Jump to content
  • 0
Guest dethnode

balk rules?

Question

Guest dethnode

Ok, so runners at R3 and R1.  RHP comes set, raises free foot and steps towards 3rd and feints a throw, R1 breaks to 2b on the knee raise.  Can the pitcher turn and run towards the runner or throw to second provided he has completed his step towards 3b?

 

Second Question, R1 is the only runner on base, RHP comes set, raises free foot, runner breaks, pitcher sets free foot behind 2b and runs and makes a tag on the advancing runner?

 

I know that neither are what you will see in MLB, but for stopping the track meet quality of 9u baseball, it peaked my interest.

 

Are either of these illegal?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

21 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

  • 0



Ok, so runners at R3 and R1.  RHP comes set, raises free foot and steps towards 3rd and feints a throw, R1 breaks to 2b on the knee raise.  Can the pitcher turn and run towards the runner or throw to second provided he has completed his step towards 3b?
This one depends on the rule set - assuming the feign to third is legal in your 9U, like HS/Fed rules, it should be a legal play - the feign to third would have to include disengaging from the rubber, but it likely would regardless in this case. In OBR or wherever the feign to third is illegal, it's a balk. He must complete the throw.

Second Question, R1 is the only runner on base, RHP comes set, raises free foot, runner breaks, pitcher sets free foot behind 2b and runs and makes a tag on the advancing runner?
This should NOT be legal in any rule set that I'm aware of - with only R1, once the pitcher lifts his front leg, he is committed to delivering a pitch. To alter it and make it a legal pick off move to second base, you would need an R2. He cannot make a pick off to an unoccupied base.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
7 minutes ago, isired said:



This should NOT be legal in any rule set that I'm aware of - with only R1, once the pitcher lifts his front leg, he is committed to delivering a pitch. To alter it and make it a legal pick off move to second base, you would need an R2. He cannot make a pick off to an unoccupied base.

^ Not true!

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
47 minutes ago, Guest dethnode said:

Ok, so runners at R3 and R1.  RHP comes set, raises free foot and steps towards 3rd and feints a throw, R1 breaks to 2b on the knee raise.  Can the pitcher turn and run towards the runner or throw to second provided he has completed his step towards 3b?

 

Second Question, R1 is the only runner on base, RHP comes set, raises free foot, runner breaks, pitcher sets free foot behind 2b and runs and makes a tag on the advancing runner?

 

I know that neither are what you will see in MLB, but for stopping the track meet quality of 9u baseball, it peaked my interest.

 

Are either of these illegal?

As mentioned,, depends on the rules set for the first question.

For the second, if you meant he stepped behind rubber toward 2nd it is legal to throw/feint to an unoccupied base provided he is attempting to retire/drive back a runner. Any rules set 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
1 hour ago, isired said:

He cannot make a pick off to an unoccupied base.

That is a true statement... HOWEVER, he can make a play on a runner advancing to 2nd or 3rd for that matter.

“b. failing to step with the non-pivot foot directly toward a base (occupied or unoccupied) when throwing or feinting there in an attempt to put out, or drive back a runner; or throwing or feinting to any unoccupied base when it is not an attempt to put out or drive back a runner;”

Excerpt From: NFHS. “2018 NFHS Baseball Rules Book.” iBooks. https://books.apple.com/us/book/2018-nfhs-baseball-rules-book/id1314997555

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
2 hours ago, Guest dethnode said:

I know that neither are what you will see in MLB, but for stopping the track meet quality of 9u baseball, it peaked my interest.

This is the highest level of interest for you?

Or, did you mean piqued?

I'm waiting with baited [sic] breath for the answer. ;)

 

(I will add that I agree with the previous answers that the first depends on the code and the second is legal as described.  As a practical matter, though, it's very difficult to have F1 execute this "option."  Either he commits to the pitch, and then tries to adjust and does something that creates a balk, or he's looking for the option and then can't make an accurate pith or an accurate throw to second.)

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Guest dethnode
16 minutes ago, noumpere said:

This is the highest level of interest for you?

Or, did you mean piqued?

I'm waiting with baited [sic] breath for the answer. ;)

 

 

No, it is the highest interest in my life. I simply must know how we can get some 9 year old runners out lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Guest dethnode
1 hour ago, noumpere said:

This is the highest level of interest for you?

Or, did you mean piqued?

