LLWS - Curacao Pitcher

[mwest5575]

9 hours ago, Rich Ives said:

With no runners It is only an IP if it meets the "real" definition of an IP  (quick pitch, pitch while not on rubber) 

With runners it's an IP if it breaks a balk rule (same rule, violation has different terms).

It IS about messing with the runner, not the batter.  

You're adding words. 8.01(d) doesn't say "real" definition of illegal pitch. 8.01 describes two legal pitching deliveries. I assume since it says nothing about runners and that pitchers pitching to batters is fundamental to the game, that how you pitch to the batter does matter, especially given the length of descriptions of the two legal deliveries. From the windup you get one step back and one forward with the free foot and that you pitch without interruption or alteration. Anything else from the windup does not meet the definition of a legal pitch, and could potentially create a disadvantage to the batter, who has an expectation to see one of two legal pitch deliveries. 

I think LL rules are messy because they are amended from OBR and not always clearly so. But I just disagree that pitching rules are only there to protect runners, and that 8.01(d) only refers to the definition in Rule 2.00. Why would we allow pitchers to pitch in a way not specified in 8.01 that could create a disadvantage to the batter?

[Jimurray]

7 minutes ago, mwest5575 said:

You're adding words. 8.01(d) doesn't say "real" definition of illegal pitch. 8.01 describes two legal pitching deliveries. I assume since it says nothing about runners and that pitchers pitching to batters is fundamental to the game, that how you pitch to the batter does matter, especially given the length of descriptions of the two legal deliveries. From the windup you get one step back and one forward with the free foot and that you pitch without interruption or alteration. Anything else from the windup does not meet the definition of a legal pitch, and could potentially create a disadvantage to the batter, who has an expectation to see one of two legal pitch deliveries. 

I think LL rules are messy because they are amended from OBR and not always clearly so. But I just disagree that pitching rules are only there to protect runners, and that 8.01(d) only refers to the definition in Rule 2.00. Why would we allow pitchers to pitch in a way not specified in 8.01 that could create a disadvantage to the batter?

You can require the pitcher to comply with rule 8 but there is no penalty in rule 8 other than for the two  Illegal pitches. Do you call a ball in OBR when the pitcher stops his delivery with no one on?

[mwest5575]

That's a fair point. Stopping a delivery is one thing. But what we were talking about is a stop or adding movements or steps other than the one back one forward, and then delivering the pitch. That seems illegal by rule to me. And the point for me isn't to be punitive to the pitcher at all. I just think that timing up the pitch made difficult when you can't reasonably assume the pitch will follow the legal parameters. 

In your example it's just a no pitch. Like if the ball slips out of the pitcher's hand with no one on. But actually delivering the pitch makes the batter do something. I guess I just think it's important to make a fair balance between pitcher and batter, and pitching outside the rules for legal delivery seem unfair...If you don't want to call it illegal, then maybe not legal.

[Jimurray]

10 minutes ago, mwest5575 said:

That's a fair point. Stopping a delivery is one thing. But what we were talking about is a stop or adding movements or steps other than the one back one forward, and then delivering the pitch. That seems illegal by rule to me. And the point for me isn't to be punitive to the pitcher at all. I just think that timing up the pitch made difficult when you can't reasonably assume the pitch will follow the legal parameters. 

In your example it's just a no pitch. Like if the ball slips out of the pitcher's hand with no one on. But actually delivering the pitch makes the batter do something. I guess I just think it's important to make a fair balance between pitcher and batter, and pitching outside the rules for legal delivery seem unfair...If you don't want to call it illegal, then maybe not legal.

A pitcher can vary his delivery and speed on every pitch. He does not even have to windup from the windup. As long as he is not quick pitching there is no penalty. 

[Rich Ives]

1 hour ago, mwest5575 said:

You're adding words. 8.01(d) doesn't say "real" definition of illegal pitch. 8.01 describes two legal pitching deliveries. I assume since it says nothing about runners and that pitchers pitching to batters is fundamental to the game, that how you pitch to the batter does matter, especially given the length of descriptions of the two legal deliveries. From the windup you get one step back and one forward with the free foot and that you pitch without interruption or alteration. Anything else from the windup does not meet the definition of a legal pitch, and could potentially create a disadvantage to the batter, who has an expectation to see one of two legal pitch deliveries. 

I think LL rules are messy because they are amended from OBR and not always clearly so. But I just disagree that pitching rules are only there to protect runners, and that 8.01(d) only refers to the definition in Rule 2.00. Why would we allow pitchers to pitch in a way not specified in 8.01 that could create a disadvantage to the batter?

There are only two illegal pitches. I listed them. Look in 2.00 in the LL book of the definitions in OBR. That's what I meant by "real" and those are the IP's referred to in 8.01.

[mwest5575]

I understand a pitcher can vary speed of delivery. We are talking about starting/stopping delivery or adding in steps which are not allowed according to 8.01 which is not dependent on runners.

And I know what you meant by real, and I know what Rule 2.00 says. Since it didn't reference Rule 2.00, and a whole page had been taken up describing what IS legal, I just assumed that doing things 8.01 says not to do was illegal, and would be covered in 8.01(d). It seems that is not the appropriate interpretation. I would still like to know how to handle a situation where the pitcher does something not legal, like start-stop-start a pitch or take too many steps, and then delivers a pitch. The fact that both pitch deliveries require that once you start the pitching motion you must complete it without "interruption or alteration" matters and should be enforced. The batter should not be put in jeopardy of a strike or out if the pitcher is not following the rule. Is it just a no pitch, resume count?

Obviously this happens mostly in lower levels. I have not seen it in juniors, seniors, or school ball, but that doesn't mean it's not possible. But it still seems like something that would need to be addressed. If not as an IP/ball called, then however. Thanks for the replies.

[Rich Ives]

4 hours ago, mwest5575 said:

. Why would we allow pitchers to pitch in a way not specified in 8.01 that could create a disadvantage to the batter?

Because, with the exception of the two "real" IPs, the batter is presumed to be ready for the pitch.

[beerguy55]

6 hours ago, mwest5575 said:

I understand a pitcher can vary speed of delivery. We are talking about starting/stopping delivery or adding in steps which are not allowed according to 8.01 which is not dependent on runners.

And I know what you meant by real, and I know what Rule 2.00 says. Since it didn't reference Rule 2.00, and a whole page had been taken up describing what IS legal, I just assumed that doing things 8.01 says not to do was illegal, and would be covered in 8.01(d). It seems that is not the appropriate interpretation. I would still like to know how to handle a situation where the pitcher does something not legal, like start-stop-start a pitch or take too many steps, and then delivers a pitch. The fact that both pitch deliveries require that once you start the pitching motion you must complete it without "interruption or alteration" matters and should be enforced. The batter should not be put in jeopardy of a strike or out if the pitcher is not following the rule. Is it just a no pitch, resume count?

Obviously this happens mostly in lower levels. I have not seen it in juniors, seniors, or school ball, but that doesn't mean it's not possible. But it still seems like something that would need to be addressed. If not as an IP/ball called, then however. Thanks for the replies.

So, in LL would you rule these Cueto and/or Osuna pitches as illegal?

https://streamable.com/37bj

 

 

[mwest5575]

Ha, well I'm no MLB umpire, and they seem to be fine with it. Still different than taking more than the allowed two steps from the windup, or picking your free foot up and putting it back down from the set. Just wondering how I'd respond to a coach who complains a pitcher is violating 8.01 and it is messing up his batters. "Sorry coach, we don't really worry about that rule." 

And I'm certainly not trying to be argumentative. I just don't understand why it's not enforced if it's there.