balks?

[Guest dethnode]

So while watching college baseball, I noticed a lot of pitchers, coming set, then having small weight shifts from their front to their back foot prior to actually delivering the pitch, why is this not a balk.

For reference, at 56:42 the Arkansas pitcher seems to shift his front leg, set it down, then raise and deliver.  Why is this not a balk?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KZg7y3MPp7E

[Rich Ives]

7 minutes ago, Guest dethnode said:

So while watching college baseball, I noticed a lot of pitchers, coming set, then having small weight shifts from their front to their back foot prior to actually delivering the pitch, why is this not a balk.

For reference, at 56:42 the Arkansas pitcher seems to shift his front leg, set it down, then raise and deliver.  Why is this not a balk?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KZg7y3MPp7E

Uh - because you can't pick up your foot without shifting weight to the other.

[maven]

In the clip you mention, the pitcher is not set until everything stops moving. So the foot adjustment is part of coming set. Provided the motion to come set is "uninterrupted"—a continuous motion without stopping—it's probably legal.

[Guest dethnode]

5 minutes ago, maven said:

In the clip you mention, the pitcher is not set until everything stops moving. So the foot adjustment is part of coming set. Provided the motion to come set is "uninterrupted"—a continuous motion without stopping—it's probably legal.

So, in theory, he could do this, front foot adjustment multiple times, like he is rocking from one foot to the other and that is all considered movement prior to becoming set? 

[Guest dethnode]

20 minutes ago, Rich Ives said:

Uh - because you can't pick up your foot without shifting weight to the other.

I meant that they are shifting their weight lifting their front foot and then setting it back down, then raising their front knee and delivering the pitch... 

[maven]

1 hour ago, Guest dethnode said:

So, in theory, he could do this, front foot adjustment multiple times, like he is rocking from one foot to the other and that is all considered movement prior to becoming set? 

Correct, and several MLB pitchers do exactly that (so not just in theory).

[Rich Ives]

1 hour ago, Guest dethnode said:

I meant that they are shifting their weight lifting their front foot and then setting it back down, then raising their front knee and delivering the pitch... 

Actually they aren't. The weight remains on the pivot foot while they are bouncing the free foot.

[Thunderheads]

13 hours ago, Rich Ives said:

Actually they aren't. The weight remains on the pivot foot while they are bouncing the free foot.

you knew what he meant ..........

[Thunderheads]

15 hours ago, Guest dethnode said:

So, in theory, he could do this, front foot adjustment multiple times, like he is rocking from one foot to the other and that is all considered movement prior to becoming set? 

Your question has been answered.  I just wanted to add my personal opinion - pet-peeve:  Pitchers just can't pitch anymore.  They have to do stupid things to be different, and see if they can "push the limits/rules" .... it's dumb 

[wolfe_man]

53 minutes ago, Thunderheads said:

Your question has been answered.  I just wanted to add my personal opinion - pet-peeve:  Pitchers just can't pitch anymore.  They have to do stupid things to be different, and see if they can "push the limits/rules" .... it's dumb 

Amen to the above.  All of this extra movement does not make pitching easier or better, it's only purpose is to try and mess with the timing of the hitter.  Quick pitches are illegal, but that's exactly what this extra movement is attempting in my opinion.  "Rushing" a pitch after toe-tapping three times is nothing more than an attempt to try and confuse the hitter to try and catch them off-guard because you normally toe-tap seven times before letting it go.

I blame MLB for this.  The amateurs (read below professional level) try to repeat what their favorite pitcher does.  I almost hate watching some of the pros pitch anymore.  Take Mike Clevinger for example... he uses a lot of energy and movement before he even pitches.  Then, add all of their hair flopping around and moving and there's a lot to confuse a hitter before they even throw the pitch. 

Uh oh, I just thought of something. I think I'm starting to sound like one of those old guys griping about the traditions changing. LOL. I am FOR some changes, but some of this just wastes time and energy for the same results.

[maven]

56 minutes ago, wolfe_man said:

Uh oh, I just thought of something. I think I'm starting to sound like one of those old guys griping about the traditions changing. LOL.

 

[noumpere]

1 hour ago, wolfe_man said:

Uh oh, I just thought of something. I think I'm starting to sound like one of those old guys griping about the traditions changing. LOL. I am FOR some changes, but some of this just wastes time and energy for the same results.

