Balk? foot goes down twice?

[Umpire942]

When using either the windup or the set position to deliver a pitch, the pitcher’s raised leg starts going down towards the ground, then comes back up, then down again before finishing the delivery.

 

I have this as a balk.  The rule book only allows arms.  I got one of these answers wrong on the test, so im fishing here.  This is a balk no

[maven]

If F1 is committed to pitch and does so, he can move his legs (and other extremities) as he likes, including the motion you describe.

To what provision are you referring? If it's the line about allowing pumping of the arms, that applies only to the arms. 

Ugly/unfamiliar/weird/never-seen-it-before ≠ illegal

[JonnyCat]

Not sure I understand the situation.

Is the pitcher doing this in one continuous motion when delivering the pitch? If he is not starting and stopping his motion, then it probably is legal.

[Umpire942]

4 minutes ago, maven said:

If F1 is committed to pitch and does so, he can move his legs (and other extremities) as he likes, including the motion you describe.

To what provision are you referring? If it's the line about allowing pumping of the arms, that applies only to the arms. 

Ugly/unfamiliar/weird/never-seen-it-before ≠ illegal

9-3-k,  but again the question says legs.  Im think things like nester cortez i guess.

 

[Jimurray]

42 minutes ago, Umpire942 said:

When using either the windup or the set position to deliver a pitch, the pitcher’s raised leg starts going down towards the ground, then comes back up, then down again before finishing the delivery.

 

I have this as a balk.  The rule book only allows arms.  I got one of these answers wrong on the test, so im fishing here.  This is a balk no

The pitcher would be allowed to do this in other codes but NCAA had a video example of this last year or two and did not like it. Balk for them. Unless they got religion and now allow it in which case you will know on Feb. 3

[Catch18]

When using either the windup or the set position to deliver a pitch, the pitcher’s raised leg starts going down towards the ground, then comes back up, then down again before finishing the delivery.
 
I have this as a balk.  The rule book only allows arms.  I got one of these answers wrong on the test, so im fishing here.  This is a balk no

Do you mean like this? Check out 1:15……

[The Man in Blue]

If a runner running the bases in reverse order is, by the book wording, making a travesty of the game, what is this?   My position as a hardliner does not change ... all that sh!+ needs to go.  I don't care if it is "technically legal" when it is all just a big #$%! you to the rulebook, umpires, and the game.   

I'm not saying I am calling it when I know better.  I will do my best to call it by the book, but when you do some dumb sh!+ you have no right to be offended if I get it wrong and balk you.  As the saying goes, play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

[Catch18]

If a runner running the bases in reverse order is, by the book wording, making a travesty of the game, what is this?   My position as a hardliner does not change ... all that sh!+ needs to go.  I don't care if it is "technically legal" when it is all just a big #$%! you to the rulebook, umpires, and the game.   
I'm not saying I am calling it when I know better.  I will do my best to call it by the book, but when you do some dumb sh!+ you have no right to be offended if I get it wrong and balk you.  As the saying goes, play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

Are you admitting that just because you don’t “like” something, you’re justified to apply the incorrect rules (knowingly or unknowingly)?

Man, I *hate*when people spew “We’re not here to see you, blue!!!!” But in this case, they’d be right.

Second question: how are people supposed to know how high your “stupid SH*#” barometer goes? Is there a chart?

[MadMax]

In each of the Nestor clips, there’s no one on base… how can they be a Balk? 

You can be aggrieved and irritated all you Ike, but there’s nothing illegal about anything he’s doing. Isn’t the objective of the pitcher to throw a pitch by a batter without him hitting it (for a strike, ideally)? 

[Catch18]

In each of the Nestor clips, there’s no one on base… how can they be a Balk? 
You can be aggrieved and irritated all you Ike, but there’s nothing illegal about anything he’s doing. Isn’t the objective of the pitcher to throw a pitch by a batter without him hitting it (for a strike, ideally)? 

Not my intent to only find clips w/ runners on. I’m aware no runners equals no balk. The OP said windup or set, I merely used the vid of any of his motions as reference, not to be a measurement of exactitude.

