Is this a balk?

[Mike Prince]

Ruleset is OBR. Pitcher pitching from the set. He takes his stretch position with his back foot behind the rubber, engages the rubber while in the stretch position then comes set. I balked him on 8.05(g) as I consider his stretch to be part of his natural pitching motion.

[Mr Umpire]

I'm having a little difficulty here.

You balked him for not using the stretch? The stretch is optional. As long as he addressed the rubber with his hands apart and then put them together, he is fine.

Or, are you saying he was straddling the rubber and was in his stretch motion? Generally, that is acceptable. As long as he is not doing anything to make the runner(s) think he is on the rubber. Such as coming set while not touching the plate. It doesn't sound like a balk to me as I am imagining this. But, I wasn't there.

[JaxRolo]

Let me get this straight.

Is he straddling the rubber and then moving his back feet forward to get on the rubber? If so I see nothing wrong.

[Mike Prince]

Yes that is what he is doing, but while straddling the rubber he is already in the stretch looking to the plate just like he would be if he was on the rubber for a normal pitch.

[sdix00]

Yes that is what he is doing, but while straddling the rubber he is already in the stretch looking to the plate just like he would be if he was on the rubber for a normal pitch.

Please clarify your definition of the "stretch". I have heard others use the terms "stretch" and "set" interchangeably. Also, the NFHS rule book uses Set ambiguously as well.

For our purposes:

stretch= hands apart, cannot pitch

set=hands together, can pitch

Which one is he doing while straddling the rubber?

[Mike Prince]

His hands are apart. Even though he is not just standing there (he is simulating the exact same stretch he is in before he comes set on a normal pitch with a wide spread of his legs and looking to the plate like he will come set and pitch) it sounds like I kicked this one. Fortunately (or not) this is Cal Ripken majors and our local rules have a 2-week warn period for balks so there was no consequence of the wrong call and it is somewhat correctable as I have the same team again Thursday night.

[sdix00]

Yep, sounds like this is not a balk.

Anyone who owns the Jim Evans Balk video will recommend it wholeheartedly. It is virtually impossible to really grasp the ins and outs of the pitching regulations without the video or hundreds of dollars of comparable training.

Watch it several times, ask questions, watch it again, watch the 100 MLB balk clips, watch the vid again. I promise you will not be disappointed.

[Dean]

His hands are apart. Even though he is not just standing there (he is simulating the exact same stretch he is in before he comes set on a normal pitch with a wide spread of his legs and looking to the plate like he will come set and pitch) it sounds like I kicked this one.

While what you described does not sound like a balk - remeber that F1 cannot take signs while off the pitching plate, cannot simulate coming set while stradling the rubber (bring the hands together would probably constitute that.)

So while he can stand astride the rubber - he is restricted to what he may do. legally stepping on the rubber would be one of the things he could do.

[Mr Umpire]

His hands are apart. Even though he is not just standing there (he is simulating the exact same stretch he is in before he comes set on a normal pitch with a wide spread of his legs and looking to the plate like he will come set and pitch) it sounds like I kicked this one. Fortunately (or not) this is Cal Ripken majors and our local rules have a 2-week warn period for balks so there was no consequence of the wrong call and it is somewhat correctable as I have the same team again Thursday night.

As long as they and you are learning, then it works out for the best.

As a side note, even if he is taking his signs while off the rubber, it is not a balk. Just a "Don't do that" with no penalties. Call "Time" and tell him not to do ONLY if the opposing manager says something. Otherwise, leave it alone and save a lot of grief.

[yawetag]

remeber that F1 cannot take signs while off the pitching plate

Rule cite, please.

[Mr Umpire]

remeber that F1 cannot take signs while off the pitching plate

Rule cite, please.

8.01 Pitchers shall take signs from the catcher while in contact with the pitcher’s plate.

[yawetag]

remeber that F1 cannot take signs while off the pitching plate

Rule cite, please.

8.01 Pitchers shall take signs from the catcher while in contact with the pitcher’s plate.

1. If the catcher is flashing signs while he's off the rubber, what are you going to do?

2. If he takes signs from the catcher while off the rubber, then contacts the rubber and takes signs, what are you going to do?

[Mr Umpire]

remeber that F1 cannot take signs while off the pitching plate

Rule cite, please.

8.01 Pitchers shall take signs from the catcher while in contact with the pitcher’s plate.

1. If the catcher is flashing signs while he's off the rubber, what are you going to do?

2. If he takes signs from the catcher while off the rubber, then contacts the rubber and takes signs, what are you going to do?

1. Nothing as long as the opposing manager says nothing. If he does, call "Time" and tell F1 to take his signs after engaging the rubber. (Did this once ever and it was earlier this year. Coach claimed his runners couldn't take a proper lead while the pitcher was off the rubber.)

2. Same as above.

[sdix00]

remeber that F1 cannot take signs while off the pitching plate

Rule cite, please.