Embrace the darkness.  Just get off my lawn before you do so.

[maven]

1 hour ago, noumpere said:

Embrace the darkness.  Just get off my lawn before you do so.

One for you, too.

 

[SeeingEyeDog]

[shakes hairy fist in the air, screams to the void]

Everything was better before!

~Dawg

[agdz59]

9 hours ago, wolfe_man said:

Amen to the above.  All of this extra movement does not make pitching easier or better, it's only purpose is to try and mess with the timing of the hitter.  Quick pitches are illegal, but that's exactly what this extra movement is attempting in my opinion.  "Rushing" a pitch after toe-tapping three times is nothing more than an attempt to try and confuse the hitter to try and catch them off-guard because you normally toe-tap seven times before letting it go.

 

I hear you wolfe_man.  I seem to see more of it each year in the youth tournaments.  I've gotten in the habit when I'm the field umpire and a kid is doing the toe-tap thing to go talk to the coach between innings and tell him his pitcher has shown that a single-or-whatever toe tap is part of his normal delivery. Hence, I'm calling a balk if he DOESN'T do that every time. 

A related thing I'd like to bring up for opinions.  NFHS rules in an 11U game.  Second or third inning and a runner gets to second for the first time.  Up til now the pitcher has never moved his non-pivot foot toward second from the set position, just raises the foot and delivers his pitch.  Then with the runner on second, he moves his non-pivot foot toward second in a big way, hesitates, and then delivers the pitch home.  I called a balk for the hesitation and a motion that was not "such as he habitually uses in his delivery".  The coach didn't agree.  What say you all?

 

 

[maven]

1 hour ago, agdz59 said:

I've gotten in the habit when I'm the field umpire and a kid is doing the toe-tap thing to go talk to the coach between innings and tell him his pitcher has shown that a single-or-whatever toe tap is part of his normal delivery. Hence, I'm calling a balk if he DOESN'T do that every time. 

That's not a balk. No rule requires F1 to deliver the same way every pitch.

1 hour ago, agdz59 said:

Up til now the pitcher has never moved his non-pivot foot toward second from the set position, just raises the foot and delivers his pitch.  Then with the runner on second, he moves his non-pivot foot toward second in a big way, hesitates, and then delivers the pitch home.  I called a balk for the hesitation and a motion that was not "such as he habitually uses in his delivery". 

That's only a balk if everything stops enough to count as a start/stop balk. But as I'm picturing it, also not a balk: a change of direction is not a set, and so not enough of a stop to rule balk.

[Rich Ives]

15 hours ago, Thunderheads said:

you knew what he meant ..........

I think he meant what he said. He thinks the free foot bounce is a balk.

[Senor Azul]

Mr. agdz59, you made the right call. Even though the following is about OBR the ruling is the same in all codes. From the 2013 Wendelstedt rules interpretation manual (section 6.3, p. 102):

It is a balk when…The pitcher suspends his foot in the air (he stopped his delivery) in an attempt to hold a runner.

Play 132:  R1, no outs, no count. The left-handed pitcher, after coming stopped in the set position, raises his non-pivot foot off the ground and suspends it in the air, freezing R1. He then steps and throws to first base in an attempt to pick-off R1. Ruling:  This is a balk.

From the 2017 Jaksa/Roder rules interpretation manual (Chapter 18, p. 144):

It is a balk if a pitcher who is in-contact…hesitates in or interrupts his motion to join hands, pitch, throw, or disengage.

R1. A left-handed pitcher lifts his free foot and suspends it, unmoving, for a split second before proceeding in his motion to throw:  hesitation, balk.

The closest the FED comes to stating this, though, is in its 2019 case book play 6.2.4F. There it tells us that the movement of the free foot cannot be interrupted or stopped prior to the completion of the pitching delivery.

[agdz59]

On 3/5/2021 at 5:20 PM, maven said:

That's not a balk. No rule requires F1 to deliver the same way every pitch.

NFHS Rule 6-2-4: If there is a runner or runners, any of the following acts by a pitcher while he is touching the pitcher's plate is a balk: failing to pitch to the batter in a continuous motion of immediately after any movement of any part of the body such as he habitually uses in his delivery.