I'm waiting with baited [sic] breath for the answer. ;)

 

(I will add that I agree with the previous answers that the first depends on the code and the second is legal as described.  As a practical matter, though, it's very difficult to have F1 execute this "option."  Either he commits to the pitch, and then tries to adjust and does something that creates a balk, or he's looking for the option and then can't make an accurate pith or an accurate throw to second.)

 

 

Honestly, the way I envision this, is simply to gamble on the inside move to second base.  At 9U around me, about 99% of the time the runner is going to 2b on the first pitch and is taking off on the front foot leaving the ground.  So, as long as that's the only runner, take the risk and perform an inside move.  Worst case its a balk and the runner is where he was gonna be on the next pitch anyway. 

Now follow up question, say pitcher performs the inside move to 2b, R1 was going to go, starts to run to 2b but realizes and tries to go back to 1b.  Can the pitcher fake the throw to 2b and then make the throw to  after his non pivot foot has landed behind the rubber? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0



For the second, if you meant he stepped behind rubber toward 2nd it is legal to throw/feint to an unoccupied base provided he is attempting to retire/drive back a runner. Any rules set 
So you're saying making an 'inside move' (RHP) to an unoccupied second base with a runner advancing would be legal? Had this exact play, except R1 & R3, in a NY Catholic HS league playoff game Spring 2019 and a balk was called because second was unoccupied, even though R1 was advancing, and they awarded the go-ahead run home.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Guest dethnode
15 minutes ago, isired said:


 

So you're saying making an 'inside move' (RHP) to an unoccupied second base with a runner advancing would be legal? Had this exact play, except R1 & R3, in a NY Catholic HS league playoff game Spring 2019 and a balk was called because second was unoccupied, even though R1 was advancing, and they awarded the go-ahead run home.

Definitely would not try it with a runner on 3b, then the risk of the balk becomes more than the potential reward of the out...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Definitely would not try it with a runner on 3b, then the risk of the balk becomes more than the potential reward of the out...
Why? If the runner is moving and it's legal to move to an unoccupied base that the R1 is advancing to, there should be zero chance of a balk whether there's a runner on third or not, no?

Or are you saying this is inconsistently called, like the once a year we seem to get a balk call when neither the SS or 2B is near second and the pitcher makes a move and doesn't throw?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Guest dethnode
29 minutes ago, isired said:

Why? If the runner is moving and it's legal to move to an unoccupied base that the R1 is advancing to, there should be zero chance of a balk whether there's a runner on third or not, no?

Or are you saying this is inconsistently called, like the once a year we seem to get a balk call when neither the SS or 2B is near second and the pitcher makes a move and doesn't throw?

I would just be hesitant because you do have to trust that the pitcher is going to set the foot behind the rubber and not off to the side, not fall down while trying to cross his feet over one another, not throw the ball out to center field, not bend his knee on the pivot leg, etc

 

there are a lot of things that could go wrong that would give the R3 an easy path home.  With runners 1R and 3R, I like the idea for a RHP to Direct step to 3b for the pick off, R1 will likely take off on the leg raise and the 3rd baseman can then try to make the throw to second, its a shorter throw than the catcher has to make and it pulls R3 back to the bag.  

3b can also then fake the throw to 2nd to try and get the runner to get up and rush off to go home, then its an easy out at the plate for 3b to throw to catcher. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
1 hour ago, isired said:


 

So you're saying making an 'inside move' (RHP) to an unoccupied second base with a runner advancing would be legal? Had this exact play, except R1 & R3, in a NY Catholic HS league playoff game Spring 2019 and a balk was called because second was unoccupied, even though R1 was advancing, and they awarded the go-ahead run home.

If the runner was advancing or gave the impression of advancing that is a legal move. If that league allowed protests it would have been upheld if the protest comittee was more knowledgeable than the guys wearing umpire shirts at that game and the reason for the balk was as is described.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
1 hour ago, isired said:


 

So you're saying making an 'inside move' (RHP) to an unoccupied second base with a runner advancing would be legal? Had this exact play, except R1 & R3, in a NY Catholic HS league playoff game Spring 2019 and a balk was called because second was unoccupied, even though R1 was advancing, and they awarded the go-ahead run home.

