apply to this play, or does 6.02(a) (4) apply?

Is your question if the latter rule allows a feint to an unoccupied third base for the purpose of making a play?

[noumpere]

7 hours ago, Matt said:

Is your question if the latter rule allows a feint to an unoccupied third base for the purpose of making a play?

It's perhaps a two-part question.

 

Can F1 feint to third if R2 is going?  If no, is is what MLB wanted when they changed the rule or is it an unintended consequence of the change? (I don't really know that anyone here will know the latter)

[basejester]

This seems pretty definitive:

--

(b/2) The pitcher, while touching his plate, feints a throw to first or third base and fails to complete the throw;

--

If the pitcher violates any of the cases, he's committed a balk.   So, even if a move is legal under d/4, that doesn't make it any less a violation of b/2.

I'm guessing they didn't think about this case at all.  

[maven]

18 minutes ago, basejester said:

This seems pretty definitive:

--

(b/2) The pitcher, while touching his plate, feints a throw to first or third base and fails to complete the throw;

--

If the pitcher violates any of the case, he's committed a balk.   So, even if a move is legal under d/4, that doesn't make it any less a violation of b/2.

I'm guessing they didn't think about this case at all.  

It's definitive on the assumption that in their rule change MLB intended to disallow an exception for feinting to 3B for the purpose of making a play.

And that, of course, is the very question @noumpere poses.

[basejester]

6 minutes ago, maven said:

It's definitive on the assumption that in their rule change MLB intended to disallow an exception for feinting to 3B for the purpose of making a play.

I don't need to know what they intended when the rule is right there in black and white.  Do you think a pitcher can legally feint to first "for purposes of making a play" under the the old rule?  Why would this be any different?

6 minutes ago, maven said:

And that, of course, is the very question @noumpere poses.

And that, of course, was my answer.  What's yours?

 

 

[maven]

My slogan for explaining the rule change prohibiting feinting to 3B was that "3B is the new 1B." If that's right, then the answer is that F1 may not feint to 3B for any reason, including making a play.

But I'm not sure that's right, because there is a substantial difference after all between 1B and 3B, namely that a runner can advance to an unoccupied 3B prior to the pitch, whereas that is not possible for 1B. That difference might warrant an exception to the "no feints to 3B" rule, where it would not warrant such an exception to 1B.

And I know you like black-letter rule, so how about this one: the rule that prohibits F1 from throwing or feinting to an unoccupied base has an exception for F1 making a play. That exception is not explicitly — in that very rule itself — limited to 2B, so it might extend to 3B. So we have the original question regarding which rule governs feints to 3B.

I have no answer to that, though if I had to bet I'd guess that a feint for the purpose of a play would be permitted. That's not what they were targeting with the rule change.

[Richvee]

54 minutes ago, maven said:

My slogan for explaining the rule change prohibiting feinting to 3B was that "3B is the new 1B." If that's right, then the answer is that F1 may not feint to 3B for any reason, including making a play.

But I'm not sure that's right, because there is a substantial difference after all between 1B and 3B, namely that a runner can advance to an unoccupied 3B prior to the pitch, whereas that is not possible for 1B. That difference might warrant an exception to the "no feints to 3B" rule, where it would not warrant such an exception to 1B.

And I know you like black-letter rule, so how about this one: the rule that prohibits F1 from throwing or feinting to an unoccupied base has an exception for F1 making a play. That exception is not explicitly — in that very rule itself — limited to 2B, so it might extend to 3B. So we have the original question regarding which rule governs feints to 3B.

I have no answer to that, though if I had to bet I'd guess that a feint for the purpose of a play would be permitted. That's not what they were targeting with the rule change.

I sent this question to a friend of mine with deep ties to the MLB umpiring community. I'll let you know what he has to say.

[ricka56]

13 hours ago, maven said:

My slogan for explaining the rule change prohibiting feinting to 3B was that "3B is the new 1B." If that's right, then the answer is that F1 may not feint to 3B for any reason, including making a play.

But I'm not sure that's right, because there is a substantial difference after all between 1B and 3B, namely that a runner can advance to an unoccupied 3B prior to the pitch, whereas that is not possible for 1B. That difference might warrant an exception to the "no feints to 3B" rule, where it would not warrant such an exception to 1B.

And I know you like black-letter rule, so how about this one: the rule that prohibits F1 from throwing or feinting to an unoccupied base has an exception for F1 making a play. That exception is not explicitly — in that very rule itself — limited to 2B, so it might extend to 3B. So we have the original question regarding which rule governs feints to 3B.

I have no answer to that, though if I had to bet I'd guess that a feint for the purpose of a play would be permitted. That's not what they were targeting with the rule change.

I remember suggesting that the feint to 3B to trap a stealing R2 should not be a balk the first year of the new rule. "Making a play on a runner" was my argument. But the explanation that we got (Wendelstedt interp, I believe) was that a feint (fake) is not a play, so there is no exception. F1 has to throw the ball to 3B or it is a balk. I still don't like it.  

[basejester]

"Except for the purpose of making a play" is an exception for #4, not the whole balk rule.  Look at the way this rule is organized.  We're obviously not going to apply it to 11, for example.  "The pitcher, while touching his plate, accidentally or intentionally has the ball slip or fall out of his hand or glove except for the purpose of making a play;"

 

6.02 (5.07)(f ), (g), ( i ), ( j ) Pitcher Illegal Action
(a) (8.05) Balks
If there is a runner, or runners, it is a balk when:

(1) The pitcher, while touching his plate, makes any motion
naturally associated with his pitch and fails to make such
delivery;

(2) The pitcher, while touching his plate, feints a throw to
first or third base and fails to complete the throw;

(3) The pitcher, while touching his plate, fails to step directly
toward a base before throwing to that base;

(4) The pitcher, while touching his plate, throws, or feints a
throw to an unoccupied base, except for the purpose of
making a play;

(5) The pitcher makes an illegal pitch;

(6 ) The pitcher delivers the ball to the batter while he is not
facing the batter;

(7) The pitcher makes any motion naturally associated with
his pitch while he is not touching the pitcher’s plate;

(8) The pitcher unnecessarily delays the game;

(9) The pitcher, without having the ball, stands on or astride
the pitcher’s plate or while off the plate, he feints a pitch;

(10) The pitcher, after coming to a legal pitching position,
removes one hand from the ball other than in an actual
pitch, or in throwing to a base;

(11) The pitcher, while touching his plate, accidentally or inten-
tionally has the ball slip or fall out of his hand or glove;

(12) The pitcher, while giving an intentional base on balls,
pitches when the catcher is not in the catcher’s box;

(13) The pitcher delivers the pitch from Set Position without
coming to a stop.