Jump to content
ousafe

Illegal Pitch?

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Jimurray said:

NFHS has a specific case play that prohibits a pause during the windup. You might perceive that with this pitcher. I wouldn't.

Some part of his body is moving. That's not a pause. (We are agreeing) some people are seeing something that isn't there. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, johnnyg08 said:

Some part of his body is moving. That's not a pause. (We are agreeing) some people are seeing something that isn't there. 

If you don't like this trick you could perceive the open hand as a request for time and call time as this umpire did:

You would then have a no pitch in any code.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Jimurray said:

If you don't like this trick you could perceive the open hand as a request for time and call time as this umpire did:

You would then have a no pitch in any code.

ha ha...that's great! Also...notice the batter sat on it and roped it. It's a gimmick...nothing more

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This might be where the college pitcher got his idea for the misdirection pitch. The following article and video are from the USAToday.com website about the Chinese Professional Baseball League All-Star game played in July 2019.

By Andrew Joseph

Typically, when we think of the hidden-ball trick in baseball, it involves some shenanigans aimed at fooling the baserunner into an out.

And it absolutely doesn’t happen with no runners on base. Well, at least not usually.

During the weekend’s Chinese Professional Baseball League All-Star Game, former MLB pitcher Mitch Lively went into the second inning with some tricks up his sleeve. With nobody on in the inning, he attempted a hidden-ball trick aimed at fooling the batter.

The right-handed pitcher hid the baseball with his left index finger while exposing the empty glove and empty right hand to the batter. The trick didn’t really confuse the hitter, but the umpire had no idea what was happening.

The hitter, smiling the entire time, acted like he was going to call time but then knocked a base hit to left field. That hit wouldn’t stand, though, because the umpire apparently ruled that the windup was illegal and blew the play dead.

I don’t know—it looked fine to me. We need to see more of this trickeration in games that actually count.

Despite the botched hidden-ball attempt, Lively ended up being the winning pitcher.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/10/2020 at 10:02 AM, maven said:

Why guess? What rule prohibits it?

Okay, @maven: I'll throw myself out there. 

When I saw the video on my social media feed (and without looking at a rulebook) I immediately thought it was a balk (if the pitcher was pitching from the windup with the bases loaded).  Specifically, I thought it was a balk because the pitcher removed his hand from the ball without delivering it to the plate (or to a base on a pickoff).  Some people on other sites have argued that although this pitcher removed his hands from the ball multiple times during this course of this wind-up/delivery, this is legal because of the language in the rule which reads "other than in an actual pitch."  I, personally, have always read that rule as providing an exception which allows the hand to come off the ball as the ball is being propelled (pitched) toward the batter (or to a base on a pickoff). One would be hard-pressed to convince me that the rules drafters intended "other than in an actual pitch" to mean that the pitcher can remove his hand from the ball multiple times during the entirety of his wind-up;delivery. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, lawump said:

Okay, @maven: I'll throw myself out there. 

When I saw the video on my social media feed (and without looking at a rulebook) I immediately thought it was a balk (if the pitcher was pitching from the windup with the bases loaded).  Specifically, I thought it was a balk because the pitcher removed his hand from the ball without delivering it to the plate (or to a base on a pickoff).  Some people on other sites have argued that although this pitcher removed his hands from the ball multiple times during this course of this wind-up/delivery, this is legal because of the language in the rule which reads "other than in an actual pitch."  I, personally, have always read that rule as providing an exception which allows the hand to come off the ball as the ball is being propelled (pitched) toward the batter (or to a base on a pickoff). One would be hard-pressed to convince me that the rules drafters intended "other than in an actual pitch" to mean that the pitcher can remove his hand from the ball multiple times during the entirety of his wind-up;delivery. 

I think all of the scenarios being discussed involved bases empty scenarios..IOW do we have a legal pitch? 

OBR provides an exception for removing the hand from the ball on a pitch (of course) maybe   x.xx a(10)?

I'm not sure there is a dispute about this being a balk with runners on base. Is there? :-) 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, lawump said:

Okay, @maven: I'll throw myself out there. 

When I saw the video on my social media feed (and without looking at a rulebook) I immediately thought it was a balk (if the pitcher was pitching from the windup with the bases loaded).  Specifically, I thought it was a balk because the pitcher removed his hand from the ball without delivering it to the plate (or to a base on a pickoff).  Some people on other sites have argued that although this pitcher removed his hands from the ball multiple times during this course of this wind-up/delivery, this is legal because of the language in the rule which reads "other than in an actual pitch."  I, personally, have always read that rule as providing an exception which allows the hand to come off the ball as the ball is being propelled (pitched) toward the batter (or to a base on a pickoff). One would be hard-pressed to convince me that the rules drafters intended "other than in an actual pitch" to mean that the pitcher can remove his hand from the ball multiple times during the entirety of his wind-up;delivery. 

You're referring to OBR 6.02(a)(10):

Quote

[It is a balk when, with runners on:]

(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;

You seem to be interpreting this provision quite narrowly, to refer to the release of a pitch.