That is exactly what I'm saying, well, the rule says it.  Your Umps screwed the pooch!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

2019 OBR rule

6.02 Pitcher Illegal Action

(a) Balks

If there is a runner, or runners, it is a balk when:

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

Rule 6.02 (a)(4) Comment: When determining whether the pitcher throws or feints a throw to an unoccupied base for the purpose of making a play, the umpire should consider whether a runner on the previous base demonstrates or otherwise creates an impression of his intent to advance to such unoccupied base.

From the 2018 Minor League Baseball Umpire Manual (section 6.22, p. 104):

Official Baseball Rule 6.02(a)(4) provides that the pitcher be charged with a balk if, while in contact with the rubber, he throws to an unoccupied base except for the purpose of making a play.

Play 1:  Runners on first and second, pitcher in set position. Runner breaks for third base and pitcher throws to third base.

Ruling 1: Legal play.

Play 2: Runners on first and second, pitcher in set position. Runner bluffs going to third base and pitcher throws to third base. However, runner did not go.

Ruling 2:  Balk under OBR 6.02(a)(4).

The key to understanding the above two plays is for the umpire to use good judgment in deciding whether or not the runner on the previous base demonstrates or otherwise creates an impression of his intent to advance to such unoccupied base…

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
That is exactly what I'm saying, well, the rule says it.  Your Umps screwed the pooch!
Yeah, funny thing is the coach asked why and he replied "he threw to an unoccupied base" and literally everyone - on the field, in the stands, everyone - nodded and you heard murmers of 'yup, threw to an unoccupied base'... oh well. The game didn't end there, and we went on to get soundly thrashed in their last at bat so whatever...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Just for you, Mr. isired--because (“everyone on the field, in the stands, everyone - nodded and you heard murmurs of 'yup, threw to an unoccupied base”) they all were wrong--

2013 NFHS Baseball Rules Interpretations

SITUATION 19: The runner at first base takes off in an attempt to steal second base. The pitcher legally makes a spin move and throws to unoccupied second base to easily retire the stealing runner. The third-base coach argues, saying the pitcher cannot throw to an unoccupied base. RULING: A pitcher may throw or feint a throw to an unoccupied base in an attempt to put out or drive back a runner. The out stands. (6-2-4b)

SITUATION 20: With runners at first base and second base, the runner at second bluffs a steal of third by running hard to third before he stops and retreats back to second base. The pitcher, seeing the runner take off hard to third base, legally throws to the unoccupied third base. The third-base coach wants a balk called on the pitcher since the runner from second stopped. RULING: A pitcher may throw or feint a throw to an unoccupied base in an attempt to put out or drive back a runner. As long as the umpire judges that it is reasonable for the pitcher to believe he had a play at third, even though the runner stopped, it is a legal move. (6-2-4b)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Oh, I wasn't disputing it at all - just saying its another example of one of those things that even people that know a little something about baseball have stuck in their heads as fact, that's totally wrong.

 

This is an amazing, amazing resource.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
55 minutes ago, LRZ said:

It is astonishing that the officials working a HS play-off game did not know the rule.

They didn’t have officials. They had guys wearing umpire shirts they bought. It’s not that uncommon. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
12 hours ago, Jimurray said:

They had guys wearing umpire shirts they bought...

... twenty five years ago, and have been leanin’ on their buddies, the association administrators, to not change ‘em, and make all the guys buy new shirts. Lenny’s Baseball, Buckshot & Bait Shop doesn’t carry them new pricey shirts.

... or it could be Ohio, where they force the umpires to get a new shirt every 2-5 years (new, updated embroidery!), but are too d@mn3d stubborn to change the style.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
5 hours ago, MadMax said:

... twenty five years ago, and have been leanin’ on their buddies, the association administrators, to not change ‘em, and make all the guys buy new shirts. Lenny’s Baseball, Buckshot & Bait Shop doesn’t carry them new pricey shirts.

... or it could be Ohio, where they force the umpires to get a new shirt every 2-5 years (new, updated embroidery!), but are too d@mn3d stubborn to change the style.

Ouch!  Easy with the truth there, that smarts!

In OH, the HS playoff umpires are selected by the good-ole boys network.  I truly do not believe how good you are matters, it is who you know for the most part.  There are exceptions of course, but the guys that get the playoff spots in my area are not the best umpires necessarily, but somehow they are all involved in leadership spots by some large coincidence.

 

  • Sad 1

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...