[Jimurray]

3 hours ago, MadMax said:

In each of the Nestor clips, there’s no one on base… how can they be a Balk? 

You can be aggrieved and irritated all you Ike, but there’s nothing illegal about anything he’s doing. Isn’t the objective of the pitcher to throw a pitch by a batter without him hitting it (for a strike, ideally)? 

 

30 minutes ago, Catch18 said:

Not my intent to only find clips w/ runners on. I’m aware no runners equals no balk. The OP said windup or set, I merely used the vid of any of his motions as reference, not to be a measurement of exactitude.

If I'm picturing the move correctly and it is what I saw on the NCAA video they did not like it with or without runners if I remember correctly.

[JSam21]

This is an NCAA Test Question... Under NCAA rules this is illegal.

[Jimurray]

16 minutes ago, JSam21 said:

This is an NCAA Test Question... Under NCAA rules this is illegal.

Wouldn't you have to say under NCAA interpretation this is illegal? The other rule codes have the same rule wording but we allow some alteration and don't consider a leg going down and up an interruption. 

[Richvee]

1 hour ago, Jimurray said:

Wouldn't you have to say under NCAA interpretation this is illegal? The other rule codes have the same rule wording but we allow some alteration and don't consider a leg going down and up an interruption. 

I have trouble using MLB  to determine what’s legal and what’s not when they let guys like Garcia in Huston blatantly break the rules of a legal windup taking 2 steps to the side and then one forward when the rule clearly states “one step forward, backwards, or to the side and one step forward”. 

 

[The Man in Blue]

6 hours ago, Catch18 said:

Are you admitting that just because you don’t “like” something, you’re justified to apply the incorrect rules (knowingly or unknowingly)?

Man, I *hate*when people spew “We’re not here to see you, blue!!!!” But in this case, they’d be right.

Second question: how are people supposed to know how high your “stupid SH*#” barometer goes? Is there a chart?

If you want to read that incorrectly for the sake of creating conflict, OK.

I didn't say I was justified.  I said, "Play stupid games, win stupid prizes."  If you want to stick your nose up and play games that have nothing to do with the spirit and intent of the game and the rules "because you can" then don't be offended when umpires get it wrong.

We have rules that refer to a pitcher's "natural pitching motion" but then we want to allow pitchers to act like epileptic zombies at random moments when they feel like it.  OK.  Sure.  Whatever.  

[The Man in Blue]

6 hours ago, MadMax said:

In each of the Nestor clips, there’s no one on base… how can they be a Balk? 

You can be aggrieved and irritated all you Ike, but there’s nothing illegal about anything he’s doing. Isn’t the objective of the pitcher to throw a pitch by a batter without him hitting it (for a strike, ideally)? 

Using that logic, I will ask why bother having any rules on a pitcher's motion?  Those rules must have some purpose ... 

Fact is, rules (and laws) are never able to be written to accommodate every possibility.  That does not mean anything not written in was intended to be allowed.

[Jimurray]

21 minutes ago, The Man in Blue said:

Using that logic, I will ask why bother having any rules on a pitcher's motion?  Those rules must have some purpose ... 

Fact is, rules (and laws) are never able to be written to accommodate every possibility.  That does not mean anything not written in was intended to be allowed.

The problem is we don't know the purpose of some of the rule writers except for interpretations. NCAA has interpretated their own rule so we know that they want a literal interp, calling a leg going down and up interruption. I don't think they will go to the extent of penalizing changes to any arm slot or other pitcher perturbations as alterations but that wording exists also. Can a sidearm pitcher throw sidearm to one side of the batter's box and over hand to the other? Unless the answer to the test question surprises us. 

[Jimurray]

1 hour ago, Richvee said:

I have trouble using MLB  to determine what’s legal and what’s not when they let guys like Garcia in Huston blatantly break the rules of a legal windup taking 2 steps to the side and then one forward when the rule clearly states “one step forward, backwards, or to the side and one step forward”. 

