Jump to content
  • 0
Guest Curious Blue

Balk or NO Balk

Question

Guest Curious Blue

Runner on 1B no outs. First baseman playing in on grass anticipating a bunt, approximately 10 foot away from base. Pitcher while in contact with the pitchers plate, throws ball to first baseman who is still about 10 foot away from base and making no attempt to move toward 1B.  Balk or No Balk? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Recommended Posts

  • 0
2 hours ago, Biscuit said:

I've never seen someone drive back a runner without at least hoping they could catch the guy napping. Yes they understand they won't get him 99% of the time on that throw, but they still are trying to get him out, so I'd rule it a play.

I'm betting you have, in fact I would be astonished if you literally never have ... it's just that it is a boring run-of-the-mill non-event so it doesn't stick in your mind.  Unless it is one of those lazy moves and the runner knows it, so he breaks for second!

That pitcher that lolligags one over to the first baseman ... the runner who is already standing on the bag before F3 even receives the ball ... F3 immediately lobs it back to the pitcher without a tag ... those are not attempts to retire a runner.  Those are just attempts to hold him on.

I agree with you that those are plays (though some rules' wording disagrees).  So why does it matter where F3 is standing AS LONG AS it accomplishes just that.  I do not believe that this scenario was the intent of the rule.  However, it is being used to justify something that somebody didn't like.  Tighten up the wording of the rule so it covers what it needs to cover and allows what it needs to allow.  I understand you cannot write rules for all situations, but you can write rules that can be applied appropriately.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
3 hours ago, The Man in Blue said:

Tighten up the wording of the rule so it covers what it needs to cover and allows what it needs to allow.  I understand you cannot write rules for all situations, but you can write rules that can be applied appropriately.

That's precisely why we end up with interpretations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Guest Guest Guest

F1 attempts a pickoff to a startled F3 who was playing in on the grass, but in a direct line between the bag and the rubber. So the throw was indeed "directly at the bag" but F3 intercepted it before it got there. F3 was not in the vicinity of the bag. What do you guys have? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Concussion protocol ... F3 removed from the game once they get him up off the ground.  :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Mr. maven posted the following on March 2, “The appearance to the contrary is from Demetriou, who's notoriously sloppy, interpreting an NCAA rule. That rule also allows an attempt to retire a runner to otherwise excuse an illegal throw to a fielder away from the base.”

Mr. maven, I am surprised that no one has challenged you about this assertion that George Demetriou is “notoriously sloppy.” Well, I am doing so now. Can you give an example to back up your insulting assertion? I have searched the Internet and have not found any negative reviews of the man or his work—in short, he seems to have a sterling reputation. In any case, he is certainly not sloppy in his assessment of this particular rule; that’s why I included the actual NCAA rule along with his interpretation in my earlier post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
Answer this question...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...