Fair enough. I don't care about defending the legality of the move, which I can't imagine being effective (see the Chinese All-Star game clip). If it becomes a thing, we'll get an official interp. In the clips we have, I don't see a balk being called (maybe no runners?).

The phrasing ("removes one hand from the ball") reminds me of the old riddle about a guy having 2 coins totaling 15¢, and one of them is not a nickel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, lawump said:

Okay, @maven: I'll throw myself out there. 

When I saw the video on my social media feed (and without looking at a rulebook) I immediately thought it was a balk (if the pitcher was pitching from the windup with the bases loaded).  Specifically, I thought it was a balk because the pitcher removed his hand from the ball without delivering it to the plate (or to a base on a pickoff).  Some people on other sites have argued that although this pitcher removed his hands from the ball multiple times during this course of this wind-up/delivery, this is legal because of the language in the rule which reads "other than in an actual pitch."  I, personally, have always read that rule as providing an exception which allows the hand to come off the ball as the ball is being propelled (pitched) toward the batter (or to a base on a pickoff). One would be hard-pressed to convince me that the rules drafters intended "other than in an actual pitch" to mean that the pitcher can remove his hand from the ball multiple times during the entirety of his wind-up;delivery. 

It also doesn't specify which hand is illegal to remove. Thus, if the gloved hand is removed from the ball, it is always a balk, under your interpretation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, maven said:

You're referring to OBR 6.02(a)(10):

You seem to be interpreting this provision quite narrowly, to refer to the release of a pitch.

I am because I think that was the drafter’s intent.  Thanks for your reply.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, lawump said:

Okay, @maven: I'll throw myself out there. 

When I saw the video on my social media feed (and without looking at a rulebook) I immediately thought it was a balk (if the pitcher was pitching from the windup with the bases loaded).  Specifically, I thought it was a balk because the pitcher removed his hand from the ball without delivering it to the plate (or to a base on a pickoff).  Some people on other sites have argued that although this pitcher removed his hands from the ball multiple times during this course of this wind-up/delivery, this is legal because of the language in the rule which reads "other than in an actual pitch."  I, personally, have always read that rule as providing an exception which allows the hand to come off the ball as the ball is being propelled (pitched) toward the batter (or to a base on a pickoff). One would be hard-pressed to convince me that the rules drafters intended "other than in an actual pitch" to mean that the pitcher can remove his hand from the ball multiple times during the entirety of his wind-up;delivery. 

I believe the rules makers worded that rule as one hand because they were envisioning a pre delivery violation such as separating the hands without starting a pitch or pickoff. It would be a violation if you separated your hands unless it was a momentary adjustment, the start of delivery or a pickoff. The rule does not even allow any removal of the hand. Thus if a set pitcher separated his hands to pitch it would be a violation. We know that's not the case because the rule allows him to pitch once he removes his hand. You can't then reinstate the rule once he starts his delivery. You don't balk pitchers who pop their glove during delivery.

"(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;" 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NCAA makes it a little more clear that in the windup the hand restriction is prior to delivery:

"Note 1: When a pitcher is on the rubber with his hands together, before any natural movement that commits the pitcher to pitch, he may move his hand within his glove to adjust the ball.  Should the pitcher separate his hands after taking a legal pitching position, a balk shall be called."

And in the set it would seem also the case:

"9-3-h� The pitcher takes either hand off the ball after having taken a stretch or set position unless making a pitch or throwing to any base; Note: The pitcher may momentarily adjust the ball in the glove and separate the hands as long as it is prior to assuming a legal pitching position."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, lawump said:

I am because I think that was the drafter’s intent.  Thanks for your reply.

Did you notice that the corresponding FED rule (6-2-4e) applies only to the set, not the windup?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

On 4/11/2020 at 11:46 AM, Jimurray said:

If you don't like this trick you could perceive the open hand as a request for time and call time as this umpire did:

You would then have a no pitch in any code.

I can't tell if the umpire was reacting on the pitcher's hand, or the batter's. The batter definitely put his hand up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't seen this mentioned in the @lawump line of thought (which I agree with) ... but when "the pitch" begins and "taking a legal pitching position" are very specific things which it seems many people are overlooking in their desire to not call anything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, The Man in Blue said:

I haven't seen this mentioned in the @lawump line of thought (which I agree with) ... but when "the pitch" begins and "taking a legal pitching position" are very specific things which it seems many people are overlooking in their desire to not call anything.

If you want to call something with no one on (which would probably be the sit) it would be "time". But the umps in both occurrences couldn't win for losing. The no call ump allowed a strike and the "time" ump took away a base hit. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jimurray said:

If you want to call something with no one on (which would probably be the sit) it would be "time". But the umps in both occurrences couldn't win for losing. The no call ump allowed a strike and the "time" ump took away a base hit. 

Strike = win imo

Share this post


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

I haven't seen this mentioned in the @lawump line of thought (which I agree with) ... but when "the pitch" begins and "taking a legal pitching position" are very specific things which it seems many people are overlooking in their desire to not call anything.

Huh?
The pitch begins when he starts his motion. Thus, removing the hand during the motion is while delivering the pitch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   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...