 

Aside from MLB extremes, would you allow a FED, PONY, LL pitcher to extend and contract and extend his stride leg during delivery? Have you seen the NCAA 2022 video bulletin #5. Aside from this OP issue they don't even want a square pitcher to go anywhere near forward with the free foot in his reposition to sideways move, considering that as his first and only step forward allowed by rule. Quoting Jim Evans: "That is not a practical way to umpire."

Edited January 25, 2023 by Jimurray

[834k3r]

On 1/23/2023 at 9:44 AM, Umpire942 said:

When using either the windup or the set position to deliver a pitch, the pitcher’s raised leg starts going down towards the ground, then comes back up, then down again before finishing the delivery.

 

I have this as a balk.  The rule book only allows arms.  I got one of these answers wrong on the test, so im fishing here.  This is a balk no

I'm late to the party here, but what rule book and test are we discussing here? I think knowing the rule set would be helpful in understanding your question better.

[Jimurray]

5 minutes ago, 834k3r said:

I'm late to the party here, but what rule book and test are we discussing here? I think knowing the rule set would be helpful in understanding your question better.

The rule set wouldn’t matter. They all read the same. NCAA takes it to a higher or simpler level. 

[834k3r]

Just now, Jimurray said:

The rule set wouldn’t matter. They all read the same. NCAA takes it to a higher or simpler level. 

Not to pick a nit, but I'm especially confused on the "test" part--I wasn't aware NFHS was open yet.

[Jimurray]

6 minutes ago, 834k3r said:

Not to pick a nit, but I'm especially confused on the "test" part--I wasn't aware NFHS was open yet.

NCAA test 

[maven]

12 hours ago, Jimurray said:

 

If I'm picturing the move correctly and it is what I saw on the NCAA video they did not like it with or without runners if I remember correctly.

If the question was to be restricted to or focused on NCAA, it's in the wrong forum. And nothing in the OP suggests such a restriction (or even an awareness that NCAA might be different).

There's no accounting for what MLB allows, which in any case is seldom an adequate guide for calling amateur games (howler monkeys be damned). NCAA umpires should do what their supervisors want.

Everyone else should know the rule and call it sensibly: once the pitching motion starts, F1 must deliver without interruption and without violating any other provision (steps, arm pumps, etc.). Anything else goes, including (as I envision it) the motion in the OP.

[JSam21]

12 hours ago, Jimurray said:

Wouldn't you have to say under NCAA interpretation this is illegal? The other rule codes have the same rule wording but we allow some alteration and don't consider a leg going down and up an interruption. 

Not sure if you're just playing semantics or what. This is a verbatim question from the NCAA test. Games being played under NCAA rules, this is considered illegal. If you want to play the game of rules v interpretations... have at it.  

[Jimurray]

1 hour ago, JSam21 said:

Not sure if you're just playing semantics or what. This is a verbatim question from the NCAA test. Games being played under NCAA rules, this is considered illegal. If you want to play the game of rules v interpretations... have at it.  

I have no doubt this is illegal in NCAA. I would like to be surprised on Feb.3 with a different answer where NCAA allows it as the other codes do but I think they will stick with their judgement that this is an "alteration or interruption". The rule wording in all codes is the same so you have to use last years NCAA video interpretation to make this an illegal pitch or balk in NCAA. Since NCAA does allow an interruption in the windup the rule does not support this being illegal without Randy saying so. "Note 2: A pitcher may pause during the delivery from the windup position without penalty"

[Richvee]

14 hours ago, Jimurray said:

Aside from MLB extremes, would you allow a FED, PONY, LL pitcher to extend and contract and extend his stride leg during delivery? Have you seen the NCAA 2022 video bulletin #5. Aside from this OP issue they don't even want a square pitcher to go anywhere near forward with the free foot in his reposition to sideways move, considering that as his first and only step forward allowed by rule. Quoting Jim Evans: "That is not a practical way to umpire."

I would not. And by the looks of the video, NCAA doesn’t want us to allow it either. ( we think…. Pending the test answer release”. 
 

I’m simply stating there is no way that I would use anything I see in a MLB game as evidence of a legal delivery in any other code.