8.01 Pitchers shall take signs from the catcher while in contact with the pitcher’s plate.

1. If the catcher is flashing signs while he's off the rubber, what are you going to do?

2. If he takes signs from the catcher while off the rubber, then contacts the rubber and takes signs, what are you going to do?

OBR ONLY:

I am learning, through the valuable discussions on this board, that 8.01 tells us what the pitcher must do. If he does not do it, then there are no penalties provided (with exceptions). This tells me that 8.01 is a "do this, not that" section. If F1 does something different than what is spelled out in 8.01, I have "Time! Pitcher do it this way, not that way". There ARE penalties described in 8.01, however these are duplicates of penalties described in other sections, (i.e. 8.05 balks). So I look at these as simple references to the other sections. It is apparent to me that I CAN NOT balk F1 for violation of any part of 8.01, UNLESS 8.01 specifically spells out a penalty for an action, and even in that case, it is simply repeating a penalty already spelled out in another section.

IF I balk F1, I will never explain that he violated 8.01. Even if there is a balk provided in 8.01, I will probably cite the actual balk rule, not the reference to the rule in 8.01.

-SO-

F1 takes his sign off the rubber, I have "Time! Pitcher, you must take your signs while engaged."

The way I understand 8.01, this is all I am allowed to to do.

NFHS is different and I don't want to confuse the issue by comparing it.

[mstaylor]

As long as the pitcher is not quick pitching I don't sweat them taking signs off the rubber. If it looks there is going to be a problem, I tell the catcher to not give him signs while he is off or go out and talk to him. The manager is correct, his runners should not take a lead while he is off the rubber.

I don't cite rule numbers anyway. Use some verbage from the rule but paraphrase it.

[sdix00]

As long as the pitcher is not quick pitching I don't sweat them taking signs off the rubber. If it looks there is going to be a problem, I tell the catcher to not give him signs while he is off or go out and talk to him. The manager is correct, his runners should not take a lead while he is off the rubber.

I don't cite rule numbers anyway. Use some verbage from the rule but paraphrase it.

I think this is why we need to enforce the rule. On some fields I umpire , the rubber is not very visible to the runners. If F1 is getting his sign, the runner should be able to reasonably expect that F1 is on the rubber, because the rules require it.

[Dean]

Didn't mean to take this into a diffrent direction (i.e. taking signs off the rubber)

As many others have said - its nothing unless someone complains - then it is a don't do that discussion.

If at older levels theycontinue to defy your direction (and the opposing coach is still complaining, you could remove them from the game for not following your directions, but it will NEVER get that far.

[carolinablue]

As long as the pitcher is not quick pitching I don't sweat them taking signs off the rubber. If it looks there is going to be a problem, I tell the catcher to not give him signs while he is off or go out and talk to him. The manager is correct, his runners should not take a lead while he is off the rubber.

I don't cite rule numbers anyway. Use some verbage from the rule but paraphrase it.

I think this is why we need to enforce the rule. On some fields I umpire , the rubber is not very visible to the runners. If F1 is getting his sign, the runner should be able to reasonably expect that F1 is on the rubber, because the rules require it.

If they can't see the rubber go out there and dust if off. LOL

[sdix00]

This clause from J/R caused a pretty heated argument on another board. (I didn't really participate in the argument because I knew I was wrong, just didn't know why.)

From J/R:

NFHS 6-1-1-It is a balk/ball if an in-contact pitcher fails to take sign(s) from the catcher prior to pitching, or a pitcher takes signs from the catcher while not in-contact.

This article seems to help resolve this issue.

http://www.amateurumpire.com/amateur...ech/mech08.htm

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

EDIT:

Updating the link with an Archive.org copy since the site went offline in July 2011.

http://web.archive.org/web/20110522104227/http://www.amateurumpire.com/amateurumpire/mech/mech08.htm

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Most on this thread already knew this. So I am just adding this post for future generations.

I am one of those who needs more than "that's just the way it is" explanations. And I finally found one.

I can let this issue go now.

[yawetag]

Most on this thread already knew this. So I am just adding this post for future generations.

You're making an assumption future generations know how to search.

[sdix00]

Most on this thread already knew this. So I am just adding this post for future generations.

You're making an assumption future generations know how to search.

Did you hear about the umpire who got hit on purpose?

EDIT: The comment above will make no sense to future generations.

The image below will make no sense to Umpires in Europe:

__

Can you tell it's Friday?

[LMSANS]

This clause from J/R caused a pretty heated argument on another board. (I didn't really participate in the argument because I knew I was wrong, just didn't know why.)

From J/R:

NFHS 6-1-1-It is a balk/ball if an in-contact pitcher fails to take sign(s) from the catcher prior to pitching, or a pitcher takes signs from the catcher while not in-contact.

This article seems to help resolve this issue.

http://www.amateurumpire.com/amateur...ech/mech08.htm

Most on this thread already knew this. So I am just adding this post for future generations.

I am one of those who needs more than "that's just the way it is" explanations. And I finally found one.

I can let this issue go now.

Holy crap! That is old! RS was a cadet!