I'm trying to think of an interpretation of "habitually uses in his delivery" that does not include "A pitcher's delivery has to be the same every pitch."

And I'll go further with an example.  A pitcher establishes a rhythm of bringing his hands together, then two rocks back and forth before delivering the pitch.  Now with a runner on first, he taps three times but the runner takes off after the second having accustomed himself to the pitcher's motion he "habitually uses in his delivery".  I'm going to call that a balk every day.

Or are we supposed to look for a pause either before or after the taps? 

[Richvee]

1 hour ago, agdz59 said:

NFHS Rule 6-2-4: If there is a runner or runners, any of the following acts by a pitcher while he is touching the pitcher's plate is a balk: failing to pitch to the batter in a continuous motion of immediately after any movement of any part of the body such as he habitually uses in his delivery.

I'm trying to think of an interpretation of "habitually uses in his delivery" that does not include "A pitcher's delivery has to be the same every pitch."

And I'll go further with an example.  A pitcher establishes a rhythm of bringing his hands together, then two rocks back and forth before delivering the pitch.  Now with a runner on first, he taps three times but the runner takes off after the second having accustomed himself to the pitcher's motion he "habitually uses in his delivery".  I'm going to call that a balk every day.

Or are we supposed to look for a pause either before or after the taps? 

His delivery does not include what he does while coming set. Nowhere will find mention that a pitcher must use the exact same motion to come set. 

[Replacematt]

1 hour ago, agdz59 said:

NFHS Rule 6-2-4: If there is a runner or runners, any of the following acts by a pitcher while he is touching the pitcher's plate is a balk: failing to pitch to the batter in a continuous motion of immediately after any movement of any part of the body such as he habitually uses in his delivery.

I'm trying to think of an interpretation of "habitually uses in his delivery" that does not include "A pitcher's delivery has to be the same every pitch."

And I'll go further with an example.  A pitcher establishes a rhythm of bringing his hands together, then two rocks back and forth before delivering the pitch.  Now with a runner on first, he taps three times but the runner takes off after the second having accustomed himself to the pitcher's motion he "habitually uses in his delivery".  I'm going to call that a balk every day.

Or are we supposed to look for a pause either before or after the taps? 

What rule requires a pitcher to have a habitual delivery? 

By your interpretation, if his second pitch is not the same as his first, you'll balk it.

[maven]

You're misreading that provision of the balk rule.

The requirement is that IF the pitcher begins his pitching motion, THEN he must pitch to the batter. "His pitching motion" includes but is not limited to his habitual motion, if any.

Once F1 starts his motion to pitch, we're at the "time of pitch," and he's committed to pitch without interruption. Stopping or changing to a pickoff would be a balk.

The rule does NOT say it is a balk if F1 does not pitch with his habitual motion. It would have been easy enough to say that instead of the convoluted syntax in the actual rule (which does not mean this).

You example is ambiguous: if this tapping and whatnot occurs after the time of pitch, then I agree, that would be a balk to interrupt it. If it occurs as he comes set, and then he picks, that's nothing. He can pick at any time prior to the time of the pitch.

Note that the definition of time of pitch 2-28-3 for the set does not mention habitual motion: "For the set position, the 'time of the pitch' occurs the instant the pitcher, after coming to a complete and discernible stop, starts any movement with arm(s) and/or leg(s) that commits him to pitch." 

[agdz59]

Thanks all for the clarification all. 

So the answer to my last question is "YES" - if the discernible stop is before the tapping, balk.  After the dance moves, no balk.

And, maven, your reference to convoluted syntax gets a thumbs up from me.  I have difficulty (as you can see) with a lot of the language in the rule book.  I just picked up '2020 Rules By Topic' and that has been helpful to clear some things up for me.  I recommend it.

 

[noumpere]

57 minutes ago, agdz59 said:

Thanks all for the clarification all. 

So the answer to my last question is "YES" - if the discernible stop is before the tapping, balk.  After the dance moves, no balk.

And, maven, your reference to convoluted syntax gets a thumbs up from me.  I have difficulty (as you can see) with a lot of the language in the rule book.  I just picked up '2020 Rules By Topic' and that has been helpful to clear some things up for me.  I recommend it.

 

As you get more experience, you will see that the rules book (any of them in any sport) does not always say exactly what it means or mean exactly what it says.